| |
|
|
HBO Commentators Up In Arms
Over Khan Point Deductions
By Bret "The Threat" Newton
HBO's Max Kellerman & Harold Lederman kept bringing up the
term "Hard Warning" during the Lamont Peterson vs. Amir Khan
last night in Washington, DC. They made it clear that they
were almost baffled by referee Joe Cooper's choice to deduct
two points from Khan in rounds 7 and 12, without a "hard
warning". Golden Boy's Oscar DeLaHoya & Eric Gomez also
appeared shocked, but Khan is their fighter, so their
feelings go without saying.
However, the points were rightly justified. The fact one
point was taken in round 7 and another had to be taken in
the final round, all with spoken warnings from the referee
before and in between, proves more points should have been
taken. Khan was clearly not following the rules throughout
the entire fight. It was obvious he got in trouble in rounds
3 and 4 and his Plan B was to survive, which included
holding, head-locking, holding Peterson's head down and
pushing.
When a point is taken from one fighter that's a way of
reprimanding him to not continue doing whatever it is he was
doing wrong. There are times when a referee will wrongly
deduct a point without prior warnings, but in this case,
Cooper had given Khan numerous warnings leading up to each
point deduction and many in between. In round 6 alone (the
round prior to the first deduction), Cooper had told Khan to
"stop holding", to "get off [Peterson's] head", and to "stop
pushing". Those are three separate illegal tactics for
starters. Secondly, Cooper can be clearly heard telling Khan
these three warnings over and over, multiple times,
throughout the entire fight. Khan was incompliant with those
warnings, as well as after the first deduction.
Kellerman & Lederman must not have been able to hear the
referee, but if they had and were expecting yet a separate
"hard warning", meaning an additional final warning, then
they were asking for too much. How many out-loud warnings
does it take to receive a deduction? By their rules it
doesn't matter how many times you say it, it's when you
actually pause the action to tell the fighter "Hey, look,
the next time is going to cost you a point". That may work
in the kindergarten classroom, but inside the ring between
two professional fighters, one should expect they both know
the rules, and that both follow instructions. Khan was clearly
not following the instructions by the referee because he had
to keep repeating to Khan to "NOT" do the illegal tactics he
was doing. Had it been only a few spoken warnings then there
could be a case for complaint, but the number of warnings in
each round alone could very well have issued a point
deduction nearly every other round from Khan.
But, when all that's said and done, Cooper did in fact tell
Khan "This is your last one", more than once. If that isn't
a "hard warning" I don't know what is. Why do Kellerman &
Lederman expect the referee to call time, grab Khan's hand
like he's a child, and give him a firm warning? What Cooper
did was fair, and he even gave Khan many advantages in
allowing the dirty tactics to continue without further
taking more points than he did. Hell, the second deduction
came at the very final round. If that wasn't accommodating,
waiting that long to take action after so many issued
warnings, then everyone who disagrees was clearly expecting
(or hoping for) Khan to get away with it. How much longer
was the referee supposed to wait for? Until the REMATCH?
After the fight Khan complained about having to fight two
people in the ring, yet he seemed to miss the fact that the
first round knockdown which Cooper ruled in his favor was in
fact a push down. The two people Khan were fighting was Peterson and
himself.
|
|
|
