Josh Taylor v Jack Catterall

[Master]

It was a bad decision not a robbery. The fight was awful at times and very messy. The ref did not take firm control early and it led to point deductions for both men.

Taylor was hurt with the knockdown and Catterall fought a tactically smart fight which nullified Josh best assets.

The ref that scored it for Josh was wrong with his 8-4 for Josh.

Top Rank must want Josh v Crawford/Spence to allow that decision to stand.

[BIG H]

It was a bad decision not a robbery. The fight was awful at times and very messy. The ref did not take firm control early and it led to point deductions for both men.

Taylor was hurt with the knockdown and Catterall fought a tactically smart fight which nullified Josh best assets.

The ref that scored it for Josh was wrong with his 8-4 for Josh.

Top Rank must want Josh v Crawford/Spence to allow that decision to stand.

Nah mate, it was a robbery!

[Primo Carnera]

It was a bad decision not a robbery. The fight was awful at times and very messy. The ref did not take firm control early and it led to point deductions for both men.

Taylor was hurt with the knockdown and Catterall fought a tactically smart fight which nullified Josh best assets.

The ref that scored it for Josh was wrong with his 8-4 for Josh.

Top Rank must want Josh v Crawford/Spence to allow that decision to stand.

Why wasn’t it a robbery. You’re quick to call Canelo/GGG a robbery , when it was correctly 50/50, but this is “just a bad decision” ?
That is exactly why they get away with it.

[Master]

It was a bad decision not a robbery. The fight was awful at times and very messy. The ref did not take firm control early and it led to point deductions for both men.

Taylor was hurt with the knockdown and Catterall fought a tactically smart fight which nullified Josh best assets.

The ref that scored it for Josh was wrong with his 8-4 for Josh.

Top Rank must want Josh v Crawford/Spence to allow that decision to stand.

Why wasn’t it a robbery. You’re quick to call Canelo/GGG a robbery , when it was correctly 50/50, but this is “just a bad decision” ?
That is exactly why they get away with it.

Can't remember calling Triple G v Canelo a robbery? Tyson Fury v Wilder 1 maybe.

A robbery is 10-2, 8-4 bad decision.

[Denilson3.0]

I just watched it back. I had 114 - 112 to Catterall it was no were near a robbery. I agree with Froch



If you are going to take the title away from home perhaps you need to win it clearly rather than pinch it. Caterrall seemed happy to sand a few punches at long range and then hold Taylor as soon as he got close. I think an American ref would have done a better job.

Catterall was quite negative and spoiled in the last few rounds whilst Taylor was the one looking to push the fight and that for me closed the score cards.

It was a lot closer than some people on here and Sky are making out.

[Master]

Froch is probably reminding people about his fight with Andre Dirrell. It is always about Froch and his ego.

[Master]

Saturday’s bout between Josh Taylor and Jack Catterall ended in immense controversy as the defending champion was judged victorious after 12 rounds of intense boxing.

Fans from across the world expressed their confusion and bitter disappointment at the decision online, with even fellow professionals and pundits raising questions over the judges’ scorecards.

The scores were 113-112 for Catterall, 114-111 for Taylor and 113-112 for Taylor.

Jack Catterall entered the fight hungry for titles as Josh Taylor looked to defend his WBC, WBA, WBO and IBF junior welterweight titles. The champion won via split decision over the Englishman and even had to overcome the first knockdown of his bright career.

The whole encounter was cagey, and with both men fighting out of a southpaw stance, the fight was set up to a be an ugly one.

Referee Marcus McDonnell warned both competitors for the tenacious nature of the brawl, but the most clean and precise work on the night was done by the imposing Catterall.

Punching statistics from CompuBox have highlighted how dominant Catterall was during this match-up and why the incorrect decision was made.



Over 12 rounds, Catterall landed a total of 39 jabs in comparison to Taylor’s 16. Catterall also averaged 10 landed punches per round, while Taylor only managed to land 6.1 punches per round.

The Scot also only managed to muster up 57 power punches, whereas the title challenger Catterall landed 81 in total.

So, although Taylor was more accurate, landing 24% of his punches over Catterall’s 23%, it’s clear the latter was the busier fighter, throwing 219 more blows.

Even Ben Shalom, the promoter of the fight itself, has openly admitted that he thought Catterall had been robbed of a victory and subsequently of all four belts.

He told talkSPORT’s Fight Night: “I’ve watched these decisions as a fan and to be part of it is sickening. It was an amazing night.”

Some have even come out and said that Taylor should respect his opponent and offer a rematch in light of the contention surrounding the standard of scoring. What a contest this could be if it materialises.

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/sport/boxi...cid=entnewsntp

[Memphis]

I just watched it back. I had 114 - 112 to Catterall it was no were near a robbery. I agree with Froch



If you are going to take the title away from home perhaps you need to win it clearly rather than pinch it. Caterrall seemed happy to sand a few punches at long range and then hold Taylor as soon as he got close. I think an American ref would have done a better job.

Catterall was quite negative and spoiled in the last few rounds whilst Taylor was the one looking to push the fight and that for me closed the score cards.

It was a lot closer than some people on here and Sky are making out.

I scored the 11th 10-8 Catterall. He won the round quite comfortably in my book plus the deduction. So I can't go along with Froch's coasting for the final four rounds nonsense. Even if he did coast the final four. I don't care if the judges "like it" or not. They are there in a professional capacity to score a fight based on set criteria. It doesn't come down to what you like.

This idea that you need to win it clearly rather than pinch it. It's essentially the old cliche "You've got to rip the title away from the champion" isn't it? That might have been the case in days gone by when you quite literally had to rip the title away from the champion. Who would remain the champion by virtue of being upright at the final bell. But I'd like to think we're a bit more sophisticated now and you simply win a fight by scoring more points over the course of twelve rounds. It doesn't matter how, it doesn't matter what rounds. You just win.

For what it's worth I scored it with sound off 113-112 Catterall.

[TIC]

josh looked terrible. did he stay that one fight too long at this weight. jack should have won