Amir Khan v Paul McCloskey - Manchester, April 16

corny wrote: »

I don't know where all the hatred for Khan comes from but i suppose you'll always have people queueing up to knock ye.

For what its worth i do think he's vulnerable to a good accurate puncher but he strikes me as a good honest kid trying to improve. His quick hands will be a problem for any fighter he faces and if he goes the distance he's always in with a shout on the scorecards because of good workrate. The ****e that goes on around him is unfortunate but through all the bull**** he walked up to McCloskey, shook his hand and said 'I'm sorry it had to end that way'. I hope he does well against bradley.

bottom line that decision stank. Regardless of whether he would have won.

anyone who claims otherwise just likes an argument for arguments sake.

Jayob10 wrote: »

Liverpool winning seals the title for United in essence so im on the fence, but f*ck it always wanna see us win

tonight I just wanted to see a fair night of boxing. Heard so much about how Paul would get batterend within 5 rounds. When that didn't happen Khan got a huge gift

F*cking rotten

yeah I know what you mean, i was saying to a friend of mine earlier, who is an Arsenal fan, i am conflicted about tomorrows game.
It was a lousy end to the fight. Khan was a muppet in the interview afterwards.

Jayob10 wrote: »

pure scutter of a post with all due respect. A world title fight should not be called off until its beyond reasonable doubt.

Maidana took punishment off Khan for most of the fight until the 10th round when Maidana rattled him, and shoud have ended it.

its as is the ref was waiting for the opporunity to tell Paul he was being outclassed, when in reality Khan was not hurting him.

I'm not for one moment saying McCloskey would have won, he wouldn't, but dont hand Khan the fight on that basis, if hes not good enough to knock out the European Champ. dont pad his record with false results. He wasnt knocking McCloskey out and that wasnt looking good for HBO

3 f*cking english judges???? and De La Hoya in attendance? I smell a gigantic rat

I wasn't defending the decision to stop it.
I was merely pointing out Khan was winning up until it was stopped. Hearns even acknowledged that. I don't see how a conspiracy to end the fight early in such a manner benefited Khan, unless you believe McCloskey was going to cause an upset in the end? Khan not ending it in emphatic fashion might have upset De La Hoya, but i doubt a dubious stoppage enhances Khan's credentials with HBO and the American public. In any case McCloskey should get a rematch.

Jayob10 wrote: »

bottom line that decision stank. Regardless of whether he would have won.

anyone who claims otherwise just likes an argument for arguments sake.

The 'decision' didn't stink. The better fighter over the 6 rounds won. In fact he was easily the better fighter over the 6 rounds. If you relax yourself and stop the crusade you'll see that. McCloskey couldn't lay a finger on him for half the fight ffs.

Yes the Doctor could have let it go and imo he should have let it go but that doesn't automatically spell FIX. What did Khan have to fear to resort to cheating? McCloskey couldn't get near him. If McCloskey had shaken him in an earlier round or looked the slightest bit dangerous you might have a point. But he didn't and he wasn't. Jesus Khan is probably more disappointed with the stoppage. I'm sure he wanted to put on a better show given the backround to the fight. The doctor robbed him of the opportunity.

Its a combination of disappointment and paranoia fuelling your argument. The better fighter won.

Oh_Noes wrote: »

Something strange fuelling your argument tbh, I don't watch boxing often but Khan did very little, McCloskey was pushing forward for most of the fight. He threw very few punches but was connecting with them whereas Khan was throwing 3-4 at a time into McCloskey's guard and not doing much else. He connected maybe once or twice, not more than that.

The cut that the fight was stopped over had been completely tidied up by the time the announcement was called. It wasn't much of a cut at all. Khan also was putting a lot more energy in, the fight could have gotten interesting in the later rounds had it continued.

Complete waste of what could have been a good fight and if you think Khan is something special then you're deluding yourself.

Yeah it shows.

Bodhisopha wrote: »

Irrelevant. McCloskey was robbed of the opportunity to turn it around. Not that i think he would have, it doesn't matter. It was a dodgy decision to say the least. A lot of weird shiit seems to happen on Golden Boy cards, i've noticed.

Dudey robbed himself when he stood there like a scoulded schoolboy while the doc was looking at him. He didn't protest until the fight was stopped.

walshb wrote: »

Well tonight he was far more special than Paul. Khan can go on and unify the division. He wants Bradley. I think he can beat him. Will that make him special in your eyes?

Is Khan perfect? No. He has weaknesses. But all fighters do. He is stil winning and beating his opponents.

im not sure, i actually think this is the weakest the division has been for a few years,

but on the other hand, i know Khan can only beat who's put in front of him,

im probably being hard on him, but i dont think he would have beaten say a prime Ricky Hatton or kostya Tzsyu, i think Hatton came into a far tougher division than Khan has

weight seems to be an issue as well, and at his age he's bound to jump up to Welter, but i cant see how if he doesnt have real concussive power at Light Welter, that he'll then somehow have Zeus like powers when he's up against bigger men in the welterweight division

i suppose im probably not his biggest fan, and dont really like his style too much either, i was warming to him, but the whole debacle of the last week have possibly tarnished my view of him,

cest la vie

cppromotions wrote: »

Lets be honest Steve Collins has proven himself so we must take some heed to what he says Who the F..k are you? to question probably the greatest fighter ever to come out of Ireland you have a lot to say on this site but did you ever have a fight yourself?

I think some posters have already defended my post; but anyway, fact is, Collins was watching a completely different fight than I and others. He had Paul to win, maybe that is why he couldn't see that Paul was being well beaten.

And yes, I do have a lot to say on the site. I like the site, the guys/gals and the knowledge/banter. Shoot me!

One of the better forums here at boards.

Anyone listen to Hearne/McCloskey interview on 5 Live after the fight? That'll clear up most of the arguments in this thread. Khan was saying that McCloskey wanted the fight over. Both Hearne and McCloskey was incredibly argressive againt these comments after the fight.

Firstly, I need to say that the atmosphere at the MEN Arena was unreal. I can't imagine it would've been better even if it had been held in Ireland. The Khan 'fans' were put to shame.

As for the fight, I think it is irrelevant what would've happened had the fight carried on. The fight shouldn't have been stopped. That was without doubt the quickest decision to stop a fight that I've seen. No consultation between doctor and corner. It was an immediate decision which is a straight-out disgrace. A cut team should be given the chance to clean up the cut, especially given the round was nearly over!

My opinion is that they wanted the fight stopped. Khan wasn't able to finish McCloskey and the way Dudey was standing up to Khan's punching was making the lad look weak in my opinion. Any further and it could have made him look very bad, especially is McCloskey was able to grab a counter punch and hurt Khan.

I feel incredibly hard done by, having paid to see a fight and then being robbed of it midway through. It's unfortunate that Paul and his team won't get a rematch as they won't be attractive enough, financially, to Khan money grabbing team.

McCloskey and the should hold their heads high.

john47832 wrote: »

Khan, even though was winning rounds, had no answer to the problem put in front of him - commentators being completely biased as usual were lauding Khans punches - yet only 25% were landing, and of those none lended on the money
"

No answer to the problem?

Jesus, if Khan had no answer to Paul, then what is Paul's answer?

There was one man in there winning, and winning fairly handily (you could not make an argument for Paul winning a single round), against a man who did very little, and actually spoiled. Paul was still beaten in ALL rds. Yet folks are criticising Khan's performance?
That is bizarre.

Kahn did not extend himself at all in there and was still two steps ahead.

john47832 wrote: »

he won rounds by throwing more shots, most of which never landed - hardly a great performance

of note it does appear that Khan struggles more against this type of fighter as shown against Pauly Mallianagi - again had Pauly possesed a power shot Khan would now be close to retirement

Throwing punches in boxing is what the sport is about for chrissake. Kahn's
strengths is his volume and speed; of course he will throw punches

Paul was doing NOTHING. This is unreal, Khan throws punches and gets criticised?

Khan landed far more shots than Paul and won each rd. The rds were clear, as in you could not award any rd to Paul.

john47832 wrote: »

its constructive criticism walshb - Khan struggles when he has an opponent in front of him with good movement, especially good head movement - if he comes up against a figher with good head movement and posseses a power shot then I couldnt possibly see him winning

like ricky hatton, he can throw all the punches he likes

Yes, he struggles, as do many fighters against good movement. BUT he still well won, that is the point. Paul was simply posing and his style is always going to present problems; he still was well beaten though

Hatton? I don't see any relevance here. Kahn is a skilled boxer. Hatton was never that.

Khan is still far from the finished article, I agree, but last night he was the ONLY man
making that fight, and winning that fight.