Video-Paulie Malignaggi Loses Controversial Decision To Juan Diaz, Calls Out Judges In Post-Fight Rant - YouTube | Boxing

Sex tape costs NFL rookie $60K endorsement deal

Don't mess with Strasburg: Nats fire critical announcer

Big Ten announces divisional alignment for 2011

BYU makes it official, will become an independent in football in 2011

Team USA remains unbeaten in World Championships

The Rapunzel of the NFL and His 1 Million Dollar Hair

Plaxico is plucked and feathered again...

This Gives a New Meaning to the Phrase, Setting the Course on Fire

Bob Bradley to remain US soccer head coach

Michelle Wie wins Canadian Open for second LPGA title

Matt Kuchar wins Barclays title in a playoff

Japan takes Little League World Series title

8/23/09

Paulie Malignaggi Loses Controversial Decision To Juan Diaz, Calls Out Judges In Post-Fight Rant

Finally, A Boxer Calls Out Boxing For Being The Corrupt Mess That It Is

Boxing, Juan Diaz, paulie malignaggi

Pat

more posts by author

Juan Diaz and Paulie Malignaggi fought last night on HBO's Boxing After Dark. Malignaggi lost a very controversial unanimous decision to Diaz, the hometown fighter in Houston, Texas. David Sutherland scored the fight 116-112, Raul Caiz scored it 115-113 and Gale Van Hoy scored it 118-110, obviously all in favor of Diaz.

After the fight, Malignaggi had some strong words for the judges, and boxing in general. Max Kellerman tried to reign him in, probably for his own good, but Malignaggi was not to be stopped. He was quite

The NY Daily News certainly isn't unbiased either, as Malignaggi is from Brooklyn, but they pointed out some interesting facts that skewed the fight towards Diaz from the beginning:

"Van Hoy is from Texas, Sutherland is from Oklahoma and Caiz is a Mexican-American, sharing the same ethnicity as Diaz. The referee, Laurence Cole, is from Texas, and the ring was of the smaller variety (18 feet), stacking the deck entirely against Malignaggi."

I was unable to watch the fight live, but HBO was gracious enough to show it about 47 times today, and I believe Malignaggi has a very legitimate point. It appeared as though he won at least 5 of the rounds, and you could make a case that he won between 1-3 of the others, depending on how you saw it. There is now way, however, that anyone could ever justify giving 10 of the rounds to Diaz, as Gale Van Hoy did.

Boxing has been known for corruption for decades, and if anyone thinks that it has changed, then think again. This fight was a perfect example, and kudos to Malignaggi for his candor, even if it was just a last-ditch effort to save his career.

COMMENT

ADD FEED

28 comments

Vote!

Comment!

Your votes determine top comment

8/23/09

BluDevil

Whatever... yes, sometimes decisions go the wrong way in boxing. News flash. It's been that way FOREVER.

But Malignaggi took this fight, knowing full well that the fight was going to be in Diaz's home town, and that the judges would be home town, the ref would be home town, the crowd would be home town, etc. And he took the fight, even knowning that the deck was stacked against him, because he wanted to get paid. Otherwise, if he didn't agree then he doesn't get to fight and does not get paid.

Any fighter worth his beans knows that when the deck is stacked against you, you have to KO your opponent or you aren't going to win. Don't you think that Miguel Cotto already knows that he has to KO Pac Man, or else the chances of him winning a decision are virtually nil? Don't you think that Juan Manuel Marquez knows that he has to KO Money Mayweather, or his chances of winning a decision are virtually nil?

That's why I love a guy like Shane Mosley. He's been victim of a few bad decisions. And you know what? After the fight he just says "You know, don't leave the fight in the judges hands or else strange things can happen".

It's a part of boxing and it's part of why I love boxing. Malignaggi is a big wuss, has been for a long time, everyone who really follows the sport knows it. He's crying foul on stuff that he already knew about.

Does that make it fair? Nope, it's not fair at all. Tough, deal with it. Playing on the road in the NFL isn't fair sometimes, as the home teams generally get favorable calls. Playing against NBA superstars isn't fair, as superstars always get the favorable calls. Playing on the road in international soccer is god awful unfair, but you suck it up and play harder and try to win even though the calls are going to go against the road team every time. And hey, even UFC has it's questionable decisions from time to time. It's sports. Deal with it.

8/23/09

sportsgnork

4	Lennox Lewis had a similar situation when he drew against Holyfield. Lewis won that fight. The three Boxing Orgs who's titles were up for grabs ordered a rematch and lewis won the rematch. Paulie said what most people already know. He could have shown a bit more class, but it needed to be said.

8/23/09

hapkido_warrior

2	well atleast he didnt get any brain damage from rock hard plaster-filled gloves all he did was get a decision loss

8/23/09

JAMESYAP12

0	STOP CRYING YOU FOOLS! YOU FOOLS CANT DO NOTHING ABOUT IT SO SHUT THE F=CK UP. WHEN YOUR INTO MY TOWN YOU GO BY MY RULES. I ONLY HAVE 1 RULE ="YOU CANT WIN.,IF YOU DONT GOT THE GREEN" MAN I LOVE THIS JOB!!!!! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

8/23/09

WBKsports

You don't even know what you're talking about...The fight is being replayed right now on HBO...Even Diaz said he wants his fans to see his opponents heads instead of his being knocked around next time....This was a complete fix...Malignaggi dominated this fight and messed up Diaz eye. If anyone thinks DIaz should have won this fight, then they didn't watch the fight. Malignaggi kicked Juan Diaz a$$, but got robbed....

8/23/09

BluDevil

8/23/09

primo

3	Boxing is still a fixed sport and this is completely evident of it. And anyone that disagrees with it needs to open their eyes

8/23/09

BluDevil

primo wrote:

Boxing is still a fixed sport and this is completely evident of it. And anyone that disagrees with it needs to open their eyes

It's not any more fixed that the NFL, NBA, College Football, Soccer or UFC. If you can watch those sports and deal with the obviously blown calls and home coooking that virtually every home team gets, and if you can deal with the fact that UFC has their fair share of questionable decisions, and still enjoy those sports then what is the difference with Boxing?

8/23/09

NorseHeathen

3	A day or so ago, I remember seeing how MMA is directly challenging professional boxing by scheduling their premier events at the same time as premier boxing events with the question: 'is this smart'. I think this demonstrates that MMA's move is VERY smart as I believe most fans of pugilistic sports are more than fed-up with this kind of travesty.

8/23/09

primo

1	When it comes down to it, as a boxer, you shouldn't go the distance and HOPE you win in points. If you do go the distance then make sure in the last round you go gunning for the whole enchilada. If every sports complain about the officiating then boxers need to take in account they are the only sport where they are in control of their outsome... simple mathematics knock the other guy out = win!

8/23/09

primo

BluDevil wrote:

UFC is headed that way as well, but I was working an BIB Boxing/ MMA event last night and there was many questionable calls and winners and this is an amatuer event. It starts off at the lowest levels and then escaliates to the bigger stage

8/23/09

Pat

I agree that there have been some questionable decisions in the UFC as well, but I will never understand the "It's a part of boxing and it's part of why I love boxing" mentality. That makes no sense to me at all. It's an obvious problem. It needs to be fixed. When I see decisions in the UFC that make no sense, it's not endearing to me. It upsets me. I can't even fathom how someone could actually like that.

8/23/09

hapkido_warrior

UFC's problem is that the judges dont have a fair way to score bouts and Dana doesnt pick the judges, its the same with boxing, the (insert state) athletic commission appoints the judges and who knows whether these guys are corrupt or biased etc etc. but UFC isnt this bad, they just award too many points in categories that arent always best, like a guy takes a guy down twice in a fight for about 1 minute, the rest of the fight hes getting his ass kicked on the feet; by their scoring system, he won
its a major problem and Dana complains alot and is still trying to work on it but theres not much that he can do

and in reguards to bludevil, i would say it is more fixed because although refs favor a little in home in those sports, if you make more points they dont give the victory to the other team, the NBA commissioner is in charge of that and its generally at most a few points from TO because of bad calls

boxing has had LOTS of scandals though, the plaster in the gloves, steroids, refs, judges, its in a good bit of trouble. The real problem is once again that its always the state sporting commission that appoints judges and referees for any 'fight sports' (boxing, grappling, mma) going on. These judges are far from unbiased, skilled, or fair and are appointed by bureacrats.
I ve never seen a guy win so clearly in the UFC and got a unanimous loss
i ve seen toss ups that go the wrong way through split or very close unanimous
or slight wins go the other way through split
but a clear win going to the wrong fighter from a huge unanimous decision- i ve never seen

8/23/09

BluDevil

Pat wrote:

I just love controversy, and how it gets everyone all stirred up. When there is a odd decision in boxing, it generally makes for a pretty exciting rematch. Does that mean I want all the fights to end in an odd decision? No, of course not. But controversy creates cash, and I like that.

It's also why I hate instant replay.... I like the fact that human error (or human bias) has some effect on the outcome of a sporting event. Otherwise, if everything was totally fair, right down the middle, all the time... well, I just think that would be boring.

8/23/09

hapkido_warrior

1	(Edited by hapkido_warrior) boring because the fighter who won actually wins? why not just watch some awful reality tv show if all you want is drama and controversy if you think that the fight itself is 'boring' unless someones making it unfair and full of drama

8/23/09

BluDevil

hapkido_warrior wrote:

boring because the fighter who won actually wins?
why not just watch some awful reality tv show if all you want is drama and controversy if you think that the fight itself is 'boring' unless someones making it unfair and full of drama

You miss my point, completely....

It's not boring "unless" someone makes it unfair and full of drama. I clearly *don't* want that to happen in every fight. But when it does happen, it really does not bug me that much because clearly, controversy is a good thing in some respects.

Would any of us be talking about this fight today if this didn't happen? Would Pat have bothered to write an article about a fight that didn't have any controversy? Nope... I can can state that for the record because every week, I watch just about every fight and I post an article about every fight I watch. How many of those articles have ended up on the front page of the Q for people to see and comment on? Only the ones where there was some kind of controversial ending.

Last week I wrote up what I thought was a pretty good article on the RJJ vs Jeff Lacy fight. DId anyone notice or care? Nope.

But this week there is a controversial fight between two guys who aren't that well known (certainly not as well known as RJJ) and it makes the front page and we're all here talking about it.

To me, that's much better for a sport I love than for nobody to care at all. Now perhaps some people who didn't watch this fight will tune in for the rematch. Like I said, controversy creates cash and sometimes that's a good thing.

8/23/09

BluDevil

0	adding comment

8/23/09

WBKsports

(Edited by WBKsports)

Um....One Judge was from Texas, another from Oklahoma, and the third judge was a Mexican-American just like Juan Diaz....The scorecards were 118-110, 116-112 and 115-113 in favor of Diaz. Gale Van Hoy from Texas had the fight at 118-110??? Malignaggi landed 191 punches to Diaz's 178, according to the official statistics. Malignaggi threw 949 punches to Diaz's 663. Paulie called out the judges before the fight, so it's obvious this fight was fixed...Did you even watch the fight? Is "Subjective" your new "Word of the Day"? You've used that B.S. two times already. Go watch the fight...It's pretty obvious Malignaggi won it.

8/23/09

Pat

BluDevil wrote:

For me, the fights are the entertaining part... not the scoring. If there are two talented fighters out there, they can make an exciting fight without making it a soap opera.

8/23/09

djjfrench

3	Top quote had me thinking like they say in sports "take it out of the refs hands" if you do it and do it right and well usually you don't leave bs up to the stripes. Still good to see someone speak out, always good to do.

8/24/09

hapkido_warrior

0	more difficult in boxing, with those giant pillows on and the exhausting length of the fight its much more difficult to get a real KO where they dont just get up and have a standing 8 count or 10 seconds to get up when they were unconcious for a couple of those seconds its another reason mma is more popular

8/26/09

Heyhey1970

1	The cliche in boxing that you have to dominate or knock-out the champion to win, makes it almost unwatchable at times. The worst travesty I've seen in my lifetime was Sugar Ray Leonard and Marvin Hagler. I was rooting for Leonard, but Hagler easily won, only to have it taken away by judges "on the take." It's why I don't by pay-per-views.

8/26/09

BluDevil

Heyhey1970 wrote:

The cliche in boxing that you have to dominate or knock-out the champion to win, makes it almost unwatchable at times. The worst travesty I've seen in my lifetime was Sugar Ray Leonard and Marvin Hagler. I was rooting for Leonard, but Hagler easily won, only to have it taken away by judges "on the take." It's why I don't by pay-per-views.

Yeah, but I love that fight. Still watch it from time to time.

Look, boxing is a subjective sport if there is no knock out. The way it looks on TV isn't always the way the judges see it. Is it sometimes a rip off? Yep, no doubt. But I feel like you get more great fights than you get bad decisions, if you watch a lot of boxing.

5/12/10

myrna_ventura

0	BluDevil wrote: Yeah, but I love that fight. Still watch it from time to time. Look, boxing is a subjective sport if there is no knock out. The way it looks on TV isn't always the way the judges see it. Is it sometimes a rip off? Yep, no doubt. But I feel like you get more great fights than you get bad decisions, if you watch a lot of boxing. Very well said my friend