WCL TALK

MikeNorris · Joined: 19 Feb 2007 Posts: 2

Keep them coming.

bigj · Joined: 01 Feb 2007 Posts: 253

the210 · Joined: 23 Jan 2007 Posts: 137

bigj,

I don't get it. Why is that funny?

bigj · Joined: 01 Feb 2007 Posts: 253

well you got to remember I was the one who brought up the whole thompson southern red neck stuff and insinuated and proved there was some racism or racial insensitivity involved in the politcs to overturn the decision ... I don't quite think that was what Mike had on his mind when he to keep it coming but that is what came to my mind and it made me chuckle that's all.

bigj · Joined: 01 Feb 2007 Posts: 253

I've been talking and there are those that belive that the WCL has opened pandora's box. It is believed that now that you have post fight reviews that in a close match having the fights reviewed looking a the low legs kicks that these kickboxers are notorious for, can now be reviewed and points awarded for fouls that the judges may have missed and the wins can not and will not be final until reviewed by an independent review board.

jmm1 · Posted: Fri Feb 23, 2007 8:51 am Post subject:

I agree. Human judgement is part of combat sports. Sending this issue to an "objective" board can provide nothing positive for the league, the issue should have died that night in Austin, the real damage (to Stephen Thompson's knee) was already done.

bigj · Joined: 01 Feb 2007 Posts: 253

I agree. the stench of politcs wasn't needed in a league that is trying to get off the ground. some times the more one tries to look impartial, the more it looks like one is trying to look impartial and the truth of the event becomes secondary.

bigj · Joined: 01 Feb 2007 Posts: 253

I guarantee this will the last protest of this type. two, my sources tell me the decision will be no contest, Ray contributed to the injury which is the rational for the no contest which will be bs if true. That would be the same as a no contest in the first 30 sec from an injury froom a side kick.I would be cool with the fact that the fight didn't go long enough and that a fight has to go 1 min or 1 1/2 min and them be scored but if in fact fact it comes back as described I think it would be bs.. we'll see how good my source is.

jmm1 · Posted: Fri Feb 23, 2007 2:44 pm Post subject:

Bigj,

Very interesting...and I do not doubt that outcome. If that is the case, somebody needs to ask daddy Thompson if the "no contest" makes Stephen's knee any better. This should have never been protested. If the ruling is changed, it will undermine the integrity of the judging and refereeing that happened that night.

bigj · Joined: 01 Feb 2007 Posts: 253

I agree. there were some things said at the event that are obviously under my skin. This Idea of even protesting, it having any merit and the fact that there will be a rule about no reivews after this if they pay attention to the poll. the fact that after the fact rule changes will be made, after the fact the possibility of Ray's character and abilities are impuned and the appearence of validation by the ruling, if true,I find morally repugnant . The fight should have been left in the ring.

This isn't about the fight or the injury. It's about hero worship, politics, poor sportsmanship, and some other things that I don't care to get back into. go look on the other site ..it isn't about stephen anymore, it s a hatred of Raymond. It isn't about a no contest so that WB doesn't have a loss . It really is that Ray doesn't have a win. now wether that's because he's a pointfighter that's been beating on all the bad arse kickboxers or some other reasons I don't know.

jean-luc · Joined: 25 Jan 2007 Posts: 66

You suggest that "somebody needs to ask daddy Thompson if the "no contest" makes Stephen's knee any better". I am not Ray Thompson's spokesman but I think I can guess what he would tell you. He would say that it is a matter of principle. Had the opposite happened, I mean had Stephen fouled and injured Daniels and on top of that be awarded the victory, would you have considered the question to know who won that fight as a minor issue ? I frankly doubt it. When I see how fiercely some of you (Big Jack, for instance) are fighting to keep on Raymond Daniels' a "victory" which is all but glorious, I can imagine what they would writen if Daniels had been the victim.

jean-luc · Joined: 25 Jan 2007 Posts: 66

Sorry, I dropped the word "record" in my last post. Here it is again :

You suggest that "somebody needs to ask daddy Thompson if the "no contest" makes Stephen's knee any better". I am not Ray Thompson's spokesman but I think I can guess what he would tell you. He would say that it is a matter of principle. Had the opposite happened, I mean had Stephen fouled and injured Daniels and on top of that be awarded the victory, would you have considered the question to know who won that fight as a minor issue ? I frankly doubt it. When I see how fiercely some of you (Big Jack, for instance) are fighting to keep on Raymond Daniels' record a "victory" which is all but glorious, I can imagine what they would writen if Daniels had been the victim.

jmm1 · Posted: Mon Feb 26, 2007 7:38 am Post subject:

jean-luc-

My point was that the victory means very little in the big picture of things. If Daniels would have been hurt I would have hoped that a no contest would have been called at ringside, but I wouldn't have wanted the LA coach to protest. The protest does the league no good and doesn't help the situation at all. I'm fine with a no contest in this situation, and that is probably what Ray and Steven want in this case. I just think it is dumb to question the integrity of the at-event officiating by changing the results of the fight a month later.

bigj · Joined: 01 Feb 2007 Posts: 253

we would have never said the things that Ray Thompson said at the event about Ray and what megan posted on the other site. We woul.d have never iimpuned WB's rep and no we wouldn't have filed a protest after the fact. WE are absolutely stunned that there is a review a month later. This never happens in the point world. I am amazed at how whiny you and the rest of the kickboxers are. Had the shoe been on the other foot, which happens in point all the time , you just wait to the next tournament and settle it in the ring. you guys whine to the officials and use your political power to overturn decisions you don't like, impune the rep of your opponents,, post signs on web sites to show your disgust or make fun of anybody who aren't like you.

I absoultely agree with Jmm!

bigj · Joined: 01 Feb 2007 Posts: 253

you know back when kickboxers were men and not bitchers. Jeff Smith had one loss on his professional career to a bs decision to Dan Macaruso in Rhode Island. the chump never gave a rematch to my knowledge and as much of a bs decision and classless win as that one was there wasn't near as much of a stink as there is with this.