Chisora’s TKO win over Malik Scott will stand

By Boxing News - 08/06/2013 - Comments

chisora101By Scott Gilfoid: The British Boxing Board of Control has decided not to review the July 20th fight between Britain’s Dereck Chisora vs. Malik Scott despite the appeal made by Scott’s promoter due to the referee halting the fight on the count of 9 instead of the count 10 in the 6th round, according to Dan Rafael.

Robert Smith, the general secretary of the BBB of C, says that in British rules a fighter is still considered down even if he’s rising at the count of 9. They still see him as being down.

Smith also says that in British boxing, the referee counts to 9 and doesn’t verbally say the number 10. It’s unclear why they wouldn’t say 10, but that’s what Smith is saying. Doesn’t quite make sense to have a count and skip saying 10.

Malik Scott was ahead of the fight going into the 6th round. In the 6th, he was nailed by a looping right hand that appeared to hit Scott in the back of the head. After Scott hit the canvas, he stayed down on one knee until referee Phil Edwards got to the count of 9 before rising to his feet. However, Edwards stopped the fight anyway, much to the disappointment of the British crowd.

If this is a British rule then why were the British fans upset about the stoppage? They seemed to be seeing this with new eyes. If it’s supposed to be a norm for British fights to have the bout stopped at the count of 9 with the fighter rising to his feet, why were the fans not aware of this? In order to avoid confusion in the future, I think British referees need to actually say the word “10” when giving a 10 count, because it’s still as heck to count to 9 and not even say the word 10.

It doesn’t make sense, and it can cause controversy like this fight. Why have a 10 count if you’re not even going to count to 10? Is this an actual rule that British don’t say the word 10 or is this something where they’ve gotten lax and changed the rule out of habit rather than sticking to the original rule having to say each number clearly?

If it’s a situation where the referees have gotten lax with the rules, then the outcome should be overturned simply because the referee failed to verbally say each number. I know it seems like small thing, but it’s important when it comes to the fighter that gets stopped on a silent 10 count.

I think American fighters are going to need to be clued into the British boxing rules before fighting in the UK in order to avoid getting stopped in the future on the count of 9 instead of 10 while they’re rising to their feet.
I just thought the knockdown shouldn’t have counted in the first place due to the punch appearing to nail Scott on the back of the head, but I’m not surprised that they counted it. I’m not surprised the fight was stopped at the count of 9 without 10 being verbalized.



Comments are closed.