Roy Jones Jr cheated out of gold

First topic message reminder :

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/blog/2012/feb/15/olympic-moments-roy-jones-jr

Just an interesting piece I picked up on the train on the way home yesterday and I thought I'd share it.

I'd only read snippets of the story of his Olympic silver before, but this piece made me watch the fight and see what a barefaced robbery it was, on (perhaps) the grandest stage, and one that trades off of it's 'fairness'.

I love the excuse of one of the judges interviewed though..."didn't want to embarrass the host nation!". Don't worry about actually doing your job. Some guys are all compassion.

Interesting. You guys bring race into it and if I comment on it, I'm in the wrong. and when that fat yanquie good old boy starts whining I get removed.

Later guys.

And Oxy, I gave you several social commentators who backed up my belief about the rocky myth, and you brought up Archie Moore to counter them. Nuff said.

Go out and enjoy Montreal. Great City I hear.

ShahenshahG wrote:

oxring wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:

azania wrote:

oxring wrote:

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Each and every situation has to be judged on it's relative merits.

I bet you enjoyed throwing that one in there Ghosty. I certainly enjoyed reading it.

It makes not a jot of difference if no-one has ever been pinged for it - its a penalty and thus can be enforced.

Glad we're in agreement about Khan, at least. Not hard done by.

Still not answered my question.

Whilst you're at it, was the punch Holy threw a foul or not?

Khan was harshly treated without doubt. You say I'm marching one way whilst 99% of the board march the other. Well 99% of the board are hardly rational when it comes to Khan. Most publications say that he was harshly treated.

Whoops, forgot we're all racist bigots on here...

Its true - I have an irrational dislike of Khan because he's from Bolton. I hate all northerners you know. Especially rowley.

The only reason anyone likes Marciano is because they're a racist bigot as well. Did you know that?

Thank god I thought I was the only one!

Far from it shah, i get it a lot, in all fairness I am pretty annoying.

azania wrote:Interesting. You guys bring race into it and if I comment on it, I'm in the wrong. and when that fat yanquie good old boy starts whining I get removed.

Later guys.

And Oxy, I gave you several social commentators who backed up my belief about the rocky myth, and you brought up Archie Moore to counter them. Nuff said.

Go out and enjoy Montreal. Great City I hear.

Can't help yourself can you?

I would consider myself very objective when it comes to Khan, my opinions of him pre peterson included

1. Top 10 pound for pound
2. Britains number one
3. The top man at 140lbs
4. The fighter most likely to give Mayweather problems
5. A future p4p king

Now if you can explain how at any time I or anyone else has shown to lack objectivity towards Khan then go ahead otherwise stop generalising the whole board into one group, we think for our own and don't need you making petty remarks.

Ghosty, I'll give this to you. You are always objective when it comes to Khan. I would say the same. My opinions of him inlcude
1) Over-rated boxer
2) Not as good as many believe
3) Talented but not imposing

But I will always maintain that the ref was wrong in deducting 2 points for pushing. It seems that many here dont like him and as a result want him to lose. They will even go as far as justifying a decision that has never happened to any other boxer that I can recall.

Be objective. KO a guy when punching on the break is a DQ offense. Punching a downed opponent is a DQ offense. I'm a huge RJJ fan, but he deserved the DQ.

I'm a huge Ali fan and am on record in saying that Foreman would have won a rematch. I dont allow favouritism (or dislike) to cloud my judgement.....and that includes my opinion on Rocky.

But ultimately you don't have a clue what people think about Khan because you jump in with both feet accusing them of lacking objectivity as soon as they criticise him, doesn't render itself to sensible debate.

A clear deliberate punch on the break knocking them out is a DQ but the Holyfield incident wasn't like that at all, the referee well and truly messed up the ending of that fight and got it completely wrong.

Jones and Abraham both deserved to be DQ'd because it was a clear foul but that doesn't mean every situation deserves the same consequences, Tua against Ruiz could be argued to be a DQ but it was rightfully not called one.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:But ultimately you don't have a clue what people think about Khan because you jump in with both feet accusing them of lacking objectivity as soon as they criticise him, doesn't render itself to sensible debate.

A clear deliberate punch on the break knocking them out is a DQ but the Holyfield incident wasn't like that at all, the referee well and truly messed up the ending of that fight and got it completely wrong.

Jones and Abraham both deserved to be DQ'd because it was a clear foul but that doesn't mean every situation deserves the same consequences, Tua against Ruiz could be argued to be a DQ but it was rightfully not called one.

Its an educated opinion based on several examples. Take the mooted fight between Khan and SSM. Khan on this board was roundly criticised (rightfully imo) for even considering such a fight. Yet look at the boxing debate on the Alvarez/SSM thread here. Very measured and muted criticism with all going for a Alvarez win. Compare that to the flak Khan got. Is that rational. We even have rowley defending it by saying that at their respective stages of their careers, SSM is a decent fight for SA but not for Khan. Well excuse me, who is the world champion. Ignore also that Khan would have to move up a weight to fight SSM. And SSM would have to move up a weight to fight Alvarez.

Absolutely zero objectivity.

As for the DQ, sorry but I disagree with you. A foul that results in a KO should be a DQ. I've seen that fight and recall the ref calling break before Hloy went for it. He could have stopped but momentum carried him through (or adrenelin). Either way to me it was a worthy DQ and considering it was an amateur fight where rules are far stricter.

This is a british forum and Khan is a british fighter so he will get more criticism than a foreign fighter but his opposition has been better than Alvarez so it would be a backward step for him while for Alvarez it's on the same level as much of his recent opposition, fairly awful. Not people being overly harsh on him but taking into account where both boxers are in their careers, being a world champion doesn't mean anything at the moment so it's a mute point.

That's my point it's debatable whether it was a foul, i've seen it many times and can't really hear the referee nor did either fighter.

azania wrote:And Oxy, I gave you several social commentators who backed up my belief about the rocky myth, and you brought up Archie Moore to counter them. Nuff said.

Stop being a tool. We're not discussing your bigoted and racist views on Rocky here.

As far as Khan goes - nothing Ghosty or I have said about him is lacking in obectivity. In fact - quite the reverse.

Saying that he's vulnerable to inside fighters and doesn't have a dominant jab is not "lacking impartiality".

Saying that he's got rubbish chat isn't "lacking impartiality".

Were I to get irritated by Khan - it would be this that would really annoy me - because he has twisted his last fight into some kind of robbery - which it didn't merit. That is sad - because its creating a myth where no myth exists. Like the idea that Holmes was robbed against Spinks in the first fight - he wasn't, he lost.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:This is a british forum and Khan is a british fighter so he will get more criticism than a foreign fighter but his opposition has been better than Alvarez so it would be a backward step for him while for Alvarez it's on the same level as much of his recent opposition, fairly awful. Not people being overly harsh on him but taking into account where both boxers are in their careers, being a world champion doesn't mean anything at the moment so it's a mute point.

That's my point it's debatable whether it was a foul, i've seen it many times and can't really hear the referee nor did either fighter.

Stop hiding "this is a british forum nonsense". This is a boxing forum. Absolute claptrap.

oxring wrote:

azania wrote:And Oxy, I gave you several social commentators who backed up my belief about the rocky myth, and you brought up Archie Moore to counter them. Nuff said.

Stop being a tool. We're not discussing your bigoted and racist views on Rocky here.

As far as Khan goes - nothing Ghosty or I have said about him is lacking in obectivity. In fact - quite the reverse.

Saying that he's vulnerable to inside fighters and doesn't have a dominant jab is not "lacking impartiality".

Saying that he's got rubbish chat isn't "lacking impartiality".

Were I to get irritated by Khan - it would be this that would really annoy me - because he has twisted his last fight into some kind of robbery - which it didn't merit. That is sad - because its creating a myth where no myth exists. Like the idea that Holmes was robbed against Spinks in the first fight - he wasn't, he lost.

You had better back that up with something I actually wrote and not something you think or hoped I wrote. Either that or apologise.

I haven't said IG lacked impartiality on the Khan issue.

Tell me a boxer who loses a close fight (without the added controversy) that doesn't cry robbery.

Cut the cowpat for a second and listen.

Ghosty and I, for the last 2 days, have been explaining everything to you in the context of logic as patiently as we can. I am not the world's greatest teacher, and I appreciate that you may not fully understand what I am saying.

It is not logically valid to declare something as acceptable because "other people do it" or "it hasn't happened before".

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/sport/279246.stm

Incidentally - here's someone, half way down the page, not arguing with a whisker-thin decision loss.

You have suggested or implied on several occasions that I lack impartiality on the Khan issue. I don't require an apology as the idea is ludicrous.

With regards to the Rocky issue - ref previous debate and your white america rant. If I could be bothered - I'd find the actual quotes from your rants. I can't be bothered - merely conduct a straw poll, via members as to whether your criticism of Rocky Marciano is racially motivated - and we'll see what they say.

oxring wrote:Cut the cowpat for a second and listen.

Ghosty and I, for the last 2 days, have been explaining everything to you in the context of logic as patiently as we can. I am not the world's greatest teacher, and I appreciate that you may not fully understand what I am saying.

It is not logically valid to declare something as acceptable because "other people do it" or "it hasn't happened before".

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/sport/279246.stm

Incidentally - here's someone, half way down the page, not arguing with a whisker-thin decision loss.

You have suggested or implied on several occasions that I lack impartiality on the Khan issue. I don't require an apology as the idea is ludicrous.

With regards to the Rocky issue - ref previous debate and your white america rant. If I could be bothered - I'd find the actual quotes from your rants. I can't be bothered - merely conduct a straw poll, via members as to whether your criticism of Rocky Marciano is racially motivated - and we'll see what they say.

Sorry Oxy, I wont let you get away with that so easy. You made an accusation that my opinions on Rocky are bigoted and racist. Back it up. Were that to come from a buffoon like trussy, I'd let it ride. From an intelligent person, I wont. Either back it up or apologise unreservedly.

There's no need to back it up because it's blindingly obvious, drop the garbage, it's a tired old argument we have no need to revisit for the millionth time.

Stop bringing race into it Rowley...

Az is a gentleman he'd never do that!!

Behave yourself..

Not nice being accused of racism/bigotry, is it, Az?

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Stop bringing race into it Rowley...

Never said a word Truss!! I know you're obsessed with me but it's beginning to get out of hand now mate.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:There's no need to back it up because it's blindingly obvious, drop the garbage, it's a tired old argument we have no need to revisit for the millionth time.

Belt up.

Every cloud has a silver lining though...

At least he had three days to get over it!!

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Stop bringing race into it Rowley...

Az is a gentleman he'd never do that!!

Behave yourself..

You whiney so and so. You started an OP bring race into it in the first line. Then you accuse me of racism because I made a comment on america. Do me a favour boy, dont mention my name. I dont like adults crying like children and supposed adults showing a complete and utter lack of intelligence.

But can I still be obsessed with you though????

rowley wrote:Right before it gets out of hand and because i have no desire to spend a Saturday night cleaning up after you the personal insults stop now.

Just be mindful where it originates.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:But can I still be obsessed with you though????

Go right ahead my goof ol boy.

"You whiney so and so"

we don't get that kind of personal stuff in White America..

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:"You whiney so and so"

we don't get that kind of personal stuff in White America..

You do in england.

TopHat24/7 wrote:Not nice being accused of racism/bigotry, is it, Az?

Who have I accused of bigotry/racism?

What was said to me was a direct accusation that my views of rocky are as they are because he was white. I want that backed up or an apology. I'm very stubborn and patient.

I'm always civil.

Easy like a Sunday morning...............

Calm down Rowley.....

if I'm honest though Az Mate...

Nancy Reagan was a slapper according to you and Floyd patterson a grovelling uncle Tom.....

May have attributed a little to your reputation....

azania wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:Not nice being accused of racism/bigotry, is it, Az?

Who have I accused of bigotry/racism?

What was said to me was a direct accusation that my views of rocky are as they are because he was white. I want that backed up or an apology. I'm very stubborn and patient.

You've used race on this forum before, in an OP to a thread no less, as the only 'logical' explanation for this board's apparent 'illogical' dislike of Khan. Essentially generalising all of us a racists/bigots - we only dislike Khan due to his race.

Joey Barton is a talented sportsman but I think he is a tool because of how he conducts himself and the rubbish that tumbles from his mouth.

My opinion's of Khan are the same. However because, unlike Joey Barton, I don't share the same ethnic heritage as Khan I face derision and the manipulation of my opinion's into being racially motivated, which for the record, they are not.

Anyways, this debate clearly won't get anywhere so it only leaves me to apologise to Rowley, I'll retire from the thread now, hope this hasn't dampened your evening.

Oh boy. According to Kitty Kelly, Nancy Reagan had an affair with Frank SInatra. Now google Kitty Kelly and her allegation. I know you're american and exams there are multiple choice based mostly. But surely you possess comprehension skills.

As for Petterson. Yes in my opinion he was an Uncle Tom. So what? Its my opinion and have given the reason why. Furthermore what on earth would YOU know about something you completely deny even existed?

Grow up boy.

ps - Capitalise the guy's name please. Show him some respect at least.

TopHat24/7 wrote:

azania wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:Not nice being accused of racism/bigotry, is it, Az?

Who have I accused of bigotry/racism?

What was said to me was a direct accusation that my views of rocky are as they are because he was white. I want that backed up or an apology. I'm very stubborn and patient.

You've used race on this forum before, in an OP to a thread no less, as the only 'logical' explanation for this board's apparent 'illogical' dislike of Khan. Essentially generalising all of us a racists/bigots - we only dislike Khan due to his race.

Joey Barton is a talented sportsman but I think he is a tool because of how he conducts himself and the rubbish that tumbles from his mouth.

My opinion's of Khan are the same. However because, unlike Joey Barton, I don't share the same ethnic heritage as Khan I face derision and the manipulation of my opinion's into being racially motivated, which for the record, they are not.

Anyways, this debate clearly won't get anywhere so it only leaves me to apologise to Rowley, I'll retire from the thread now, hope this hasn't dampened your evening.

I have asked a question is the dislike of Khan had anything to do with his ethnicity. I read an article in the Guardian asking the same question and their conclusion was that some of the dislike was race based. I didn't give my conclusion or come tothe same conclusion. Perhaps I dont want to believe the guardian's conslusion.

Now is asking a question which has been asked before the same as a direct accusation I was met with?

Have I accussed you or anyone else on this forum of having bigoted views or racism? The short answer is that I have not. And I will never. Even when some American eejit who posts here said some absolutely bigotted stuff about Islam, I didn't accuse him of bigotry.

Do we really need this bigoted fool on this forum, goes about insulting everyone acting like a child, we all know the truth about his 'opinion' so is there any need to revisit it yet again?

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Do we really need this bigoted fool on this forum, goes about insulting everyone acting like a child, we all know the truth about his 'opinion' so is there any need to revisit it yet again?

Leave it ghosty....not worth it Mate..

Ridiculous Truss that anyone who rightfully criticises Khan must be a racist, when pushed has nothing to back it up other than deciding what any objective fan would think.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Leave it ghosty....not worth it Mate..

Best advice you've ever given anyone boy. |Especially on a subject matter you clearly have no understanding of.

This is a boxing forum, you would do well to remember that instead of trying to turn everything into a racially motivated debate, disgusting behaviour.

He has to have the last word.....

Have it mate by all means......I kind of feel sorry for you.....Try to remember that harboring resentment doesn't get you anywhere Az!!

Thread is all yours kid!!

Have the last word............................................

azania wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:Not nice being accused of racism/bigotry, is it, Az?

Who have I accused of bigotry/racism?

What was said to me was a direct accusation that my views of rocky are as they are because he was white. I want that backed up or an apology. I'm very stubborn and patient.

You said that Rocky's standings in history is due to "White America". That Patterson is an "Uncle Tom". Both of which are racially motivated statements.

Lets leave this shall we?

oxring wrote:

azania wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:Not nice being accused of racism/bigotry, is it, Az?

Who have I accused of bigotry/racism?

What was said to me was a direct accusation that my views of rocky are as they are because he was white. I want that backed up or an apology. I'm very stubborn and patient.

You said that Rocky's standings in history is due to "White America". That Patterson is an "Uncle Tom". Both of which are racially motivated statements.

Lets leave this shall we?

There's a huge difference between that statement and being a bigot. Moreover my comment was based on the writings of social commentators and african american academics including Dr Cornel West who is the Head of African American Faculty at Harvard and previously at Princeton. Acuse me of bigotry then you are accusing them of bigotry. Accusing them of bigotry then you are literally washing away their opinions and elevating the opinion of Archie Moore above theirs.

Anyway, I'll leave it there.