Kirkland vs Molina: Predictions

well, in the WBC rules, it seems nothing requires the referee to dq a figher if his seconds enter the ring, it's treated as a simple foul, just like an headbutt or a low blow where the ref can simply penalize the fighter or warn him. If it's the case, Shrole call was bullshit and scream favoritism for the home town and backed fighter as the foul had no impact on the fight.

 

Ike, the point you continue to miss is that Schorle's mishandling of the events is what led to mass confusion.

Had he instructed Kirkland to go to a neutral corner, both corners would've realized that the round hadn't yet ended despite the bell ringing. At that point, Schorle could've ensured the ring was cleared before issuing the count.

Had he picked up the count from the timekeeper, he'd have realized the bell had already rung, at which point his count ends when the fighter rises.

"Can't be saved by the bell" means you have to be on your feet, and not that you can lie on the canvas and the count ends at the bell. That's ALL it means. If the count is going on with less than 10 seconds, left. the clock stops at :02 so that the referee can complete the count.

That didn't happen here. The knockdown came literally at the bell. Had Schorle not done everything else wrong, it would've never led to how it ended.

You can continue harping on your one point, but this convo is over as far as I'm concerned. You're talking in circles and quite frankly I'm sick of your level of disrespect in this conversation.

 

There are ambiguities within the rules.

For example, Rule 1:
Twelve rounds with three minutes of action and one minute resting period, which belongs to the previously fought round.

Nowhere does it say that a round can be 3 minutes + time to count on a knockdown going past the round. So does a knockdown at the end of a round make for a 3 minute, 5 second round followed by a 55 second rest period? Or does it create a 3 minute, 5 second round followed by a full 60 second rest period?

Further down under Rule 15:
A list of common fouls that may be committed by boxers (or seconds, where the context is appropriate) that may be cause for penalty or disqualification is as follows:
29. During a round, a boxer’s seconds entering the ring or stepping on the ring apron.

I highlighted "may" because that means it is at the referee's descretion.

While I could argue that the round was over and that there was therefore no basis to dq Molina, since it is not clear when a round is actually over, AND

Rule 22: Authority of Referee[FONT=Arial,Arial][FONT=Arial,Arial]. The referee has the discretion and authority to: 1) interpret and enforce these rules[/FONT][/FONT]

[FONT=Arial,Arial][FONT=Arial,Arial]gives the referee the authority to interpret the rules as he deems correct, I think Schorle did have the authority to dq Molina for his corner coming into the ring.[/FONT][/FONT]

[FONT=Arial,Arial][FONT=Arial,Arial]I also think that Schorle had the power to finish the count after he got the cornerman out of the ring to determine if Kirkland would win by TKO and then make the call to dq Molina (instead of considering him tko'd) because his corner entered the ring during the count.[/FONT][/FONT]


[FONT=Arial,Arial][FONT=Arial,Arial]Personally, I think it was a shit call and it should be overturned upon review, mainly because the bell rang, the cornerman's entrance did nothing to affect the fight, his entrance was excusable under a few theories, and because the ambiguity of the situation. The WBC's instant replay option (see Rule 23) would have been extremely appropriate, but under that set of rules, it is the referee's discretion whether or not to use it.[/FONT][/FONT]


[FONT=Arial,Arial][FONT=Arial,Arial]The problem with Ike's position is not that it is incorrect, it's just that no one likes it. Rather than prove him wrong, everyone has resorted to alternate attacks. When you refer to Texas' rules, you can start making an argument, but I still don't think it's clear what was supposed to happen..or, if it is clear...what is supposed to happen if the rules (say ringing the bell when Molina got up) weren't followed? And that leads right back to the referee having the discretion to enforce the rules and Ike being correct.[/FONT]
[/FONT]

 

Hardly

Name one fight in history before this where a referee disqualified a guy after letting a fight continue for an offense that took place before HE LET THE FIGHT CONTINUE

GO AHEAD, SHOW IT TO ME

 

You guys and especially Ike need bigger letters and more bold and Capitals. I can barely read, what everybody's writing here... :finger:

 

I know of a fight where this happened, but I haven't been able to find it, yet.

I have an example of a ref DQing a fighter and then changing his mind:

Amid much confusion, Panama Al Brown (116 ½) remained world bantamweight champion after his opponent Johnny Erickson (117) was disqualified at the Olympia Boxing Club in New York.
After already being warned in each of the opening two rounds of the bout, referee Jack Dorman initially disqualified Erickson for landing a left hand below the belt, only for Brown to request that the bout continue. The ref decided to accept the lanky champion’s desire to go on and stepped back, only for Erickson to land another low left in the very next exchange. This time Dorman declared the bout over, ignoring another request from Brown to allow hostilities to continue.

We also have Genaro Hernandez vs Azumah Nelson where Hernandez was permitted additional time to recover from a foul and the fight was permitted to continue, even though the rules dictated that Hernandez should have won by DQ.

The fight I'm thinking of, the fouled fighter said he could continue, but was stopped seconds afterwards and instead of giving the fouling fighter a TKO win, the ref DQ'd him. Probably a 90's fight, but I'm not sure.

 

The first two are in no way analogous with this fight because they were an example of a fighter being given the chance to win on a DQ and the referee asked the offended fighter FIRST if he wanted to continue. In both cases, the fighter requested the fight be continued (see also Hopkins/Echols II)

I would love to know more specifics about the third example.

 

I am not missing any point. I have already conceded that SHORLE mishandled the the kd, the count any any other error you'd like to tack on him. I grant them all.. None of that disallows him from dq'ing MOLINA. THE ROUND WAS CLEARLY on. I knew it. Shorle knew it. The Texas Commission knew it. You want the boxing equivalent of encroachment and it does not exist in boxing. A ref cannot through ineptitude lure a cornerman in the ring. If the count was over, I might have agreed. It wasn't and shorle was still administering a count, whether or not he was supposed to. It is irrelevant to the issue. The ref thought the round was still on and he is the judge. No question Shorle's poor handling led to the result, but no one would have remembered it had Molina's corner done its job and not jumped in the ring. I disagree with your encroachment theory as it is opinion and not ruled based.

I apologize for any and all for my disrespect. I have a slipped disc and I am on a multitude of drugs. I am halving them now so maybe I will return to my ordinary cantankerousness.

 

I never said it did. Normally, in contract language it will allow the ref the ability. Most of people arguing against me are really arguing against themselves. I think he could have let it slide. My objection is the outrage was misplaced by nearly everyone except me. The person to blame was the cornerman. He is a professional and knows the rules. It was obvious the round was still on. You wait until the ref stops the counts and allows you in and then you tell him he doesn't know the rules. It is about order of operations.

 

Count the seconds. You act as if Shorle saw the offense in the six round and dq'd him in the 11th. No more than 20 seconds went by half of which was spent sending Kirkland back from pouncing on Molina he then went to what appeared to be the judges and then dq'd him. In Tyson/Holyfield II Mills Lane did dq TYSON ANd was made to not dq him. I honestly have really no ability to see your point of view on this issue. Your point is quite literally nonsense like I said before. Even if it has never been done in the history of boxing, viewed within the context of the fight I saw no unreasonable delay. It wasn't like the fight continued. It went into a rest period and a discussion was made. It is your opinion that it has to be immediate or it is nullified and that is just not true, not common sense, not obvious. It is blue cars get better gas mileage in july as long as the driver eats jelly doughnuts. It is nonsense. You can think it is a point if you like. It isn't based on any form of reason, held outside of creationist circles.

 

Yes it did

The count being continued indicates that fight is deemed to be still in progress

The issue is the continuation of the count, again as previously stated in my last 500 posts

 

I just don't understand your point. If Molina's corner just waited 3 to 4 more seconds , Molina likely wins. I understand it is you opinion that it is somehow disbarred from action but I see no precedent whether delineated or in practice to prohibit what Shorle did. I would feel that way had the same situation occurred at any point in the round. The Sine Quo Non, the proximate cause , the necessary condition whatever way you want to describe it for the dq was Molina's cornerman entering the ring. However many pages and thousands of posts by you or anyone else has failed shown otherwise.

Forgive my childish insults. I am in a much better physical state today.I have learned something about myself in the last few weeks. If I ever have something wrong with me that is bad, I am a dead man. I do not deal with physical pain very well.

 

panocha

 

Ike, the continuation of the count after the man enters and then quickly exits the ring (urged to do so by the referee, on top of it-- why would he do that if he was going to issue a DQ for it? It would be like an official grabbing Andrew Golota's arm on its path to an opponents Bozak) is an implicit acknowledgement that the fight is to continue. Once the official has continued the count, he has essentially said "The match is on".

If the match is on after the punishable offense has taken place, the offense can't then be used as an excuse to stop the match. By counting after the fact, the official gives the appearance of forgiving the foul (as he has some discretion to do). This is only further solidified by his actively shooing the man out of the ring. What meaning could there possibly to that action other than "no, no! get out of the ring, the round isn't over yet! get out before I disqualify your fighter"? As I said, if you apply it to the Golota analogy, it would be like stopping his arm in mid-punch, saying to him "don't do that!" and then letting the fight continue, even if only for 2 seconds and then saying "You're Disqualified!"

The official in this case fucked up not only in that 1) he kept counting after the bell (a no-no since Molina was standing) ... 2) He gave the cornerman a chance to get out of the ring, implying a warning... 3) Having interrupted his already incorrect count to issue that implied warning, he then picked up where left off with said count and 4) DQ'd the fighter for something that happened prior to the picking up of a count that should not have been going on in the first place... Furthermore, Molina's corner entered the ring AFTER the bell with Molina standing. Since he was on his feet, the count that the cornerman interrupted should never have been happening in the first place.

Basically, Molina's corner was DQ'd for interrupting the referee while he was in the process of doing something he is not supposed to actually be doing.

Like I said, I don't see it as some sort of conspiracy, I see it purely as incompetence. The official was issuing an invalid count, he implied a warning that gave the second a chance to exit the ring, he then continued the invalid count and compounded this series of errors by then disqualifying the fighter for an action that would not have been a penalty had he been doing his job correctly.

I forgive you, by the way, for the insults.