The v2 Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

Should Terence Crawford have been disqualified?

Go down

Should Terence Crawford have been disqualified? Empty Should Terence Crawford have been disqualified?

Post by Ronikara on Sun 21 Apr 2019, 11:15 am

Ok before I start this thread, I fully accept that Amir Khan was being beaten up badly by Crawford. However the decision of a TKO defeat against Khan for a low blow that he suffered doesn’t make any sense.

Imagine if while down clearly on the scorecards, Amir Khan has smashed a low blow like that in Crawford and Crawford was unable to continue. Would they have given a TKO win for Khan and taken the title off Crawford? I don’t think so. No commentator seemed to be too clued up on the rules of what happens when there is a low blow and the victim cannot continue. However the idea that a fighter could win a world title by smashing a low blow on their opponent seems ridiculous. What a strange precedent to set. Like I say, if roles had been reversed and Khan while losing the fight had done that, what should have been the outcome?

Barry Jones suggested that it should be like an accidental head clash so after 4 rounds it goes to the scorecards. I would agree with that as a fair way of deciding the fight but to my knowledge that is not the current rule in boxing. That applies to head clashes, but bad low blows should lead to disqualification, accidental or not. It is a gap in the laws of boxing that obviously needs to be resolved.

To me, it just seems like the American referee and officials were in a sticky situation and wanted to find a way to declare American Crawford as the winner, and a TKO win was the easiest way to do that. And while it would have been a travesty for Crawford to lose this fight because of an accidental low blow, this decision by the officials has wider ramifications. Personally, I think people are focussing on the wrong things here. Just because Crawford was winning the fight and didn’t deserve to be stripped of his title doesn’t mean that the laws of boxing should be twisted to somehow give him the win. Whether Khan quit is almost irrelevant. Khan, for all his faults, has always challenged himself to go in with the best and fight to the often bitter end. If he says he could not continue, I believe him. I also believe that under the rules as they are, Crawford should have been disqualified and Khan should have come out of Maddison Square Garden as world champion because of it. What do you think?

Ronikara

Posts : 101
Join date : 2011-04-23

Back to top Go down

Should Terence Crawford have been disqualified? Empty Re: Should Terence Crawford have been disqualified?

Post by Derbymanc on Sun 21 Apr 2019, 11:55 am

No he shouldn't have, Khan had the option to take 5 mins to recover and didn't. He then called it quits, TKO loss for him and at the moment it looks like a massive mistake for him to have taken the fight as he has come out of it looking a lot worse.

Derbymanc

Posts : 3879
Join date : 2013-10-14
Location : Manchester

Back to top Go down

Should Terence Crawford have been disqualified? Empty Re: Should Terence Crawford have been disqualified?

Post by CaledonianCraig on Sun 21 Apr 2019, 11:59 am

As I understand it he was given the mandatory five minutes to recover from the low blow and could not continue. However, it was taken to be him throwing the towel in when he said he couldn't continue due to the beating he'd already taken so I cannot see how the result could not go any other way really. At the end of the day he was a well beaten man - in the rounds up until that point. Had he continued he could have got hurt very badly. At the end of the day the result was always going to be a Crawford win.
CaledonianCraig
CaledonianCraig

Posts : 20218
Join date : 2011-05-31
Age : 52
Location : Edinburgh

Back to top Go down

Should Terence Crawford have been disqualified? Empty Re: Should Terence Crawford have been disqualified?

Post by The Beast on Sun 21 Apr 2019, 4:14 pm

It is a good point and I agree that it is an awkward situation and with the arguments regarding going to the scorecards. I am not suggesting for a second that Khan was thinking this, despite a weak chin he fights until stopped however if he was given the decision this might give others incentives to quit following low blows particularly where re-match clauses are in place.

Not a good night for Amir unfortunately, comfortably outboxed and outfought. Given the stick he gave Kell Brook (who suffered a much more serious injury) after the Spence fight his stock will have taken a bigger hit than that final punch delivered.

As a side note Crawford looked the mustard, great balance, setting traps and power. A fight with Spence would be great match.

The Beast

Posts : 1168
Join date : 2012-04-21
Location : Leicestershire

Back to top Go down

Should Terence Crawford have been disqualified? Empty Re: Should Terence Crawford have been disqualified?

Post by Mr Bounce on Sun 21 Apr 2019, 6:00 pm

Let's not forget a similar thing happened in the Ward-Kovalev rematch, although that time the ref claimed not to have seen it and counted the under pressure Kovalev out. Seems that the home fighter and champion will always be given the benefit of the doubt. I am sure that it wasn't deliberate from Crawford and I did think that Khan was not looking for a way out - as stated above, he either goes out on his shield or wins.

What I actually think happened here is that Virgil Hunter made a miscalculation and thought that Khan could get the disqualification win, thus advising Khan to say he couldn't carry on and potentially forcing a lucrative rematch. Ain't gonna happen though.

Still, having recently been accidentally kicked in the gentleman's vegetables at work (by a lady demonstrating combat kicks), I can only imagine the discomfort being slugged there by a pro boxer. Protective cup or not, if you get caught there, it's going to smart a bit... Shocked

Mr Bounce

Posts : 2538
Join date : 2011-03-18
Location : East of Florida, West of Felixstowe

Back to top Go down

Should Terence Crawford have been disqualified? Empty Re: Should Terence Crawford have been disqualified?

Post by Nathaniel Jacobs on Sun 21 Apr 2019, 6:15 pm

TBH when you here Khan talking about passing blood through his urine you can understand what pain/discomfort he must’ve been in. That said his arm seemed also to be damaged and Hunter throwing in the towel essentially saved Khan more unnecessary punishment.

Think Khan should really be considering retirement. The punch resistance is totally gone and your legs are gone

Nathaniel Jacobs

Posts : 1923
Join date : 2016-12-17

Back to top Go down

Should Terence Crawford have been disqualified? Empty Re: Should Terence Crawford have been disqualified?

Post by Ronikara on Sun 21 Apr 2019, 6:36 pm

The ward fight was similar but on that occasion the ref said it wasn’t a low blow so just counted it like a normal body shot. Here, the ref had seen the low blow clearly yet still awarded a TKO win to Crawford. In my view, if that is ok in boxing someone who is losing the fight can now find another Hail Mary and go for a low blow and instead of being disqualified can argue it’s a TKO win for them. It’s a very dangerous precedent to set just because they didn’t want Crawford to lose.

I agree Khan looked terrible all night and should retire rather than take the pasting that Brook would give him. He has enough money. Crawford did look very impressive and I think he beats spence, but I can’t help feeling he was a lucky boy tonight not to be disqualified.

Ronikara

Posts : 101
Join date : 2011-04-23

Back to top Go down

Should Terence Crawford have been disqualified? Empty Re: Should Terence Crawford have been disqualified?

Post by melv500 on Sun 21 Apr 2019, 8:27 pm

Did anyone else think the shot landed more on his right thigh? Didn’t seem to me it hit the “danger” area which would mean you needed to stop. I’m not saying it definitely didn’t but but if it hadn’t he’s used it as an excuse to get out of there.

Also the old statement that Khan has never been outboxed is out the window.

melv500

Posts : 389
Join date : 2011-06-20

Back to top Go down

Should Terence Crawford have been disqualified? Empty Re: Should Terence Crawford have been disqualified?

Post by rapidringsroad on Mon 22 Apr 2019, 4:36 am

I agree Khan was beaten, but he was fouled and Crawford should at least have been warned if not disqualified. It's not the first time a Brit has had a dodgy decision, go back a few years when Duran landed a low blow on Buchanan and the Ref ignored it. I don't think Khan quit and even though he was well behind on points, he didn't disgrace himself against a good champion.

rapidringsroad

Posts : 439
Join date : 2011-02-25
Age : 84
Location : Coromandel New Zealand

Back to top Go down

Should Terence Crawford have been disqualified? Empty Re: Should Terence Crawford have been disqualified?

Post by TRUSSMAN66 on Mon 22 Apr 2019, 10:41 am

Not cowardly to quit when you are being handily beaten in a sport that can leave you damaged for life...

Think Khan knew he was beaten...But had the blow not happened would have carried on gamely and tried to push water up the fall...

But this gave him an out with an excuse and being in the heat of battle he didn't think it through....My guess is he regretted the decision when reason returned and the adrenalin left his brain....

Finished in the US now...

Two winners on Saturday...Crawford and Brook..

Khan's options are limited to a domestic fight and 50/50 split with a guy from Yorkshire.


TRUSSMAN66

Posts : 39302
Join date : 2011-02-02

Back to top Go down

Should Terence Crawford have been disqualified? Empty Re: Should Terence Crawford have been disqualified?

Post by Seanusarrilius on Mon 22 Apr 2019, 1:36 pm

Khan knew he was beat and took a way out so he could live to fight another day. It's hard to blame Khan in a sense. He has been pancaked 3 times and didn't fancy a 4th. on the other hand, people paid $75 US for that and were robbed of a natural end. ESPN wont be ahppy, and wont take Khan back again, but then they wanted him as highlight reel fodder for Crawford so I am sure Khan doesn't care. Crawford outboxing Khan was very interesting to see. Now Khan can be outboxed, he is in trouble going forward. I imagine Khan will get other big fights. Crawford is going to lack credible opp at WW because Haymon has almost all US WW's and wont work with Arum. Enter Kell Brook for Crawford?

Seanusarrilius
Moderator
Moderator

Posts : 5145
Join date : 2011-02-15

Back to top Go down

Should Terence Crawford have been disqualified? Empty Re: Should Terence Crawford have been disqualified?

Post by Seanusarrilius on Mon 22 Apr 2019, 1:37 pm

rapidringsroad wrote:I agree Khan was beaten, but he was fouled and Crawford should at least have been warned if not disqualified. It's not the first time a Brit has had a dodgy decision, go back a few years when Duran landed a low blow on Buchanan and the Ref ignored it. I don't think Khan quit and even though he was well behind on points, he didn't disgrace himself against a good champion.

He quit, but Khan has given the US a lot -- so I kinda don't blame him.

Seanusarrilius
Moderator
Moderator

Posts : 5145
Join date : 2011-02-15

Back to top Go down

Should Terence Crawford have been disqualified? Empty Re: Should Terence Crawford have been disqualified?

Post by 88Chris05 on Mon 22 Apr 2019, 5:35 pm

I don't think a case can be made for disqualifying Crawford, really. Yes - it was a definite foul. However, it was the first foul of its kind in the fight and you can't go turfing a guy out of the fight on the basis of one (admittedly quite bad) indiscretion, especially when there's nothing to suggest it was deliberate. The referee would have been within his rights to take a point and have a stern word with Crawford, but that's about it.

With regards to how the fight ended or how it should be recorded in the record books, I agree that a technical decision is the sensible and fairest option. It's generally accepted as being a decent compromise for one foul which causes an injury from which a fighter feels he can't continue (a head butt), so quite why the authorities don't unanimously make it so for another foul is beyond me. I appreciate that using this method has its shortcomings, where a fighter who thinks they're probably ahead but who is being pegged back could conceivably complain over a butt / low blow which has left them unable to continue and pick up an undeserved win on a technical decision, ala Chavez-Randall II or Donaire-Vetyeka etc. But if there are more than four rounds in the bank I think that's a far less dangerous precedent than awarding TKOs outright on foul punches which, as others have said, is likely to increase a fighter who's getting a tonking trying to shortcut themselves to victory.
88Chris05
88Chris05
Moderator
Moderator

Posts : 9092
Join date : 2011-02-16
Age : 32
Location : Nottingham

Back to top Go down

Should Terence Crawford have been disqualified? Empty Re: Should Terence Crawford have been disqualified?

Post by TRUSSMAN66 on Mon 22 Apr 2019, 6:53 pm

Seanusarrilius wrote:Khan knew he was beat and took a way out so he could live to fight another day. It's hard to blame Khan in a sense. He has been pancaked 3 times and didn't fancy a 4th. on the other hand, people paid $75 US for that and were robbed of a natural end. ESPN wont be ahppy, and wont take Khan back again, but then they wanted him as highlight reel fodder for Crawford so I am sure Khan doesn't care. Crawford outboxing Khan was very interesting to see. Now Khan can be outboxed, he is in trouble going forward. I imagine Khan will get other big fights. Crawford is going to lack credible opp at WW because Haymon has almost all US WW's and wont work with Arum. Enter Kell Brook for Crawford?

Past his prime British fighter that needs a big name to sell in the US who quit in his last fight..

There are no more big fights in the US..

Brook or retire.

TRUSSMAN66

Posts : 39302
Join date : 2011-02-02

Back to top Go down

Should Terence Crawford have been disqualified? Empty Re: Should Terence Crawford have been disqualified?

Post by smashingstormcrow on Mon 22 Apr 2019, 9:07 pm

A DQ would have been extremely harsh... can anyone think of a previous DQ in similar circumstances? A deduction would be appropriate if it were deemed intentional. And I don't think Hunter thought they had any chance of being handed a win, but perhaps he thought there was a slim chance of an NC, which I guess is better than his guy taking a beating.

I've always enjoyed watching Khan fight... he is fast, brave, entertaining. But arguably has never really belonged at the absolute pinnacle. No shame in that... he's had a great career... although didn't fight enough when he was at his peak. But there's nowhere left for him to go now apart from Brook. Maybe a "warm-up" fight against a B-level opponent first if he really wants to stretch it out... but that's about it.


smashingstormcrow

Posts : 279
Join date : 2011-02-21

Back to top Go down

Should Terence Crawford have been disqualified? Empty Re: Should Terence Crawford have been disqualified?

Post by hogey on Tue 23 Apr 2019, 10:11 pm

No never a disqualification, it was deemed accidental and looked more like his thigh than balls. At the end of the day just looked like he wanted out and quit when the opportunity arose. The fact he didnt take the 5 minutes to recover tells you everything. Ironic that Khan actually slaughtered Brook online for pulling out with a smashed eye socket which easily could have led to blindness, but then quit himself at the drop of a hat from a so called low blow without even seeing if the pain will subside after a few minutes.

hogey

Posts : 1366
Join date : 2011-02-24
Location : London

Back to top Go down

Should Terence Crawford have been disqualified? Empty Re: Should Terence Crawford have been disqualified?

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum