I'm pretty sure he's referring to the end of the round where after knocking him down Pac staggers Marquez, who stumbles backwards and very brieftly grabs the ropes. It was unclear whether or not Marquez would've gone down without grabbing the ropes, but I really doubt it. It was nothing like Rafa grabbing the ropes in rd. 12 against Vazquez.
Okay yeah i figured he was on about that incident but i always overlooked it as a 'nearly'.
But as far as the rules go, does that mean that it should of been scored a knockdown?
I believe the rules state that if the ropes are the only thing holding a fighter up then it should be ruled a knockdown. In my opinion, it is not conclusive whether or not the ropes were the only things holding up JMM. Without briefly grabbing them he may have staggered back a few feet but it is impossible to tell if he would've gone down without grabbing them. This is the case for me even after watching the end of the round several times, so it would have been impossible for the ref to make a conclusive call and rule it a knockdown. It's nothing like the Rafa incident he sites because Rafa was badly hurt and it was very clear the ropes were the only thing holding him up.
Oh dear
Thanks man, but now i I need to re-re-re-watch![]()
Uhh please put your Manny Pacquiao fan boy glasses away, and just accept the fact people have different opinions. I gave the 1st round to JMM i don't need to explain it because i already gave my reason's above.
Stop ignoring the fact that the 3rd round was a 10-7 round ? excuse me but was it scored a 10-7 round ? did any of the judges score it 10-7 ? so why should i score it 10-7 ? yes some ref's may of ruled it a 10-7 round, but he didn't some ref's don't always rule it a knockdown if a fighter get knocked back towards the ropes. I could mention hundreds of incident's when thats happened.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks