The Chlamydia Kid Posted October 7, 2017 Share Posted October 7, 2017 I don't think he did. I had it a draw. Crolla may have been busier but wasn't actually connecting with much as Burns was blocking most of his shots with his arms. That’s fair enough. But it’s subjective and not beyond dispute. Your opinion is valid but most folk would probably disagree. The point is you only need to JUST win the majority of the rounds and the overall score looks wide. It’s not like GGG vs Canelo where nobody with half a brain could have given Canelo some of the rounds. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Stubbs Posted October 7, 2017 Share Posted October 7, 2017 6 minutes ago, Neilly said: What are you talking about? Crolla shaded most of the close rounds, certainly in my eyes. The judges have seen it that way as well. I agree and said so myself: 35 minutes ago, Alan Stubbs said: Sky are ridiculously one sided but Crolla is winning most of these rounds. Burns looking better here. Thought Burns finished pretty well and in the end 117 was too high a margin. Would have had no complaints if Crolla's early-middle round work nicked him the fight. 10 minutes ago, The Chlamydia Kid said: No it isn’t a joke at all. You could win a close fight 120-108 if you just edged each round which is what Crolla did in most rounds. 9 minutes ago, The Chlamydia Kid said: Just because it was 117-112 doesn’t meant he smashed him about. Just means he edged more of the rounds. 4 minutes ago, The Chlamydia Kid said: Folk seem To think 117-112 means you’ve been hammered. Burns could have smashed Crolla for 3 rounds but Crolla just get the benefit of the doubt in 8 of them, draw one and it is a 117-112. So looking at it as a whole it’s really close but round by round it looks big. It's really great that you've explained this three times, I don't think anyone knew how boxing scoring worked before. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMDP Posted October 7, 2017 Share Posted October 7, 2017 No, never swung a punch in ma puff. Would love to lace up a pair of gloves one day but... You've never mentioned it tbh -2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jagfox Posted October 7, 2017 Share Posted October 7, 2017 I only had Burns winning four or five rounds. I think the overall result was correct. As said the winning margin could be subjective when giving winning rounds to Crolla. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chlamydia Kid Posted October 7, 2017 Share Posted October 7, 2017 You've never mentioned it tbh Have I not? Must not have been relevant to the conversation then. Will try to bring it up when I get the chance in future. [emoji106] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chlamydia Kid Posted October 7, 2017 Share Posted October 7, 2017 It's really great that you've explained this three times, I don't think anyone knew how boxing scoring worked before. It needs continually driven home when the hard of thinking can’t comprehend anything other than a Scottish boxer being beat in England=robbery. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMDP Posted October 7, 2017 Share Posted October 7, 2017 Tck [emoji23]Everyone knows it was tight but giving it the biggun cos you once sparred a couple people is brilliant. Probably the only guy to do this tbh -2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MONKMAN Posted October 7, 2017 Share Posted October 7, 2017 Taylor would smash him to pieces. Define “smash him to pieces”. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Stubbs Posted October 7, 2017 Share Posted October 7, 2017 (edited) 15 minutes ago, The Chlamydia Kid said: It needs continually driven home when the hard of thinking can’t comprehend anything other than a Scottish boxer being beat in England=robbery. If anyone even mentioned the fighters' nationalities or described the overall result as a "robbery" I missed it. As has been said there were quite a few close rounds and everyone's subjective view of those will produce their own results. What can be pretty irritating with boxing is that those close decisions the judges have to make can often be pretty predictable depending on where the fight is happening/who is promoting it etc. I mind plenty folk having a chuckle at Burns getting a 118 score in Glasgow against Relikh. Do you think everyone on P&B has a complex about Belarusians not getting results against Scots, that merits an explanation of how boxing works? Edited October 7, 2017 by Alan Stubbs 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pittsburgh phil Posted October 7, 2017 Share Posted October 7, 2017 They are all fighting at a different weight from Taylor so not sure the relevance of that question. Burns is shot and offensively has nothing to offer. Taylor is viscious on the inside and would have too much movement for Burns. What attributes does Burns have to beat Taylor? Experience is just a word that I think loses meaning when a young, fresh skilled boxer has just too much in the locker for a shot Burns. Hiya Josh, hiya pal!! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Stubbs Posted October 7, 2017 Share Posted October 7, 2017 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthernJambo Posted October 7, 2017 Share Posted October 7, 2017 I have no desire to see a rematch of Burns Crolla. Most the rounds were pretty tight and not all that entertaining. Crolla won, imo, by two or three rounds. Ricky had some good moments, but crolla outworked him for most the fight. Well done to both, but interesting to see where Burns goes next. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMDP Posted October 8, 2017 Share Posted October 8, 2017 If anyone even mentioned the fighters' nationalities or described the overall result as a "robbery" I missed it. As has been said there were quite a few close rounds and everyone's subjective view of those will produce their own results. What can be pretty irritating with boxing is that those close decisions the judges have to make can often be pretty predictable depending on where the fight is happening/who is promoting it etc. I mind plenty folk having a chuckle at Burns getting a 118 score in Glasgow against Relikh. Do you think everyone on P&B has a complex about Belarusians not getting results against Scots, that merits an explanation of how boxing works? TCK sparred a couple of bois so it's only right he points things out tbh. -2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kiddy Posted October 8, 2017 Share Posted October 8, 2017 This appeared on my Twitter feed. Ooft 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chlamydia Kid Posted October 8, 2017 Share Posted October 8, 2017 TCK sparred a couple of bois so it's only right he points things out tbh. It’s a pity the only time you’ve ever got the baws to do anything approaching getting into a confrontation is getting full of the drink and getting wide on the internet ya complete weapon. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
8MileBU Posted October 8, 2017 Share Posted October 8, 2017 Dan Rafael of ESPN on Twitter claiming the ref made a bad call stopping the Eubank/Yildirim fight. Genuinely can’t tell if he’s trolling or just stupid as f**k. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chlamydia Kid Posted October 8, 2017 Share Posted October 8, 2017 I just watched it. I thought the ref panicked and waved it off too early. How could the ref tell the instant that he hit the floor that he wasn’t going to be ok in 8seconds? He went down heavy but he wasn’t knocked out. I am not saying that the he was fit to fight after 8- it would have been touch and go, but the how the ref was able to deduce that so quickly is beyond me- If he was right it was by accident. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MONKMAN Posted October 8, 2017 Share Posted October 8, 2017 Dan Rafael of ESPN on Twitter claiming the ref made a bad call stopping the Eubank/Yildirim fight. Genuinely can’t tell if he’s trolling or just stupid as f**k. It would appear you’re the one who’s stupid as f**k. ETA. See the 2 above posts. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
8MileBU Posted October 8, 2017 Share Posted October 8, 2017 It would appear you’re the one who’s stupid as f**k. ETA. See the 2 above posts. Trying too hard mate. What you raging for? Whilst I respect the opinions of said posts from two random punters on a football forum, it doesn’t make them right and I’m inclined to differ with them.Pipe down & don’t be a dick. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marshmallo Posted October 8, 2017 Share Posted October 8, 2017 Matchroom daft -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.