
Originally Posted by
bikersk

Originally Posted by
hitmandonny
I feel the judges may not have liked the aftertaste of Hopkins' dirty tactics. Because of this they favoured the more active productive boxer.
In that sense it was a triumph for boxing.
As for the referee.

I agree with that. Yeah I don't know what's going on with Cortez. Can't figure him out.
Well I feel Cortez was a disgrace and I'll tell you why.
In the Ricky Hatton Floyd Mayweather bout Cortez was completely intolerant of Hatton keeping Mayweather in place with an arm and hitting. Many fans and trainers deem this "working rough on the inside." Cortez completely prevented Hatton from employing this tactic and ruined Hatton's chances of survinng the 12 rounds.
He then administered a warning and point deduction on an attempted foul.
In the Hopkins fight, Cortez not only allowed Hopkins to utilise a hit and hold style throughout the twelve rounds without warning Hopkins, he also allowed him to get away with numerous uses of the head and punches to the thigh. I don't blame Hopkins for this. Any professional fighter should press any advantage they have.
Cortez clearly altered his attitude and approach to theses two fights according to the personalities involved.
A referee is responsible for a fighters safety, his job is to be completely impartial in performing his duties and the fight with Hopkins proved that he had two completely contrasting standards for Hopkins and Ricky Hatton.
This is not only unprofessional it is also unethical and he should be ashamed of himsel;f for his performance in both fights.
Bookmarks