Danny Green Upends Anthony Mundine in their “Senior Circuit” Megafight

GREEN-MUNDINE II — Although widely lampooned when the match was made, the Feb. 3 encounter between Danny Green and Anthony Mundine was yet a compelling attraction Down Under. The bout at the Adelaide Oval reportedly drew the second highest rating for a pay-per-view boxing event in Australia, surpassed only by the first meeting in 2006.

When the smoke cleared, the 43-year-old Green (36-5) avenged his loss in the first meeting, upending his 41-year-old rival on a majority decision. Mundine (47-8) did some of his best work in the late rounds and the consensus of the ringside media was that a draw would have been a fair verdict, notwithstanding the fact that one of the judges had it 98-90.

The 10-round contest nearly ended in the opening round when Mundine clipped Green with a cheap shot, a punch that landed as the referee was breaking the fighters as Green was looking the other way. He was dazed but, given time to recover, the bout continued. In round seven, Green was penalized for excessive use of his elbows.

Green and Mundine engaged in a war of words before their 2006 engagement at the Sydney Football Stadium. The trash talk grew so intense that it dictated separate pre-fight press conferences. Mundine won a clear-cut, 12-round unanimous decision. Green attributed his showing to burning off too much weight in the days leading up to the fight. It was contested at 168 pounds.

A lot of water went under the bridge since that shindig. Mundine won the WBA super middleweight title and made four successful defenses. He then dropped down in weight and competed as a super welterweight. Green became a world titlist at 175 pounds and won several minor titles as a cruiserweight. For this fight, Mundine came in at 174 ¾ and Green at 182 ½.

Danny Green has been a popular performer in Australia since representing his country in the 2000 Summer Olympics in Sydney. Anthony Mundine, a second-generation prizefighter, has had an even higher profile. On the short list of greatest overall athletes in boxing history, Mundine at one time was the highest paid player in the Australian Rugby League. An indigenous Australian, he is one of Australia’s most polarizing personalities. He has described Australia as one of the most racist countries in the world and threatened to sit during the playing of the Australian National Anthem at yesterday’s fight. (The authorities nipped that controversy in the bud by playing the anthem while both fighters were still in their dressing rooms.)

This match ended like so many “grudge fights” do – with the fighters embracing. Interviewed in the ring, Danny Green spoke highly of his rival and asked the audience to give Mundine a round of applause.

Will they do it again, seeking to break the 1-1 tie in a rubber match? There would be a precedent for it. We are reminded that Julio Cesar Chavez and Frankie Randall were both in their forties when they completed their trilogy. However, the event was hyped as the farewell fight for both men.

Check out more boxing news on video at The Boxing Channel.

COMMENTS

-stormcentre :

Very dodgy decision for what was - if we're being honest - pretty much a "gimmick" of a fight. Green plundered forward for most of the time with a combination of no defence and/or head movement, and well-telegraphed, single, and often inaccurate shots; ocassionally scoring well here and there when he could utilize his advantages. Anthony, whilst also way past his best as well, was clearly the;


A) Ring general of the night.
B) And, (as Green's face clearly testified to the fact) the winner.

The scoring was also obviously questionable to say the least, with;


A) One judge having such a wide margin for Green that even Buffer commented on its strangeness.
B) Another judge scoring 10 points for Green in a round where he had a point deducted for elbowing Mundine.

The decision stunk enough to flush Barry Michael and Jeff Fenech out; both of which are pretty well known Australian fighters.

Barry Michael voiced his thoughts/concerns about the decision to an audience, whilst Fenech hit the media the day after the fight (today) to pretty much proclaim the same. Any suggestions that Jeff Fenech was carping on about nothing can perhaps be tempered by the facts that, he isn't really known for his love of Mundine and prior to the actual fight he had openly/publicly voiced concerns for Mundine's health; due to weight/strength and other advantages Green contractually held.

In round 1 Mundine was deducted a point for almost KOing Green with a punch from an obscure angle that was also out of Green's peripheral vision, as (Green was focussed on) the referee was stepping in to break them up. A "point" (or two) that was perhaps overlooked by most was that the referee was (to Mundine) obscured by Green, and that he had seemed to have not called a stop to proceedings before Anthony threw the controversial punch. I am not sure, but I think any fighter is free to attack the opponent; before the round has expired, whilst he is still on his feet, and whilst the referee has not called a stop. Perhaps Green contracted that safety net out of the fight also; so that if his attention is diverted elsewhere, he is tired, and at the same time he also rewarded with a punch for his lapse of concentration, one can simply claim a foul exists? Green was certainly on shaky legs after the shot and had to muster all his energy to persuade the Doctor not to stop the bout. Anyway, as if the officiating and final decision weren't bad enough; the undercard was also stacked with obvious mismatches too. Some were so skewed towards who was favored to win that the odds read like a comedy script. For the most part the Danny Green V2 Anthony Mundine fight can be pretty much summarised as; Anthony Mundine (normally a light middle weight boxer) competing against Danny Green (normally a cruiserweight fighter) whom himself has accomodated bitter feelings towards Anthony ever since Mundine first beat him years ago - in a catch weight (83KG) bout (where, at least weight/strength wise Green had most of the advantages stacked in his favour) that was said to be for Green's Australian Cruiserweight title - where the bout took place at a point in both fighter's careers when they were way past their prime. Apparently the weight disparity on fight night was claimed in some reports to be around 8 pounds; in Green's favor. Aside from the above-mentioned controversies, there was no real suspense, thrill, or any of that "barely escapable danger" that is often associated with top level fighters/fights; in this this one. All in all it would be nice to say something more positive about the night/fight, but it's hard to when the above took place and the PPV fees where so high. Cheers,
Storm :) :) :)


-Kid Blast :

Yes. More gimmick than genuine.


-stormcentre :

Yes. More gimmick than genuine.
Cheers,
Storm :) :) :)


-Paul Kevin :

Yes. More gimmick than genuine.
Cheers


-stormcentre :

Now . . . . Forgetting for one momemnt that, only just recently, one of the ringside Doctors {Dr. Lou Lewis} associated with the Green V2 Mundine bout has publicly come out in protest of the bout, its scoring, and officiating . . . . And, after discussing such "Gimmicks" . . . . . . Perhaps it's now time for some real positivity and a "Genuine" fight. And, with that in mind . .. . What could possibly be a really/genuinely good fight is that between Kell Brook and Errol Spence; which seems to be reasonably progressed and in the works. Now that - provided it happens - is a really good fight. On one hand you have Spence; whom is probably sharper/faster than Brook and extremely dynamic - but possibly not completely ready for someone whom is as seasoned/skilled as Brook. And with Brook; you have a guy that is a shrewed switch hitter whose boxing took kit is full of nice moves - all combined with the fact that he has just proven that (if you're to stop, and/or present problems for, him) you will need to have the kind of durability, power, and toughness that Trilpe brings. There's a lot to say about how that could unfold and I would not underestimate Spence. Or Brook. Cheers,
Storm :) :) :)


-Kid Blast :

Now . . . . Forgetting for one momemnt that, only just recently, one of the ringside Doctors {Dr. Lou Lewis} associated with the Green V2 Mundine bout has publicly come out in protest of the bout, its scoring, and officiating . . . . And, after discussing such "Gimmicks" . . . . . . Perhaps it's now time for some real positivity and a "Genuine" fight. And, with that in mind . .. . What could possibly be a really/genuinely good fight is that between Kell Brook and Errol Spence; which seems to be reasonably progressed and in the works. Now that - provided it happens - is a really good fight. On one hand you have Spence; whom is probably sharper/faster than Brook and extremely dynamic - but possibly not completely ready for someone whom is as seasoned/skilled as Brook. And with Brook; you have a guy that is a shrewed switch hitter whose boxing took kit is full of nice moves - all combined with the fact that he has just proven that (if you're to stop, and/or present problems for, him) you will need to have the kind of durability, power, and toughness that Trilpe brings. There's a lot to say about how that could unfold and I would not underestimate Spence. Or Brook. Cheers,
Storm :) :) :)
Hmm. I think Brook is more technically sound but I think Spence is far more explosive. Also, and I can't find the word to describe it, but Spence has a scary quality to him. It's almost as if he becomes a sociopathic punishing machine with no conscience and will only be stopped when the ref stops it. Very scary. Like Crawford, he has a real mean streak, but his is more understated than Crawford's. It's like once a button is pressed he becomes a monster. Poor Algieri found that out.


-stormcentre :

Fair comments. However, I?m not sure Brook is the more technically sound of the two. They're both pretty good though. I agree Brook has more tricks. But Spence is pretty tight - actually really tight - when it comes to technical execution. Anyway, here?s some more Danny Green V Mundine material, including that old Green V1 Mundine article (second link) that I mentioned to you either, in your well written ?The Danny Green V Anthony Mundine Rematch Genuine Or Gimmick? piece/thread - or perhaps I mentioned it in another thread here on this wbesite.


->http://www.thesweetscience.com/forums/showthread.php?272167146-The-Danny-Green-%96-Anthony-Mundine-Rematch-Genuine-or-Gimmick&p=108088&viewfull=1#post108088
->http://www.boxingscene.com/mundines-beats-green-pr-machine--4180
->https://thewest.com.au/sport/boxing/mundine-lodges-appeal-against-green-win-reports-ng-b88380738z
->https://dailytelegraphatnewscorpau.files.wordpress.com/2017/02/mundine-appeal.pdf
->http://www.cairnspost.com.au/mundine-lodges-protest-over-green-decision/news-story/4f74f115950a491abf7bdc01017393d7

Makes for interesting reading. Cheers,
Storm :) :) :)


-stormcentre :

Sadly, I am not surprised at how unsurprised I am at the seemingly widespread lack of interest in the real story and/or lack of substance behind/associated with this fight and in particular how the result was achieved. Not in the least, as far lesser and less tangible injustices have received far more attention previously. Whilst it is always easy to get excited about and report on the promotional aspects of a fight and its results . . . . It never ceases to amaze how often the underlying (and sometimes more interesting) story is often allowed to go by the wayside. Particularly if it suggests that greater scrutiny should perhaps have been applied when all the glossy fight-promotion-reports were initially released and then quickly accepted, facsimiled, and/or re-published.

If one looks at the scale of concerns within Anthony Mundine’s appeal (linked within the above post #8) - and, of course, provided one was motivated to do so in an evenhanded manner - it’s then quite easy for any boxing scribe and/or reliable forum member/poster to;


-
Formulate a unique and referenced story about the concerns that is at least as interesting/reliable as those aforementioned publications that supported the original promotion.
-
See that many of Mundine’s appeal related concerns are actually quite real and factual, and supported by what appears to be - if not indisputable, then - strong evidence.
-
See that something extremely wrong - that is something that is the exact antithesis of almost all the initial pre/post Green V2 Mundine fight reports that were published about this fight - has taken place during the Danny Green V2 Anthony Mundine fight.
-
See, that, perhaps even before the fight started, the writing about the Green V2 Mundine fight was both, on the wall and also ignored.

This above/last consideration seems to be supported by;


A) Not only, Green’s below-mentioned and previous involvement in - if not predetermined, then certainly - controversial fight/outcomes.
B) But also, a fight where the fact that a (traditional) cruiserweight boxer (in Green) elected to avenge what was really a well deserved and previous loss (that itself - even after all these years - still constitutes {like the recent Green V2 Mundine fight} yet another example of how some fighters/fights are successively, deliberately, and/or otherwise poorly scrutinized) in a fight where his opponent was now a (traditional) light middleweight boxer.







Yet, strangely (along with Mundine’s appeal) none of these related points currently appear to be getting “mined” and/or utilized out of Australia for their worth and what they are. Which surely is; useful and highly exploitable boxing-writing material that (aside from potentially revealing an author’s principles as they pertain to originality and reliability) provides a unique insight into how the dark and other sides of boxing sometimes works; in the ring, out of the ring, whilst in front of the keyboard, and also at the (virtual) publishing “office”. For what it’s worth I personally think that the lack of interest in these matters allows such problems within boxing to flourish, propagate, and fester. Not in the least as;


A) The matters Anthony Mundine raises within his appeal possess and/or highlight a potentially negative bearing/aspect on the sport that, if we’re being honest, appears to be far greater in sensationalistic/other magnitude than, say, even how “great” and “magnificent” the initial (but questionable) glossy Green V Mundine promotional material purported to be; which itself was the same stuff that led and motivated some to immediately jump upon the Green V2 Mundine promotional dais without questioning - to wave the promotional banner.
B) It sends the wrong message.

That is, unless one openly supports and subscribes to the questionable/skewed philosophy of . . .

" “Yes, we will report on potential miscarriages of boxing/other related justices - but only if doing so doesn’t expose how our initial perception, trust, and reporting of the matter may have been left wanting”".





As such (and I think this stands even if we discount {which, mind you, is quite unnecessarily generous to the matter in hand} all the fanfare that accompanied the initial wave of Green V2 Mundine promotional releases and scripted/copied fight reports - that were themselves effectively scattered around the globe at various unscrutinizing and other media/boxing outlets) I would have thought that these important appeal related matters (that potentially reveal how the sport can be manipulated) deserved, at least, some “thread/air time”. If for no other reason, it deserved some “thread/air time” so that the potential injustices and other related matters could be suitably exposed and/or treated for what they are. Exposed and/or treated for what they are, say, perhaps, in the same way that Hauser “uncovered” all that misplaced trust we all supposedly had in USADA; post Mayweather V Pacquaio.


->http://www.sbnation.com/longform/2015/9/9/9271811/can-boxing-trust-usada

Yet, in reality . . . .

And, this is despite how the Green V2 Mundine result-appeal matter itself represents and contains some extremely real, tangible, and provable, concerns/indiscretions . . .

The fact of the matter is that there appears to be no boxing scribe outside of Australia that’s willing to run with it in a meaningful way - let alone one that takes on the same kind of enthusiasm that some of the/their original articles exhibited. It’s interesting because I would have thought that;

At least the same “thread/air time”, that was given to, say, the initial (in *house released) Green V2 Mundine fight promotional material that, both;


A) Some boxing scribes worked from; without applying too much scrutiny.
B) In effect, misled the public.

Would have been lent to this matter.

However, it appears not. Instead, it appears that the real story on just how concerning and easily manipulated boxing can be is (well, at least in this Mundine-appeal instance) going to be left to drift off into the darkness. Treating the matter in this (quiet) manner is both disappointing and also an injustice to boxing. The reason being is that doing so ensures that other/future circumstances like this will certainly repeat itself and come back again to haunt us; perhaps not as a Green V Mundine orchestration - but almost certainly in the form of another bout.

In fact, after one reads this entire post (and all the references and links I refer to; including those contained within the above post #8) I dare/challenge anyone to present a reasonable argument that opposes the view that, the reason we have the debacle that now is the (ignored) Mundine-appeal points/matter . . . . . Is, at least in part, due to the fact that the origin, history, and concerns around Green V1 Mundine - along with other the other curiosities associated with some of Green’s other previous fights - were themselves simply left to drift like ignored “floaters” down the canal - possibly because in the dangerous act of examining these “floaters” and their inherent complexity and curiosness (if it were to ever happen) one might also discover the part oneself played in;


A) Being easily marketed to.
B) Any associated bias.
C) Manipulating public opinion in a questionable manner.

You see (when it comes to ensuring a boxing scam, fix, and/or other questionable boxing related intention, is not heavily scrutinized and/or reported upon after the fact and/or when more material, information, and facts pertaining to it may be later available) the recipe is as relatively well known to (some) promotional entities - as it is both, simple and reasonably reliable. And, it goes a little like this . . . .

Provided the fight is promoted in such a way where those that write/report about it and can expose the concerns;


A) Only have access to ~pre-manufactured, ~questionable, and sometimes ~bias/hate-driven material.
B) Have “bought in” enough on the ~above-mentioned material beforehand . . . . . Such that self preservation can be relied upon by both those disseminating the ~questionable information and also others to ensure
(i) that the true extent of the questionable conduct,
(ii) just how much the cards are really stacked on one person’s favor, and
(iii) in general the overall wrongdoing in relation to the fight . . . . is never truly exposed by those whom have the scribing and/or keyboard-power to do so.



The result is that, usually, very few will take the time to go back and write about the fight’s injustices and in doing so both, conflict with their’s/others initial reports and take the chance of implicitly revealing how easily they may have been utilized for promotional purposes and/or misled; which, in turn, almost always ensures that the above-mentioned scams and wrongdoings remain in a state where they have far less publication interests cast upon them than they should. Certainly far less publication interest than the same information that was originally disseminated by promotional/other interests and subsequently utilized in an unscrutinised manner. And, this is how some fighters, managers, and promoters, get a free pass at the expense of boxing’s reputation.

Some may think that view is a little harsh and I accept that. However, even aside from the fact that to counter that view is to effectively suggest that you’re able to meangfully respond to the points raised . . . . Please also recall that the supposed “cheap shot” Mayweather unloaded onto Victor Ortiz some years back (even taking into account the popularity difference between the bouts in question) received far more “thread/air time” than the "entire" spectrum of appealable Green V2 Mundine matters that are mentioned within Anthony Mundine’s appeal.

An appeal that;


A) Appears to (along with the vast array of other concerning guidline breaches and claims that the Mayweather V Ortiz bout itself was not ever involved/associated with) include yet another so called “cheap shot” and/or “sucker punch” - that (like the Mayweather V Ortiz bout) to some extent potentially comes down to “poor officiating” and/or a “referee” and/or an “questionable incident”,where;


a1) In the case of “referee”; he - once again - simply doesn’t know how to follow the rules when breaking fighters up and/or stopping them.
a2) In the case of “questionable incident” and “poor officiating”; whilst the so called “cheap shot” that was authored by Mundine and occurred in round 1 of the Green V2 Mundine fight is not too disimiliar to that incident which occurred within the Mayweather V Ortiz bout - the fact of the matter is that Mundine’s so called “cheap shot” and how (his appeal details) it was mismanaged and poorly officiated, only constitutes but one of tens of concerns that Mundine explicitly details within his entire appeal.
a3) In the case of “questionable incident”, “referee”, and also “poor officiating”; "
like" how Victor Ortiz’ claims pertaining to the so called “sucker punch” that Floyd subjected him to resulted in widespread misinterpretation and misunderstanding across the globe about whom was right/wrong and how the rules applied in those circumstances. So too, has the same occurred (to a proportionally lesser extent) within the context of Mundine’s so called “cheap shot” that occurred within round 1 of the Green V2 Mundine fight.
a4) In the case of “questionable incident”, “referee”, and also “poor officiating”; "
unlike" how Victor Ortiz’ claims pertaining to the so called “sucker punch” that Floyd subjected him to in their fight caused widespread uproar and and an almost total boxing-scribe-interest across the globe about all the resulting misinterpretation/misunderstanding, whom was right/wrong, and how the rules applied in those circumstances . . . . .

Insofar as Mundine’s;


-
So called “cheap shot” that occurred within round 1 of the Green V2 Mundine fight and how (his appeal quite accurately details) it was mismanaged and poorly officiated.
-
Overall appeal-points tally - that itself effectively renders the so called “cheap shot” matter (a matter that is very similar to that above-mentioned which Victor Ortiz and Mayweather themselves courted widespread boxing writer interest over) as but one of about 50 concerns that Mundine explicitly details within his entire appeal.

For some reason - and this is despite the proportionally similar interest in and also the rush to label both Floyd’s and Anthony’s punches as “cheap shots” and/or “sucker punches” and reporting on them as such - currently there appears to be very little follow-up story written about the facts of the matter and in particular the appeal related to Anthony’s incident; especially now that it has become reasonably clear that Mundine may have not executed a cheap shot after all, and that the referee himself (along with the questionable reporting) may be to blame.




B) Perhaps, implicitly and unintentionally, also goes some way to explaining the slight (but nonetheless contagious) oversights to adequately scrutinize Green V2 Mundine material and the fight itself. Oversights that were themselves possibly also accompanied by what might also be phrased as a curiously gullible hastiness to accept the *aforementioned prewritten Green V2 Mundine fight scripts on face value and (regardless of the true story behind Mundine V1 Green which both, occurred more than 10 years ago and appears reasonably well captured within one of the links contained within the above post #8) publish them in goodwill.



Think about it. How can all the superficial, promotional, and genuine, fanfare/energy that was seemingly associated with both, the Green V2 Mundine fight and also all the publications that were associated with it that we were simply awash in, now, all of a sudden (now that the above Mundine-appeal, *considerations, and other points have been raised) somehow be so totally absent and/or exhausted that there is absolutely no interest in what is happening to Mr. Mundine and the fraudulent circumstances that may have been associated with the heavily promoted and highly charged/hyped Green V2 Mundine fight? Where is all that energy, interest, and fanfare gone; particularly now that the real story is off the leash, out, and orphaned? Perhaps the answer lies in how the Green V2 Mundine promoters and their army of loyalist, fawning, and un-scrutinizing media/other scribes are simply not prepared to ask what's happening - let alone do their own research and release reliable reports about the matters in hand; which in turn means that others - particularly those outside of Australia - have no scripts to follow or tailcoats to ride. Ahh . . . . It’s always handy to have a good sense of humour with these things. I mean you have to be able to laugh. Like there were no (ignored) warning signs to this debacle. But, of course warning signs really and meaningfully only exist if you want to see them, don’t they? I mean, with the Green V2 Mundine fight, here we had a boxing contest that involved someone (Danny Green) whom is typically a cruiserweight fighter that was looking to do anything he can to avenge an embarrassing loss that he pretty much brought upon himself and publicly begged for. With Green, here we had a cruiserweight fighter whom decides that;


A) In order to avenge a previous, embarrassing, and (some say) thoroughly well-deserved loss (to Mundine); revenge will be accomplished by fighting Anthony a second time. However, this time the fight will be engineered such so that it takes place when Mundine is older, slower, and also at a weight where he is almost certain to be much smaller/lighter than Green; say like when Anthony is both, 13 years older than when he first fought Green and when he’s (typically campaigning four divisions lower than Green as) a light middleweight.
B) Provided the public’s hatred of Mundine (itself a social emotion that, whilst being largely fuelled by Green for the last 15 years or so, is often misplaced and also highly questionable) is reignited and/or stirred up - whilst simultaneously other misdirections are thrown into the promotional fire; the large majority of Australian and other boxing fans and writers will probably overlook the huge “approach with caution” neon sign that is hanging over the fight for various reasons; some of which include the fact that Green is typically a cruiserweight and Mundine is typically a light middleweight.

A good question may be; who meaningfully raised any alarms about this and what it normally means for a fight and it’s outcome? The answer probably is; very few boxing scribes. And the reasons why, are most likely given herein, above, and also below. Yes, folks - believe it or not - despite all the boxing mishaps and controversies that have occurred during the last 5 years, and despite the aforementioned huge “approach with caution” sign that was hanging over the Green V2 mundine fight - all that was required to set the world and all the scrutinizing experts at ease about the above weight disparity concerns was Danny Green’s assertion that went something like this . . .


"”Don’t worry peeps, come fight night there won’t be much (weight discrepancy) between us”"

And, what could possibly go wrong when the entire fight and promotion was underpinned with the above-mentioned approach, intentions, interests, and assertions; you may ask? And just like that, we were then awash with what were effectively Green V2 Mundine promotional articles and claims. With not an editorial magnifying glass, scrutinizing question, or fine enquiring mind, to be seen, heard - or even imagined. And, perhaps for some that’s a reasonable approach. After all, aside from those mentioned within Mundine’s appeal that have already been largely ignored; what possible advantage could a cruiserweight (Green) gain by fighting a guy (Mundine) whom;


A) Typically fights as a light middleweight fighter.
B) In order to make the fight happen, must drastically come up in weight (to what is his maximum/slowest weight possible) and then also face the prospect of fighting a hard punching cruiserweight (Green) whom - come fight night and despite Danny’s assurances otherwise - was always going to be significantly heavier than the agreed catchweight.

I mean, it’s not as if such a contractual approach to the fight, itself;


A) Formed a warning sign.
B) Was envisaged to ensure Green possessed both a strength and size advantage.

Is it? Remarkably, the warning-siren like components accosciated with the aforementioned flashing neon “approach with caution” sign were still largely ignored and pushed aside as they broadcasted their familiar alarm; as preference was given for what was no doubt easy access to prefabricated promotional Green V2 Mundine material. Yes, despite all the suspicious activities that are known to go down in this sport and despite all those that matters within it that are also concerning and written about, and despite all the below/above-mentioned Green V2 Mundine warning signs; somehow with it all Green V2 Mundine was (then before the fight, and still now after the fight {just as was the case with Green V1 Mundine}) largely given a free pass by the entire boxing press. And in itself that is probably as remarkable as it is symbolically representative of the failure to learn from the mistakes that it willingly chooses to facilitate and represent. Not in the least, because (even if we push aside and turn a blind eye to the fact that Green - whom, initially, more than 10 years ago, quite literally stalked/trolled Mundine’s fights - built his reputation off of bagging Anthony - constantly begged and publicly pleaded {both, with and without the help of broadcasters} for Mundine to fight him - then precipitously/openly and questionably claimed that Anthony was too scared to fight - only to then, in the end, simply get thoroughly outclassed, embarrassed, and flogged for all his questionable actions/efforts in what was then labeled as Australia’s biggest fight; Mundine V1 Green) it’s hard to imagine a promotional boxing match of recent years that;


-
Has more warnings, advantages, and concerns, associated with it; than Green V2 Mundine.
-
Has such a comprehensive, well detailed, and easy to understand/quantify appeal associated with it; than Green V2 Mundine.
-
Involves fighters that, particularly Green, appear to have an historical involvement with curious matchmaking and fight results/circumstances; as much as Green V2 Mundine.

Which all points to the fact that - if we’re not playing silly buggers - it’s hard to imagine a promotional boxing match of recent years that’s more worthy of webpage real estate and attention than the true story behind the Green V2 Mundine fight. Which - for those whom enjoy being in receipt of and/or working from pre-prepared boxing material - appears to be already detailed above and also within Mundine’s appeal?


->https://dailytelegraphatnewscorpau.files.wordpress.com/2017/02/mundine-appeal.pdf

So, the sixty four thousand dollar question is then surely . . . .

"”Why is this not getting “air/thread time? Not even from those whom assisted the promotion and saw an interest in it then.”"

It’s worth some thoughts folks, fans, spectators, and boxing experts. How (particularly when many lesser poor decisions and lesser boxing tragedies before it have received more attention) could such a potential travesty of Australian boxing justice (particularly after the fight itself has been so energetically promoted by all) simply be allowed to pass under the bridge without any meaningful scrutiny and float down the canals of boxing’s sewer; without anyone so much as affording it (pound for pound and/or proportionally) the same fanfare, excitment, and attention as, say;


-
The initial Green V2 Mundine fight/material.
-
The real/imagined wrongdoings associated with MayPac.
-
The real/imagined wrongdoings associated with Hauser’s “Can We Trust USADA” piece.
-
The real/imagined wrongdoings associated with Mayweather V Ortiz.

Could the answer be somewhere within the below and/or above *content of this post? Could it be found in how (some of) those whom may be reluctant to report on the real issues are the same that were also quick to initially jump on board the Green V2 Mundine bandwagon? After all, let’s not forget . . . In the case of Mundine’s appeal (unlike most of the above-mentioned and similarly related MayPac/Hauser and other matters that caused many to attack the keyboard, publish stories, and/or raise their arms/eyebrows in outrage and concern) here we have a detailed list of legitimate and easy to understand concerns that are all neatly compiled by a lawyer whom does not work for any promotional or boxing writing entity. Additionally, some of the concerns Mundine’s appeal details explicitly describe (with proof) fight-outcome altering matters that appear to be clearly in breach of the relevant/accepted guidelines (eg; scoring). Furthermore, some of Mundine’s appeal concerns ask reasonable (fight-outcome altering) questions such as;


A) How can a round be scored 10-10 for both fighters within a 10 point must system and also when one fighter (the cruiserweight; whom already had his share of advantages going into the fight) has been deducted a point for elbowing the other (the light middleweight)?
B) How can what has been labeled as a “cheap shot” by Mundine really/legitimately be a foul and worthy of the 1 point deduction it received by the referee - when the referee didn’t;


b1) Bring the action to a stop (before Mundine threw the punch); as per the guidelines.
b2) Subsequently (after the punch) officiate the matter and/or tend to the claimed fouled fighter properly; as per the guidelines.


C) How can the result of the Green V2 Mundine fight be considered to be fair, reasonable, and legitimate, when the fight’s scorecards;


c1) Tallies themselves were obviously erroneous/questionable; in conflict with the relevant guidelines.
c2) Were not signed by the appropriate authority; in conflict with the relevant guidelines.
c3) Were publicly released - including to the media (whereby they then became instantly published) - "before" both, the scoredards were signed by the appropriate authority and/or even witnessed/announced by the referee; in conflict with the relevant guidelines.



In fact (provided one was prepared to donate 1/100th of the time it took to eagerly assist with the unscrutinized promotion of Green v2 Mundine) an argument could quite possibly be mounted to assert that the entire spectrum of Mundine’s appeal covers, if not more, then certainly an equally concerning amount of concerns/questions, than;


A) Even just those detailed within the directly above points “A”, “B”, and “C”.
B) Some of those issues that have previously presented cause for this and/or other boxing websites and forums to be up in arms, outraged, and attacking the keyboards over.

But, sadly . . . At the moment both Mundine’s appeal and also the real, multi-dimensional, and untapped, story it actually presents appears to be as lonely and abandonded as both the MayPac and FloydClinch round by round count that was forever talked about, but never quite eventuated. And, as if all the above doesn’t constitute strangely ignored boxing-tabloid fodder and/or overlooked concerns, enough . . . Perhaps more telling and (negatively) entertaining is Danny Green’s response to Anthony’s appeal (and all the serious, clearly obvious, and well referenced problems, that it details). It’s both a curious and interesting response for many reasons. Including how it suggests that Green feels Mundine’s tabled appeal-concerns have (despite their prima facie strength and legitimacy) such little basis that they deserve to be ignored - possibly even treated, say, just as he might have (successfully) expected the catchweight matter related to the actual Green v2 Mundine fight would be. Yes, perhaps Green’s response - along with going some way to explain why Green himself is quick to dismiss Mundine’s appeal - provides us with a suitable insight into the entire matter; which surely now must also include the “white elephant in the room” consideration (itself overlooked by many in the lead up to the fight in question) that Green himself appears to not exactly be without a irregular and/or suspicious history himself. Especially when it comes to matchmaking, explanations, and/or other matters pertaining to his fight outcomes. Danny Green, when asked about Anthony’s above-mentioned appeal said . . .


"“All it is is an appeal - it doesn’t mean anything is going to happen. I expect nothing less from such a poor sport.”"

Hmmmm . . . . . The contempt for Green shows for the industry and his own fan’s intelligence with comments like these, is almost palpable. It takes a “special” person to ignore/disregard all the points contained within Mundine’s appeal; particularly those in relation to the scoring. Looks like Danny is hoping everyone will simply continue to treat the concerning issues Mundine has raised - just as Green himself has, and just as many currently are now. And, just as many did in the lead up to the fight when the warning signs screamed and flashed. Which is; looking the other way and turning a blind eye. So, in this respect it appears that it’s business as usual. And, just as this is not the first time;


A) Green has been involved in a controversial fight/outcomes.


-
- Green V Stipe Drews.

Actionless/predictable transaction where the main parties wore boxing gloves and called it a world title. Some very well known/respected identities within boxing accurately labeled Drews as the worst champion they had ever seen.


-
- Green V1 Markus Beyer.

Green’s questionable actions/claims in relation to Green blatantly headbutting Beyer during the fight and just as he started to noticeably lose, which ultimately then brought about the fight’s disqualification possibly served as an early indicator/warning as to how future fights would be managed and made.


-
- Green V Paul Briggs.

Briggs was known to all in the industry at the time to be washed up and physically/psychologically unfit to fight, but also desperate for income. By the time this fight took place Green’s approach to matchmaking/fighting was becoming reasonably well known and as such (despite Green’s attempts to cast blame on Briggs for taking a dive) many within Australia’s boxing fraternity knew the truth and supported Johnny Lewis when he claimed . . .



"Danny wanted a sausage (as an opponent) and that's what he got”.


-
Green V Manny Siaca.

By the time Green got to Siaca he was washed up, fighting tomato cans, and had (before Green fought/beat both, Drews and Siaca) already lost quite easily to a guy that Drews had beaten; Silvio Banco. The risk and action was incredibly low for a world title fight, and as such this fight too (like the Drews fight) took on the appearance of a predictable transaction where the main parties wore boxing gloves and attempted to legitimize it by calling it a (IBO) world title.


-
Green V2 Mundine.

Please see above.




B) The true reasons behind the aforementioned and controversial Green fight/outcome(s) have not always been properly acknowledged, examined, scrutinized, and reported on.

So, too, corruption (in boxing) often thrives when good people (particularly those that initially bought into the legitamcy of the fight and/or are in positions that can bring light to and/or change matters) do and say absolutely nothing. Cheers,
Storm :) :) :)


-stormcentre :

Sadly, I am not surprised at how unsurprised I am at the seemingly widespread lack of interest in the real story and/or lack of substance behind/associated with this fight and in particular how the result was achieved. Not in the least, as far lesser and less tangible injustices have received far more attention previously. Whilst it is always easy to get excited about and report on the promotional aspects of a fight and its results . . . . It never ceases to amaze how often the underlying (and sometimes more interesting) story is often allowed to go by the wayside. Particularly if it suggests that greater scrutiny should perhaps have been applied when all the glossy fight-promotion-reports were initially released and then quickly accepted, facsimiled, and/or re-published.

If one looks at the scale of concerns within Anthony Mundine?s appeal (linked within the above post #8) - and, of course, provided one was motivated to do so in an evenhanded manner - it?s then quite easy for any boxing scribe and/or reliable forum member/poster to;


-
Formulate a unique and referenced story about the concerns that is at least as interesting/reliable as those aforementioned publications that supported the original promotion.
-
See that many of Mundine?s appeal related concerns are actually quite real and factual, and supported by what appears to be - if not indisputable, then - strong evidence.
-
See that something extremely wrong - that is something that is the exact antithesis of almost all the initial pre/post Green V2 Mundine fight reports that were published about this fight - has taken place during the Danny Green V2 Anthony Mundine fight.
-
See, that, perhaps even before the fight started, the writing about the Green V2 Mundine fight was both, on the wall and also ignored.

This above/last consideration seems to be supported by;


A) Not only, Green?s below-mentioned and previous involvement in - if not predetermined, then certainly - controversial fight/outcomes.
B) But also, a fight where the fact that a (traditional) cruiserweight boxer (in Green) elected to avenge what was really a well deserved and previous loss (that itself - even after all these years - still constitutes {like the recent Green V2 Mundine fight} yet another example of how some fighters/fights are successively, deliberately, and/or otherwise poorly scrutinized) in a fight where his opponent was now a (traditional) light middleweight boxer.







Yet, strangely (along with Mundine?s appeal) none of these related points currently appear to be getting ?mined? and/or utilized out of Australia for their worth and what they are. Which surely is; useful and highly exploitable boxing-writing material that (aside from potentially revealing an author?s principles as they pertain to originality and reliability) provides a unique insight into how the dark and other sides of boxing sometimes works; in the ring, out of the ring, whilst in front of the keyboard, and also at the (virtual) publishing ?office?. For what it?s worth I personally think that the lack of interest in these matters allows such problems within boxing to flourish, propagate, and fester. Not in the least as;


A) The matters Anthony Mundine raises within his appeal possess and/or highlight a potentially negative bearing/aspect on the sport that, if we?re being honest, appears to be far greater in sensationalistic/other magnitude than, say, even how ?great? and ?magnificent? the initial (but questionable) glossy Green V Mundine promotional material purported to be; which itself was the same stuff that led and motivated some to immediately jump upon the Green V2 Mundine promotional dais without questioning - to wave the promotional banner.
B) It sends the wrong message.

That is, unless one openly supports and subscribes to the questionable/skewed philosophy of . . .

" ?Yes, we will report on potential miscarriages of boxing/other related justices - but only if doing so doesn?t expose how our initial perception, trust, and reporting of the matter may have been left wanting?".





As such (and I think this stands even if we discount {which, mind you, is quite unnecessarily generous to the matter in hand} all the fanfare that accompanied the initial wave of Green V2 Mundine promotional releases and scripted/copied fight reports - that were themselves effectively scattered around the globe at various unscrutinizing and other media/boxing outlets) I would have thought that these important appeal related matters (that potentially reveal how the sport can be manipulated) deserved, at least, some ?thread/air time?. If for no other reason, it deserved some ?thread/air time? so that the potential injustices and other related matters could be suitably exposed and/or treated for what they are. Exposed and/or treated for what they are, say, perhaps, in the same way that Hauser ?uncovered? all that misplaced trust we all supposedly had in USADA; post Mayweather V Pacquaio.


->http://www.sbnation.com/longform/2015/9/9/9271811/can-boxing-trust-usada

Yet, in reality . . . .

And, this is despite how the Green V2 Mundine result-appeal matter itself represents and contains some extremely real, tangible, and provable, concerns/indiscretions . . .

The fact of the matter is that there appears to be no boxing scribe outside of Australia that?s willing to run with it in a meaningful way - let alone one that takes on the same kind of enthusiasm that some of the/their original articles exhibited. It?s interesting because I would have thought that;

At least the same ?thread/air time?, that was given to, say, the initial (in *house released) Green V2 Mundine fight promotional material that, both;


A) Some boxing scribes worked from; without applying too much scrutiny.
B) In effect, misled the public.

Would have been lent to this matter.

However, it appears not. Instead, it appears that the real story on just how concerning and easily manipulated boxing can be is (well, at least in this Mundine-appeal instance) going to be left to drift off into the darkness. Treating the matter in this (quiet) manner is both disappointing and also an injustice to boxing. The reason being is that doing so ensures that other/future circumstances like this will certainly repeat itself and come back again to haunt us; perhaps not as a Green V Mundine orchestration - but almost certainly in the form of another bout.

In fact, after one reads this entire post (and all the references and links I refer to; including those contained within the above post #8) I dare/challenge anyone to present a reasonable argument that opposes the view that, the reason we have the debacle that now is the (ignored) Mundine-appeal points/matter . . . . . Is, at least in part, due to the fact that the origin, history, and concerns around Green V1 Mundine - along with other the other curiosities associated with some of Green?s other previous fights - were themselves simply left to drift like ignored ?floaters? down the canal - possibly because in the dangerous act of examining these ?floaters? and their inherent complexity and curiosness (if it were to ever happen) one might also discover the part oneself played in;


A) Being easily marketed to.
B) Any associated bias.
C) Manipulating public opinion in a questionable manner.

You see (when it comes to ensuring a boxing scam, fix, and/or other questionable boxing related intention, is not heavily scrutinized and/or reported upon after the fact and/or when more material, information, and facts pertaining to it may be later available) the recipe is as relatively well known to (some) promotional entities - as it is both, simple and reasonably reliable. And, it goes a little like this . . . .

Provided the fight is promoted in such a way where those that write/report about it and can expose the concerns;


A) Only have access to ~pre-manufactured, ~questionable, and sometimes ~bias/hate-driven material.
B) Have ?bought in? enough on the ~above-mentioned material beforehand . . . . . Such that self preservation can be relied upon by both those disseminating the ~questionable information and also others to ensure
(i) that the true extent of the questionable conduct,
(ii) just how much the cards are really stacked on one person?s favor, and
(iii) in general the overall wrongdoing in relation to the fight . . . . is never truly exposed by those whom have the scribing and/or keyboard-power to do so.



The result is that, usually, very few will take the time to go back and write about the fight?s injustices and in doing so both, conflict with their?s/others initial reports and take the chance of implicitly revealing how easily they may have been utilized for promotional purposes and/or misled; which, in turn, almost always ensures that the above-mentioned scams and wrongdoings remain in a state where they have far less publication interests cast upon them than they should. Certainly far less publication interest than the same information that was originally disseminated by promotional/other interests and subsequently utilized in an unscrutinised manner. And, this is how some fighters, managers, and promoters, get a free pass at the expense of boxing?s reputation.

Some may think that view is a little harsh and I accept that. However, even aside from the fact that to counter that view is to effectively suggest that you?re able to meangfully respond to the points raised . . . . Please also recall that the supposed ?cheap shot? Mayweather unloaded onto Victor Ortiz some years back (even taking into account the popularity difference between the bouts in question) received far more ?thread/air time? than the "entire" spectrum of appealable Green V2 Mundine matters that are mentioned within Anthony Mundine?s appeal.

An appeal that;


A) Appears to (along with the vast array of other concerning guidline breaches and claims that the Mayweather V Ortiz bout itself was not ever involved/associated with) include yet another so called ?cheap shot? and/or ?sucker punch? - that (like the Mayweather V Ortiz bout) to some extent potentially comes down to ?poor officiating? and/or a ?referee? and/or an ?questionable incident?,where;


a1) In the case of ?referee?; he - once again - simply doesn?t know how to follow the rules when breaking fighters up and/or stopping them.
a2) In the case of ?questionable incident? and ?poor officiating?; whilst the so called ?cheap shot? that was authored by Mundine and occurred in round 1 of the Green V2 Mundine fight is not too disimiliar to that incident which occurred within the Mayweather V Ortiz bout - the fact of the matter is that Mundine?s so called ?cheap shot? and how (his appeal details) it was mismanaged and poorly officiated, only constitutes but one of tens of concerns that Mundine explicitly details within his entire appeal.
a3) In the case of ?questionable incident?, ?referee?, and also ?poor officiating?; "
like" how Victor Ortiz? claims pertaining to the so called ?sucker punch? that Floyd subjected him to resulted in widespread misinterpretation and misunderstanding across the globe about whom was right/wrong and how the rules applied in those circumstances. So too, has the same occurred (to a proportionally lesser extent) within the context of Mundine?s so called ?cheap shot? that occurred within round 1 of the Green V2 Mundine fight.
a4) In the case of ?questionable incident?, ?referee?, and also ?poor officiating?; "
unlike" how Victor Ortiz? claims pertaining to the so called ?sucker punch? that Floyd subjected him to in their fight caused widespread uproar and and an almost total boxing-scribe-interest across the globe about all the resulting misinterpretation/misunderstanding, whom was right/wrong, and how the rules applied in those circumstances . . . . .

Insofar as Mundine?s;


-
So called ?cheap shot? that occurred within round 1 of the Green V2 Mundine fight and how (his appeal quite accurately details) it was mismanaged and poorly officiated.
-
Overall appeal-points tally - that itself effectively renders the so called ?cheap shot? matter (a matter that is very similar to that above-mentioned which Victor Ortiz and Mayweather themselves courted widespread boxing writer interest over) as but one of about 50 concerns that Mundine explicitly details within his entire appeal.

For some reason - and this is despite the proportionally similar interest in and also the rush to label both Floyd?s and Anthony?s punches as ?cheap shots? and/or ?sucker punches? and reporting on them as such - currently there appears to be very little follow-up story written about the facts of the matter and in particular the appeal related to Anthony?s incident; especially now that it has become reasonably clear that Mundine may have not executed a cheap shot after all, and that the referee himself (along with the questionable reporting) may be to blame.




B) Perhaps, implicitly and unintentionally, also goes some way to explaining the slight (but nonetheless contagious) oversights to adequately scrutinize Green V2 Mundine material and the fight itself. Oversights that were themselves possibly also accompanied by what might also be phrased as a curiously gullible hastiness to accept the *aforementioned prewritten Green V2 Mundine fight scripts on face value and (regardless of the true story behind Mundine V1 Green which both, occurred more than 10 years ago and appears reasonably well captured within one of the links contained within the above post #8) publish them in goodwill.



Think about it. How can all the superficial, promotional, and genuine, fanfare/energy that was seemingly associated with both, the Green V2 Mundine fight and also all the publications that were associated with it that we were simply awash in, now, all of a sudden (now that the above Mundine-appeal, *considerations, and other points have been raised) somehow be so totally absent and/or exhausted that there is absolutely no interest in what is happening to Mr. Mundine and the fraudulent circumstances that may have been associated with the heavily promoted and highly charged/hyped Green V2 Mundine fight? Where is all that energy, interest, and fanfare gone; particularly now that the real story is off the leash, out, and orphaned? Perhaps the answer lies in how the Green V2 Mundine promoters and their army of loyalist, fawning, and un-scrutinizing media/other scribes are simply not prepared to ask what's happening - let alone do their own research and release reliable reports about the matters in hand; which in turn means that others - particularly those outside of Australia - have no scripts to follow or tailcoats to ride. Ahh . . . . It?s always handy to have a good sense of humour with these things. I mean you have to be able to laugh. Like there were no (ignored) warning signs to this debacle. But, of course warning signs really and meaningfully only exist if you want to see them, don?t they? I mean, with the Green V2 Mundine fight, here we had a boxing contest that involved someone (Danny Green) whom is typically a cruiserweight fighter that was looking to do anything he can to avenge an embarrassing loss that he pretty much brought upon himself and publicly begged for. With Green, here we had a cruiserweight fighter whom decides that;


A) In order to avenge a previous, embarrassing, and (some say) thoroughly well-deserved loss (to Mundine); revenge will be accomplished by fighting Anthony a second time. However, this time the fight will be engineered such so that it takes place when Mundine is older, slower, and also at a weight where he is almost certain to be much smaller/lighter than Green; say like when Anthony is both, 13 years older than when he first fought Green and when he?s (typically campaigning four divisions lower than Green as) a light middleweight.
B) Provided the public?s hatred of Mundine (itself a social emotion that, whilst being largely fuelled by Green for the last 15 years or so, is often misplaced and also highly questionable) is reignited and/or stirred up - whilst simultaneously other misdirections are thrown into the promotional fire; the large majority of Australian and other boxing fans and writers will probably overlook the huge ?approach with caution? neon sign that is hanging over the fight for various reasons; some of which include the fact that Green is typically a cruiserweight and Mundine is typically a light middleweight.

A good question may be; who meaningfully raised any alarms about this and what it normally means for a fight and it?s outcome? The answer probably is; very few boxing scribes. And the reasons why, are most likely given herein, above, and also below. Yes, folks - believe it or not - despite all the boxing mishaps and controversies that have occurred during the last 5 years, and despite the aforementioned huge ?approach with caution? sign that was hanging over the Green V2 mundine fight - all that was required to set the world and all the scrutinizing experts at ease about the above weight disparity concerns was Danny Green?s assertion that went something like this . . .


"?Don?t worry peeps, come fight night there won?t be much (weight discrepancy) between us?"

And, what could possibly go wrong when the entire fight and promotion was underpinned with the above-mentioned approach, intentions, interests, and assertions; you may ask? And just like that, we were then awash with what were effectively Green V2 Mundine promotional articles and claims. With not an editorial magnifying glass, scrutinizing question, or fine enquiring mind, to be seen, heard - or even imagined. And, perhaps for some that?s a reasonable approach. After all, aside from those mentioned within Mundine?s appeal that have already been largely ignored; what possible advantage could a cruiserweight (Green) gain by fighting a guy (Mundine) whom;


A) Typically fights as a light middleweight fighter.
B) In order to make the fight happen, must drastically come up in weight (to what is his maximum/slowest weight possible) and then also face the prospect of fighting a hard punching cruiserweight (Green) whom - come fight night and despite Danny?s assurances otherwise - was always going to be significantly heavier than the agreed catchweight.

I mean, it?s not as if such a contractual approach to the fight, itself;


A) Formed a warning sign.
B) Was envisaged to ensure Green possessed both a strength and size advantage.

Is it? Remarkably, the warning-siren like components accosciated with the aforementioned flashing neon ?approach with caution? sign were still largely ignored and pushed aside as they broadcasted their familiar alarm; as preference was given for what was no doubt easy access to prefabricated promotional Green V2 Mundine material. Yes, despite all the suspicious activities that are known to go down in this sport and despite all those that matters within it that are also concerning and written about, and despite all the below/above-mentioned Green V2 Mundine warning signs; somehow with it all Green V2 Mundine was (then before the fight, and still now after the fight {just as was the case with Green V1 Mundine}) largely given a free pass by the entire boxing press. And in itself that is probably as remarkable as it is symbolically representative of the failure to learn from the mistakes that it willingly chooses to facilitate and represent. Not in the least, because (even if we push aside and turn a blind eye to the fact that Green - whom, initially, more than 10 years ago, quite literally stalked/trolled Mundine?s fights - built his reputation off of bagging Anthony - constantly begged and publicly pleaded {both, with and without the help of broadcasters} for Mundine to fight him - then precipitously/openly and questionably claimed that Anthony was too scared to fight - only to then, in the end, simply get thoroughly outclassed, embarrassed, and flogged for all his questionable actions/efforts in what was then labeled as Australia?s biggest fight; Mundine V1 Green) it?s hard to imagine a promotional boxing match of recent years that;


-
Has more warnings, advantages, and concerns, associated with it; than Green V2 Mundine.
-
Has such a comprehensive, well detailed, and easy to understand/quantify appeal associated with it; than Green V2 Mundine.
-
Involves fighters that, particularly Green, appear to have an historical involvement with curious matchmaking and fight results/circumstances; as much as Green V2 Mundine.

Which all points to the fact that - if we?re not playing silly buggers - it?s hard to imagine a promotional boxing match of recent years that?s more worthy of webpage real estate and attention than the true story behind the Green V2 Mundine fight. Which - for those whom enjoy being in receipt of and/or working from pre-prepared boxing material - appears to be already detailed above and also within Mundine?s appeal?


->https://dailytelegraphatnewscorpau.files.wordpress.com/2017/02/mundine-appeal.pdf

So, the sixty four thousand dollar question is then surely . . . .

"?Why is this not getting ?air/thread time? Not even from those whom assisted the promotion and saw an interest in it then.?"

It?s worth some thoughts folks, fans, spectators, and boxing experts. How (particularly when many lesser poor decisions and lesser boxing tragedies before it have received more attention) could such a potential travesty of Australian boxing justice (particularly after the fight itself has been so energetically promoted by all) simply be allowed to pass under the bridge without any meaningful scrutiny and float down the canals of boxing?s sewer; without anyone so much as affording it (pound for pound and/or proportionally) the same fanfare, excitment, and attention as, say;


-
The initial Green V2 Mundine fight/material.
-
The real/imagined wrongdoings associated with MayPac.
-
The real/imagined wrongdoings associated with Hauser?s ?Can We Trust USADA? piece.
-
The real/imagined wrongdoings associated with Mayweather V Ortiz.

Could the answer be somewhere within the below and/or above *content of this post? Could it be found in how (some of) those whom may be reluctant to report on the real issues are the same that were also quick to initially jump on board the Green V2 Mundine bandwagon? After all, let?s not forget . . . In the case of Mundine?s appeal (unlike most of the above-mentioned and similarly related MayPac/Hauser and other matters that caused many to attack the keyboard, publish stories, and/or raise their arms/eyebrows in outrage and concern) here we have a detailed list of legitimate and easy to understand concerns that are all neatly compiled by a lawyer whom does not work for any promotional or boxing writing entity. Additionally, some of the concerns Mundine?s appeal details explicitly describe (with proof) fight-outcome altering matters that appear to be clearly in breach of the relevant/accepted guidelines (eg; scoring). Furthermore, some of Mundine?s appeal concerns ask reasonable (fight-outcome altering) questions such as;


A) How can a round be scored 10-10 for both fighters within a 10 point must system and also when one fighter (the cruiserweight; whom already had his share of advantages going into the fight) has been deducted a point for elbowing the other (the light middleweight)?
B) How can what has been labeled as a ?cheap shot? by Mundine really/legitimately be a foul and worthy of the 1 point deduction it received by the referee - when the referee didn?t;


b1) Bring the action to a stop (before Mundine threw the punch); as per the guidelines.
b2) Subsequently (after the punch) officiate the matter and/or tend to the claimed fouled fighter properly; as per the guidelines.


C) How can the result of the Green V2 Mundine fight be considered to be fair, reasonable, and legitimate, when the fight?s scorecards;


c1) Tallies themselves were obviously erroneous/questionable; in conflict with the relevant guidelines.
c2) Were not signed by the appropriate authority; in conflict with the relevant guidelines.
c3) Were publicly released - including to the media (whereby they then became instantly published) - "before" both, the scoredards were signed by the appropriate authority and/or even witnessed/announced by the referee; in conflict with the relevant guidelines.



In fact (provided one was prepared to donate 1/100th of the time it took to eagerly assist with the unscrutinized promotion of Green v2 Mundine) an argument could quite possibly be mounted to assert that the entire spectrum of Mundine?s appeal covers, if not more, then certainly an equally concerning amount of concerns/questions, than;


A) Even just those detailed within the directly above points ?A?, ?B?, and ?C?.
B) Some of those issues that have previously presented cause for this and/or other boxing websites and forums to be up in arms, outraged, and attacking the keyboards over.

But, sadly . . . At the moment both Mundine?s appeal and also the real, multi-dimensional, and untapped, story it actually presents appears to be as lonely and abandonded as both the MayPac and FloydClinch round by round count that was forever talked about, but never quite eventuated. And, as if all the above doesn?t constitute strangely ignored boxing-tabloid fodder and/or overlooked concerns, enough . . . Perhaps more telling and (negatively) entertaining is Danny Green?s response to Anthony?s appeal (and all the serious, clearly obvious, and well referenced problems, that it details). It?s both a curious and interesting response for many reasons. Including how it suggests that Green feels Mundine?s tabled appeal-concerns have (despite their prima facie strength and legitimacy) such little basis that they deserve to be ignored - possibly even treated, say, just as he might have (successfully) expected the catchweight matter related to the actual Green v2 Mundine fight would be. Yes, perhaps Green?s response - along with going some way to explain why Green himself is quick to dismiss Mundine?s appeal - provides us with a suitable insight into the entire matter; which surely now must also include the ?white elephant in the room? consideration (itself overlooked by many in the lead up to the fight in question) that Green himself appears to not exactly be without a irregular and/or suspicious history himself. Especially when it comes to matchmaking, explanations, and/or other matters pertaining to his fight outcomes. Danny Green, when asked about Anthony?s above-mentioned appeal said . . .


"?All it is is an appeal - it doesn?t mean anything is going to happen. I expect nothing less from such a poor sport.?"

Hmmmm . . . . . The contempt for Green shows for the industry and his own fan?s intelligence with comments like these, is almost palpable. It takes a ?special? person to ignore/disregard all the points contained within Mundine?s appeal; particularly those in relation to the scoring. Looks like Danny is hoping everyone will simply continue to treat the concerning issues Mundine has raised - just as Green himself has, and just as many currently are now. And, just as many did in the lead up to the fight when the warning signs screamed and flashed. Which is; looking the other way and turning a blind eye. So, in this respect it appears that it?s business as usual. And, just as this is not the first time;


A) Green has been involved in a controversial fight/outcomes.


-
- Green V Stipe Drews.

Actionless/predictable transaction where the main parties wore boxing gloves and called it a world title. Some very well known/respected identities within boxing accurately labeled Drews as the worst champion they had ever seen.


-
- Green V1 Markus Beyer.

Green?s questionable actions/claims in relation to Green blatantly headbutting Beyer during the fight and just as he started to noticeably lose, which ultimately then brought about the fight?s disqualification possibly served as an early indicator/warning as to how future fights would be managed and made.


-
- Green V Paul Briggs.

Briggs was known to all in the industry at the time to be washed up and physically/psychologically unfit to fight, but also desperate for income. By the time this fight took place Green?s approach to matchmaking/fighting was becoming reasonably well known and as such (despite Green?s attempts to cast blame on Briggs for taking a dive) many within Australia?s boxing fraternity knew the truth and supported Johnny Lewis when he claimed . . .



"Danny wanted a sausage (as an opponent) and that's what he got?.


-
Green V Manny Siaca.

By the time Green got to Siaca he was washed up, fighting tomato cans, and had (before Green fought/beat both, Drews and Siaca) already lost quite easily to a guy that Drews had beaten; Silvio Banco. The risk and action was incredibly low for a world title fight, and as such this fight too (like the Drews fight) took on the appearance of a predictable transaction where the main parties wore boxing gloves and attempted to legitimize it by calling it a (IBO) world title.


-
Green V2 Mundine.

Please see above.




B) The true reasons behind the aforementioned and controversial Green fight/outcome(s) have not always been properly acknowledged, examined, scrutinized, and reported on.

So, too, corruption (in boxing) often thrives when good people (particularly those that initially bought into the legitamcy of the fight and/or are in positions that can bring light to and/or change matters) do and say absolutely nothing. Cheers,
Storm :) :) :)


-stormcentre :

Sadly, I am not surprised at how unsurprised I am at the seemingly widespread lack of interest in the real story and/or lack of substance behind/associated with this fight and in particular how the result was achieved. Not in the least, as far lesser and less tangible injustices have received far more attention previously. Whilst it is always easy to get excited about and report on the promotional aspects of a fight and its results . . . . It never ceases to amaze how often the underlying (and sometimes more interesting) story is often allowed to go by the wayside. Particularly if it suggests that greater scrutiny should perhaps have been applied when all the glossy fight-promotion-reports were initially released and then quickly accepted, facsimiled, and/or re-published.

If one looks at the scale of concerns within Anthony Mundine’s appeal (linked within the above post #8) - and, of course, provided one was motivated to do so in an evenhanded manner - it’s then quite easy for any boxing scribe and/or reliable forum member/poster to;


-
Formulate a unique and referenced story about the concerns that is at least as interesting/reliable as those aforementioned publications that supported the original promotion.
-
See that many of Mundine’s appeal related concerns are actually quite real and factual, and supported by what appears to be - if not indisputable, then - strong evidence.
-
See that something extremely wrong - that is something that is the exact antithesis of almost all the initial pre/post Green V2 Mundine fight reports that were published about this fight - has taken place during the Danny Green V2 Anthony Mundine fight.
-
See, that, perhaps even before the fight started, the writing about the Green V2 Mundine fight was both, on the wall and also ignored.

This above/last consideration seems to be supported by;


A) Not only, Green’s below-mentioned and previous involvement in - if not predetermined, then certainly - controversial fight/outcomes.
B) But also, a fight where the fact that a (traditional) cruiserweight boxer (in Green) elected to avenge what was really a well deserved and previous loss (that itself - even after all these years - still constitutes {like the recent Green V2 Mundine fight} yet another example of how some fighters/fights are successively, deliberately, and/or otherwise poorly scrutinized) in a fight where his opponent was now a (traditional) light middleweight boxer.







Yet, strangely (along with Mundine’s appeal) none of these related points currently appear to be getting “mined” and/or utilized out of Australia for their worth and what they are. Which surely is; useful and highly exploitable boxing-writing material that (aside from potentially revealing an author’s principles as they pertain to originality and reliability) provides a unique insight into how the dark and other sides of boxing sometimes works; in the ring, out of the ring, whilst in front of the keyboard, and also at the (virtual) publishing “office”. For what it’s worth I personally think that the lack of interest in these matters allows such problems within boxing to flourish, propagate, and fester. Not in the least as;


A) The matters Anthony Mundine raises within his appeal possess and/or highlight a potentially negative bearing/aspect on the sport that, if we’re being honest, appears to be far greater in sensationalistic/other magnitude than, say, even how “great” and “magnificent” the initial (but questionable) glossy Green V Mundine promotional material purported to be; which itself was the same stuff that led and motivated some to immediately jump upon the Green V2 Mundine promotional dais without questioning - to wave the promotional banner.
B) It sends the wrong message.

That is, unless one openly supports and subscribes to the questionable/skewed philosophy of . . .

" “Yes, we will report on potential miscarriages of boxing/other related justices - but only if doing so doesn’t expose how our initial perception, trust, and reporting of the matter may have been left wanting”".





As such (and I think this stands even if we discount {which, mind you, is a discount that’s quite unnecessarily generous to the matter in hand} all the fanfare that accompanied the initial wave of Green V2 Mundine promotional releases and scripted/copied fight reports - that were themselves effectively scattered around the globe at various unscrutinizing and other media/boxing outlets) I would have thought that these important appeal related matters (that potentially reveal how the sport can be manipulated) deserved, at least, some “thread/air time”. If for no other reason, they deserved some “thread/air time” so that the potential injustices and other related matters could be suitably exposed and/or treated for what they are. Exposed and/or treated for what they are, say, perhaps, in the same way that Hauser “uncovered” all that misplaced trust we all supposedly had in USADA; post Mayweather V Pacquaio.


->http://www.sbnation.com/longform/2015/9/9/9271811/can-boxing-trust-usada

Yet, in reality . . . .

And, this is despite how the Green V2 Mundine result-appeal matter itself represents and contains some extremely real, tangible, and provable, concerns/indiscretions . . .

The fact of the matter is that there appears to be no boxing scribe outside of Australia that’s willing to run with it in a meaningful way - let alone one that takes on the same kind of enthusiasm that some of the/their original articles exhibited. It’s interesting because I would have thought that;

At least the same “thread/air time”, that was given to, say, the initial (in *house released) Green V2 Mundine fight promotional material that, both;


A) Some boxing scribes worked from; without applying too much scrutiny.
B) In effect, misled the public.

Would have been lent to this matter.

However, it appears not. Instead, it appears that the real story on just how concerning and easily manipulated boxing can be is (well, at least in this Mundine-appeal instance) going to be left to drift off into the darkness. Treating the matter in this (quiet) manner is both disappointing and also an injustice to boxing. The reason being is that doing so ensures that other/future circumstances like this will certainly repeat themselves and come back again to haunt us; perhaps not as a Green V Mundine orchestration - but almost certainly in the form of another bout.

In fact, after one reads this entire post (and all the references and links I refer to; including those contained within the above post #8) I dare/challenge anyone to present a reasonable argument that opposes the view that, the reason we have the debacle that now is the (ignored) Mundine-appeal points/matter . . . . . Is, at least in part, due to the fact that the origin, history, and concerns around Green V1 Mundine - along with other the other curiosities associated with some of Green’s other previous fights - were themselves simply left to drift like ignored “floaters” down the canal - possibly because in the dangerous act of examining these “floaters” and their inherent complexity and curiosness (if it were to ever happen) one might also discover the part oneself played in;


A) Being easily marketed to.
B) Any associated bias.
C) Manipulating public opinion in a questionable manner.

You see (when it comes to ensuring a boxing scam, fix, and/or other questionable boxing related intention, is not heavily scrutinized and/or reported upon after the fact and/or when more material, information, and facts pertaining to it may become later available) the recipe is as relatively well known to (some) promotional entities - as it is both, simple and reasonably reliable. And, it goes a little like this . . . .

Provided the fight is promoted in such a way where those that write/report about it and can expose the concerns;


A) Only have access to ~pre-manufactured, ~questionable, and sometimes ~bias/hate-driven material.
B) Have “bought in” enough on the ~above-mentioned material beforehand . . . . . Such that self preservation can be relied upon by both those disseminating the ~questionable information and also others to ensure
(i) that the true extent of the questionable conduct,
(ii) just how much the cards are really stacked on one person’s favor, and
(iii) in general the overall wrongdoing in relation to the fight . . . . is never truly exposed by those whom have the scribing and/or keyboard power to do so.



The result is that, usually, very few will take the time to go back and write about the fight’s injustices and in doing so both, conflict with their’s/others initial reports and take the chance of implicitly revealing how easily they may have been utilized for promotional purposes and/or misled; which, in turn, almost always ensures that the above-mentioned scams and wrongdoings remain in a state where they have far less publication interests cast upon them than they should. Certainly far less publication interest than the same information that was originally disseminated by promotional/other interests and subsequently utilized in an unscrutinised manner. And, this is how some fighters, managers, and promoters, get a free pass at the expense of boxing’s reputation.

Some may think that view is a little harsh and I accept that. However, even aside from the fact that to counter that view is to effectively suggest that you’re able to meangfully respond to the points raised . . . . Please also recall that the supposed “cheap shot” Mayweather unloaded onto Victor Ortiz some years back (even taking into account the popularity difference between the bouts in question) received far more “thread/air time” than the "entire" spectrum of appealable Green V2 Mundine matters that are mentioned within Anthony Mundine’s appeal.

An appeal that;


A) Appears to (along with the vast array of other concerning guidline breaches and claims that the Mayweather V Ortiz bout itself was not ever involved/associated with) include yet another so called “cheap shot” and/or “sucker punch” - that (like the Mayweather V Ortiz bout) to some extent potentially comes down to “poor officiating” and/or a “referee” and/or an “questionable incident”,where;


a1) In the case of “referee”; he - once again - simply doesn’t know how to follow the rules when breaking fighters up and/or stopping them.
a2) In the case of “questionable incident” and “poor officiating”; whilst the so called “cheap shot” that was authored by Mundine and occurred in round 1 of the Green V2 Mundine fight is not too disimiliar to that incident which occurred within the Mayweather V Ortiz bout - the fact of the matter is that Mundine’s so called “cheap shot” and how (his appeal details) it was mismanaged and poorly officiated, only constitutes but one of tens of concerns that Mundine explicitly details within his entire appeal.
a3) In the case of “questionable incident”, “referee”, and also “poor officiating”; "
like" how Victor Ortiz’ claims pertaining to the so called “sucker punch” that Floyd subjected him to resulted in widespread misinterpretation and misunderstanding across the globe about whom was right/wrong and how the rules applied in those circumstances. So too, has the same occurred (to a proportionally lesser extent) within the context of Mundine’s so called “cheap shot” that occurred within round 1 of the Green V2 Mundine fight.
a4) In the case of “questionable incident”, “referee”, and also “poor officiating”; "
unlike" how Victor Ortiz’ claims pertaining to the so called “sucker punch” that Floyd subjected him to in their fight caused widespread uproar and and an almost total boxing-scribe-interest across the globe about all the resulting misinterpretation/misunderstanding, whom was right/wrong, and how the rules applied in those circumstances . . . . .

Insofar as Mundine’s;


-
So called “cheap shot” that occurred within round 1 of the Green V2 Mundine fight and how (his appeal quite accurately details) it was mismanaged and poorly officiated.
-
Overall appeal-points tally; that itself effectively renders the so called “cheap shot” matter (a matter that is very similar to that above-mentioned which Victor Ortiz and Mayweather themselves courted widespread boxing writer interest over) as but one of about 50 concerns that Mundine explicitly details within his entire appeal.

For some reason - and this is despite the proportionally similar interest in and also the rush to label both Floyd’s and Anthony’s punches as “cheap shots” and/or “sucker punches” and reporting on them as such - currently there appears to be very little follow-up story written about the facts of the matter and in particular the appeal related to Anthony’s incident; especially now that it has become reasonably clear that Mundine may have not executed a cheap shot after all, and that the referee himself (along with the questionable reporting) may be to blame.




B) Perhaps, implicitly and unintentionally, also goes some way to explaining the slight (but nonetheless contagious) oversights to adequately scrutinize Green V2 Mundine material and the fight itself. Oversights that were themselves possibly also accompanied by what might also be phrased as a curiously gullible hastiness to accept the *aforementioned prewritten Green V2 Mundine fight scripts on face value and publish them in goodwill. Regardless of the true story behind Mundine V1 Green which both, occurred more than 10 years ago and appears reasonably well captured within one of the links contained within the above post #8.



Think about it. How can all the superficial, promotional, and genuine, fanfare/energy that was seemingly associated with both, the Green V2 Mundine fight and also all the publications that were associated with it that we were simply awash in, now, all of a sudden (now that the above Mundine-appeal, *considerations, and other points have been raised) somehow be so totally absent and/or exhausted that there is absolutely no interest in what is happening to Mr. Mundine and the fraudulent circumstances that may have been associated with the heavily promoted and highly charged/hyped Green V2 Mundine fight? Where has all that energy, interest, and fanfare gone? Particularly now that the real story is off the leash, out, and orphaned? Perhaps the answer lies in how the Green V2 Mundine promoters and their army of loyalist, fawning, and un-scrutinizing media/other scribes are simply not prepared to ask what's happening - let alone do their own research and release reliable reports about the matters in hand; which in turn possibly means that others - particularly those outside of Australia - have no scripts to follow or tailcoats to ride. Ahh . . . . It’s always handy to have a good sense of humour with these things. I mean you have to be able to laugh. Like there were no (ignored) warning signs to this debacle. But, of course warning signs really and meaningfully only exist if you want to see them, don’t they? I mean, with the Green V2 Mundine fight, here we had a boxing contest that involved someone (Danny Green) whom is typically a cruiserweight fighter that was looking to do anything he can to avenge an embarrassing loss that he pretty much brought upon himself and publicly begged for. With Green, here we had a cruiserweight fighter whom decides that;


A) In order to avenge a previous, embarrassing, and (some say) thoroughly well-deserved loss (to Mundine); revenge will be accomplished by fighting Anthony a second time. However, this time the fight will be engineered such so that it takes place when Mundine is older, slower, and also at a weight where he is almost certain to be much smaller/lighter than Green; say like when Anthony is both, 13 years older than when he first fought Green and when he’s (typically campaigning four divisions lower than Green as) a light middleweight.
B) Provided the public’s hatred of Mundine (itself a social emotion that, whilst being largely fuelled by Green for the last 15 years or so, is often misplaced and also highly questionable) is reignited and/or stirred up - whilst simultaneously other misdirections are thrown into the promotional fire; the large majority of Australian and other boxing fans and writers will probably overlook the huge “approach with caution” neon sign that is hanging over the fight for various reasons; some of which include the fact that Green is typically a cruiserweight and Mundine is typically a light middleweight.

A good question may be; who meaningfully raised any alarms about this and what it normally means for a fight and it’s outcome? The answer probably is; very few boxing scribes. And the reasons why, are most likely given herein, above, and also below. Yes, folks - believe it or not - despite all the boxing mishaps and controversies that have occurred during the last 5 years, and despite the aforementioned huge “approach with caution” sign that was hanging over the Green V2 mundine fight . . . . . . Predictably, all that was required to set the boxing world and all its scrutinizing experts at ease about the above weight disparity and any concerns pertaining to Green V2 Mundine was Danny Green’s assertion, which went something like this . . .


"”Don’t worry peeps, come fight night there won’t be much (weight discrepancy) between us”"

And, what could possibly go wrong when the entire fight and promotion was underpinned with the above-mentioned approach, intentions, interests, and assertions, from someone as implicated and reliable as Green; you may ask? And just like that, we were then awash with what were effectively Green V2 Mundine promotional articles and claims. With not an editorial magnifying glass, scrutinizing question, or fine enquiring mind, to be seen, heard - or even imagined. And, perhaps for some that’s a reasonable approach. After all, aside from those mentioned within Mundine’s appeal that have already been largely ignored; what possible advantage could a cruiserweight (Green) gain by fighting a guy (Mundine) whom;


A) Typically fights as a light middleweight fighter.
B) In order to make the fight happen, must drastically come up in weight (to what is his maximum/slowest weight possible) and then also face the prospect of fighting a hard punching cruiserweight (Green) whom - come fight night and despite Danny’s assurances otherwise - was always going to be significantly heavier than the agreed catchweight.

I mean, it’s not as if such a contractual approach to the fight, itself;


A) Formed a warning sign.
B) Was envisaged to ensure Green possessed both a strength and size advantage.

Is it? Remarkably, these warning-siren like components that were associated with the aforementioned flashing neon “approach with caution” sign - that itself cast an ominous shadow over the Green V2 Mundine fight/promotion reminiscent of thunderclouds over a picturesque rural setting - were still largely ignored and pushed aside. And, the warnings were all pushed aside and ignored for several main reasons, including . . . . . The unrestrained preference that was shown for what was no doubt easy access to prefabricated promotional Green V2 Mundine material. Material that (perhaps just as much as it had obviously been manufactured by those familiar with the distinctive combination of skills and dark artistry normally associated with amalgamating activities such as propaganda and promotion) had also undoubtedly been the subject of considerable proactive planning/marketing; as evidenced by the fact that almost all the distributed information Green Machine Promotions (GMP) released to its unsuspecting tergets appeared to be just as ready made, pre-fabricated, and designed for an intended purpose - as the stories it ultimately gave rise to became themselves misdirected, skewed, biased, and fodder for this post. In fact, had the above-mentioned GMP promotional material not been so predictably effective at the task it set out to do (which clearly was ensure the majority of boxing outlets/writers adopted a bias position on the Green V2 Mundine fight and advertised it as if it were original and sanctimonious) one could then perhaps feel comfortable saying that the aforementioned prefabricated promotional Green V2 Mundine material - which was relied upon by the majority of boxing outlets/writers - was deliberately insultive the majority of boxing outlets/writer’s intelligence. Not in the least, as the promotionally released Green V2 Mundine material clearly (and successfully) assumed that most of its targets would accept the information without scrutiny due to its pre-fabricated state, and therefore how easy it appeared to be able to be quickly massaged into what could later be redistributed/sold as unique boxing-news scoops. Yes, despite all the suspicious activities that are known to go down in this sport and despite all those that matters within it that are also concerning and written about, and despite all the below/above-mentioned Green V2 Mundine warning signs; somehow with it all Green V2 Mundine was (then before the fight, and still now after the fight {just as was the case with Green V1 Mundine}) largely given a free pass by the entire boxing press. And in itself that is probably as remarkable as it is symbolically representative of a failure to learn from the same mistakes that it appears to willingly facilitate and represent. Not in the least, because (even if we push aside and turn a blind eye to the fact that Green - whom, initially, more than 10 years ago, quite literally stalked/trolled Mundine’s fights - built his reputation off of bagging Anthony - constantly begged and publicly pleaded {both, with and without the help of broadcasters} for Mundine to fight him - then precipitously/openly and questionably claimed that Anthony was too scared to fight - only to then, in the end, simply get thoroughly outclassed, embarrassed, and flogged for all his questionable actions/efforts in what was then labeled as Australia’s biggest fight; Mundine V1 Green) it’s hard to imagine a promotional boxing match of recent years that;


-
Has more warnings, advantages, and concerns, associated with it; than Green V2 Mundine.
-
Has such a comprehensive, well detailed, and easy to understand/quantify appeal associated with it; than Green V2 Mundine.
-
Involves fighters that, particularly Green, appear to have an historical involvement with curious matchmaking and fight results/circumstances; as much as Green V2 Mundine.

Which all points to the fact that - if we’re not playing silly buggers - it’s hard to imagine a promotional boxing match of recent years that’s more worthy of webpage real estate and attention than the true story behind the Green V2 Mundine fight. Which - for those whom enjoy being in receipt of and/or working from pre-prepared boxing material - appears to be already detailed above and also within Mundine’s appeal?


->https://dailytelegraphatnewscorpau.files.wordpress.com/2017/02/mundine-appeal.pdf

So, the sixty four thousand dollar question is then surely . . . .

"”Why is this matter and Mundine’s appeal not getting sufficient “air/thread time"?" "Not even from those whom assisted the promotion and saw an interest in it back then.”"

It’s worth some thoughts folks, fans, spectators, and boxing experts. I mean . . . . How (particularly when many lesser poor decisions and lesser boxing tragedies before it have received more attention) could such a potential travesty of Australian boxing justice (particularly after the fight itself has been so energetically promoted by all) simply be allowed to pass under the bridge without any meaningful scrutiny as it floats down the canals of boxing’s sewer; without anyone so much as even affording it (pound for pound and/or proportionally) the same fanfare, excitment, and attention as, say;


-
The initial Green V2 Mundine fight/material.
-
The real/imagined wrongdoings associated with MayPac.
-
The real/imagined wrongdoings associated with Hauser’s “Can We Trust USADA” piece.
-
The real/imagined wrongdoings associated with Mayweather V Ortiz.

Could the answer be somewhere within the below and/or above *content of this post? Could it be found in how (some of) those whom may be reluctant to report on the real issues are the same that were also quick to initially jump on board the Green V2 Mundine bandwagon? After all, let’s not forget . . . In the case of Mundine’s appeal (unlike most of the above-mentioned and similarly related MayPac/Hauser and other matters that caused many to attack the keyboard, publish stories, fantasize, and/or raise their arms/eyebrows in outrage and concern) here we have a detailed list of legitimate and easy to understand concerns that are all neatly compiled by a lawyer whom does not work for any promotional or boxing writing entity. Additionally, some of the concerns Mundine’s appeal details explicitly describe (with proof) fight-outcome altering matters that appear to be clearly in breach of the relevant/accepted guidelines (eg; scoring). Furthermore, some of Mundine’s appeal concerns ask reasonable (fight-outcome altering) questions such as;


A) How can a round be scored 10-10 for both fighters within a 10 point must system and also when one fighter (the cruiserweight; whom already had his share of advantages going into the fight) has been deducted a point for elbowing the other (the light middleweight)?
B) How can what has been labeled as a “cheap shot” by Mundine really/legitimately be a foul and worthy of the 1 point deduction it received by the referee - when the referee didn’t;


b1) Bring the action to a stop (before Mundine threw the punch); as per the guidelines.
b2) Subsequently (after the punch) officiate the matter and/or tend to the claimed fouled fighter properly; as per the guidelines.


C) How can the result of the Green V2 Mundine fight be considered to be fair, reasonable, and legitimate, when the fight’s scorecards;


c1) Tallies themselves were obviously erroneous/questionable; in conflict with the relevant guidelines.
c2) Were not signed by the appropriate authority; in conflict with the relevant guidelines.
c3) Were publicly released - including to the media (whereby they then {like the aforementioned GMP material that many simply swallowed up without questioning} became instantly published) - "before" both, the scoredards were signed by the appropriate authority and/or even witnessed/announced by the referee; in conflict with the relevant guidelines.



In fact (provided one was prepared to donate 1/100th of the time it took to eagerly assist with the unscrutinized promotion of Green V2 Mundine) an argument could quite possibly be mounted to assert that the entire spectrum of Mundine’s appeal covers, if not more, then certainly an equivalent amount of concerns/questions, than;


A) Even just those detailed within the directly above points “A”, “B”, and “C”.
B) Some of those issues that have previously presented great cause for this and/or other boxing websites and forums to be up in arms, outraged, and attacking the keyboards over.

But, sadly . . . At the moment both Mundine’s appeal and also the real, multi-dimensional, and untapped, story it actually presents appears to be as lonely and abandonded as both the MayPac and FloydClinch round by round count that was forever talked about, but never quite eventuated. And, as if all the above doesn’t constitute strangely ignored boxing-tabloid fodder and/or overlooked concerns, enough . . . Perhaps more telling and (negatively) entertaining is Danny Green’s response to Anthony’s appeal (and all the serious, clearly obvious, and well referenced problems, that it details). It’s both a curious and interesting response for many reasons. Including how it suggests that Green feels Mundine’s tabled appeal-concerns have (despite their prima facie strength and legitimacy) such little basis that they deserve to be ignored - possibly even treated, say, just as he might have (successfully) expected the catchweight matter related to the actual Green V2 Mundine fight would be. Yes, perhaps Green’s response - along with going some way to explain why Green himself is quick to dismiss Mundine’s appeal - provides us with a suitable insight into the entire matter; which surely now must also include the “white elephant in the room” consideration (itself overlooked by many in the lead up to the fight in question) that Green appears himself to not exactly be without a irregular and/or suspicious history. Especially when it comes to matchmaking, explanations, and/or other matters pertaining to his fight outcomes. When asked about Anthony’s above-mentioned appeal, Danny Green said . . .


"“All it is is an appeal - it doesn’t mean anything is going to happen. I expect nothing less from such a poor sport.”"

Hmmmm . . . . . The contempt for Green shows for the industry and his own fan’s intelligence with comments like these, is almost palpable. It takes a “special” person to ignore/disregard all the points contained within Mundine’s appeal; particularly those in relation to the scoring. Looks like Danny is hoping everyone will simply continue to treat the real and concerning issues Mundine has raised - just as Green himself has. And just as many;


A) Currently are now.
B) Did in the lead up to both the Mundine V1 Green and the Mundine V2 Green fights, despite all the warning signs that loudly screamed and brightly flashed back then.

Which is . . . . Looking the other way and turning a blind eye. So, in this respect it appears that nothing changes and that it’s business as usual. And, just as this is not the first time;


A) Green has been involved in a controversial fight/outcomes.


-
- Green V Stipe Drews.

Actionless/predictable transaction where the main parties wore boxing gloves and called it a world title. Some very well known/respected identities within boxing accurately labeled Drews as the worst champion they had ever seen; and it is hard to argue with that as the fight was simply disgraceful even if it were not a world title bout.


-
- Green V1 Markus Beyer.

Green’s extremely questionable actions/denials in relation to Green blatantly headbutting Beyer during the fight and just as he started to noticeably lose, which ultimately then brought about the fight’s disqualification; possibly served as an early indicator/warning as to how future fights would be managed and made.


-
- Green V Paul Briggs.

Briggs (once a formidable fighter) was known to all in the industry at the time to be washed up, physically/psychologically unfit to fight, and also desperate for income. By the time this fight took place Green’s approach to matchmaking/fighting was becoming reasonably well known and as such (despite Green’s attempts to cast blame on Briggs for taking a dive) many within Australia’s boxing fraternity knew the truth and supported Johnny Lewis when he claimed . . .



"Danny wanted a sausage (as an opponent) and that's what he got”.


-
Green V Manny Siaca.

By the time Green got to Siaca he was washed up, fighting tomato cans, and had (even before Green fought/beat both, Drews and Siaca) already lost quite easily to a guy that Drews had beaten; Silvio Banco. The risk and action was incredibly low for a world title fight, and as such this fight too (like the Drews fight) stunk a little as it took on the appearance of a predictable transaction where the main parties wore boxing gloves and attempted to legitimize it by calling it a (IBO) world title.


-
Green V2 Mundine.

Please see above.




B) The true reasons behind the aforementioned and controversial Green fight/outcome(s) have not always been properly acknowledged, examined, scrutinized, and reported on.

So, too, corruption (in boxing) often thrives when good people (particularly those that initially bought into the legitamcy of the fight and/or are in positions that can bring light to and/or change matters) do and say absolutely nothing. Cheers,
Storm :) :) :)


-stormcentre :

Sadly, I am not surprised at how unsurprised I am at the seemingly widespread lack of interest in the real story and/or lack of substance behind/associated with this fight and in particular how the result was achieved. Not in the least, as far lesser and less tangible injustices have received far more attention previously. Whilst it is always easy to get excited about and report on the promotional aspects of a fight and its results . . . . It never ceases to amaze how often the underlying (and sometimes more interesting) story is often allowed to go by the wayside. Particularly if it suggests that greater scrutiny should perhaps have been applied when all the glossy fight-promotion-reports were initially released and then quickly accepted, facsimiled, and/or re-published.

If one looks at the scale of concerns within Anthony Mundine?s appeal (linked within the above post #8) - and, of course, provided one was motivated to do so in an evenhanded manner - it?s then quite easy for any boxing scribe and/or reliable forum member/poster to;


-
Formulate a unique and referenced story about the concerns that is at least as interesting/reliable as those aforementioned publications that supported the original promotion.
-
See that many of Mundine?s appeal related concerns are actually quite real and factual, and supported by what appears to be - if not indisputable, then - strong evidence.
-
See that something extremely wrong - that is something that is the exact antithesis of almost all the initial pre/post Green V2 Mundine fight reports that were published about this fight - has taken place during the Danny Green V2 Anthony Mundine fight.
-
See, that, perhaps even before the fight started, the writing about the Green V2 Mundine fight was both, on the wall and also ignored.

This above/last consideration seems to be supported by;


A) Not only, Green?s below-mentioned and previous involvement in - if not predetermined, then certainly - controversial fight/outcomes.
B) But also, a fight where the fact that a (traditional) cruiserweight boxer (in Green) elected to avenge what was really a well deserved and previous loss (that itself - even after all these years - still constitutes {like the recent Green V2 Mundine fight} yet another example of how some fighters/fights are successively, deliberately, and/or otherwise poorly scrutinized) in a fight where his opponent was now a (traditional) light middleweight boxer.







Yet, strangely (along with Mundine?s appeal) none of these related points currently appear to be getting ?mined? and/or utilized out of Australia for their worth and what they are. Which surely is; useful and highly exploitable boxing-writing material that (aside from potentially revealing an author?s principles as they pertain to originality and reliability) provides a unique insight into how the dark and other sides of boxing sometimes works; in the ring, out of the ring, whilst in front of the keyboard, and also at the (virtual) publishing ?office?. For what it?s worth I personally think that the lack of interest in these matters allows such problems within boxing to flourish, propagate, and fester. Not in the least as;


A) The matters Anthony Mundine raises within his appeal possess and/or highlight a potentially negative bearing/aspect on the sport that, if we?re being honest, appears to be far greater in sensationalistic/other magnitude than, say, even how ?great? and ?magnificent? the initial (but questionable) glossy Green V Mundine promotional material purported to be; which itself was the same stuff that led and motivated some to immediately jump upon the Green V2 Mundine promotional dais without questioning - to wave the promotional banner.
B) It sends the wrong message.

That is, unless one openly supports and subscribes to the questionable/skewed philosophy of . . .

" ?Yes, we will report on potential miscarriages of boxing/other related justices - but only if doing so doesn?t expose how our initial perception, trust, and reporting of the matter may have been left wanting?".





As such (and I think this stands even if we discount {which, mind you, is a discount that?s quite unnecessarily generous to the matter in hand} all the fanfare that accompanied the initial wave of Green V2 Mundine promotional releases and scripted/copied fight reports - that were themselves effectively scattered around the globe at various unscrutinizing and other media/boxing outlets) I would have thought that these important appeal related matters (that potentially reveal how the sport can be manipulated) deserved, at least, some ?thread/air time?. If for no other reason, they deserved some ?thread/air time? so that the potential injustices and other related matters could be suitably exposed and/or treated for what they are. Exposed and/or treated for what they are, say, perhaps, in the same way that Hauser ?uncovered? all that misplaced trust we all supposedly had in USADA; post Mayweather V Pacquaio.


->http://www.sbnation.com/longform/2015/9/9/9271811/can-boxing-trust-usada

Yet, in reality . . . .

And, this is despite how the Green V2 Mundine result-appeal matter itself represents and contains some extremely real, tangible, and provable, concerns/indiscretions . . .

The fact of the matter is that there appears to be no boxing scribe outside of Australia that?s willing to run with it in a meaningful way - let alone one that takes on the same kind of enthusiasm that some of the/their original articles exhibited. It?s interesting because I would have thought that;

At least the same ?thread/air time?, that was given to, say, the initial (in *house released) Green V2 Mundine fight promotional material that, both;


A) Some boxing scribes worked from; without applying too much scrutiny.
B) In effect, misled the public.

Would have been lent to this matter.

However, it appears not. Instead, it appears that the real story on just how concerning and easily manipulated boxing can be is (well, at least in this Mundine-appeal instance) going to be left to drift off into the darkness. Treating the matter in this (quiet) manner is both disappointing and also an injustice to boxing. The reason being is that doing so ensures that other/future circumstances like this will certainly repeat themselves and come back again to haunt us; perhaps not as a Green V Mundine orchestration - but almost certainly in the form of another bout.

In fact, after one reads this entire post (and all the references and links I refer to; including those contained within the above post #8) I dare/challenge anyone to present a reasonable argument that opposes the view that, the reason we have the debacle that now is the (ignored) Mundine-appeal points/matter . . . . . Is, at least in part, due to the fact that the origin, history, and concerns around Green V1 Mundine - along with other the other curiosities associated with some of Green?s other previous fights - were themselves simply left to drift like ignored ?floaters? down the canal - possibly because in the dangerous act of examining these ?floaters? and their inherent complexity and curiosness (if it were to ever happen) one might also discover the part oneself played in;


A) Being easily marketed to.
B) Any associated bias.
C) Manipulating public opinion in a questionable manner.

You see (when it comes to ensuring a boxing scam, fix, and/or other questionable boxing related intention, is not heavily scrutinized and/or reported upon after the fact and/or when more material, information, and facts pertaining to it may become later available) the recipe is as relatively well known to (some) promotional entities - as it is both, simple and reasonably reliable. And, it goes a little like this . . . .

Provided the fight is promoted in such a way where those that write/report about it and can expose the concerns;


A) Only have access to ~pre-manufactured, ~questionable, and sometimes ~bias/hate-driven material.
B) Have ?bought in? enough on the ~above-mentioned material beforehand . . . . . Such that self preservation can be relied upon by both those disseminating the ~questionable information and also others to ensure
(i) that the true extent of the questionable conduct,
(ii) just how much the cards are really stacked on one person?s favor, and
(iii) in general the overall wrongdoing in relation to the fight . . . . is never truly exposed by those whom have the scribing and/or keyboard power to do so.



The result is that, usually, very few will take the time to go back and write about the fight?s injustices and in doing so both, conflict with their?s/others initial reports and take the chance of implicitly revealing how easily they may have been utilized for promotional purposes and/or misled; which, in turn, almost always ensures that the above-mentioned scams and wrongdoings remain in a state where they have far less publication interests cast upon them than they should. Certainly far less publication interest than the same information that was originally disseminated by promotional/other interests and subsequently utilized in an unscrutinised manner. And, this is how some fighters, managers, and promoters, get a free pass at the expense of boxing?s reputation.

Some may think that view is a little harsh and I accept that. However, even aside from the fact that to counter that view is to effectively suggest that you?re able to meangfully respond to the points raised . . . . Please also recall that the supposed ?cheap shot? Mayweather unloaded onto Victor Ortiz some years back (even taking into account the popularity difference between the bouts in question) received far more ?thread/air time? than the "entire" spectrum of appealable Green V2 Mundine matters that are mentioned within Anthony Mundine?s appeal.

An appeal that;


A) Appears to (along with the vast array of other concerning guidline breaches and claims that the Mayweather V Ortiz bout itself was not ever involved/associated with) include yet another so called ?cheap shot? and/or ?sucker punch? - that (like the Mayweather V Ortiz bout) to some extent potentially comes down to ?poor officiating? and/or a ?referee? and/or an ?questionable incident?,where;


a1) In the case of ?referee?; he - once again - simply doesn?t know how to follow the rules when breaking fighters up and/or stopping them.
a2) In the case of ?questionable incident? and ?poor officiating?; whilst the so called ?cheap shot? that was authored by Mundine and occurred in round 1 of the Green V2 Mundine fight is not too disimiliar to that incident which occurred within the Mayweather V Ortiz bout - the fact of the matter is that Mundine?s so called ?cheap shot? and how (his appeal details) it was mismanaged and poorly officiated, only constitutes but one of tens of concerns that Mundine explicitly details within his entire appeal.
a3) In the case of ?questionable incident?, ?referee?, and also ?poor officiating?; "
like" how Victor Ortiz? claims pertaining to the so called ?sucker punch? that Floyd subjected him to resulted in widespread misinterpretation and misunderstanding across the globe about whom was right/wrong and how the rules applied in those circumstances. So too, has the same occurred (to a proportionally lesser extent) within the context of Mundine?s so called ?cheap shot? that occurred within round 1 of the Green V2 Mundine fight.
a4) In the case of ?questionable incident?, ?referee?, and also ?poor officiating?; "
unlike" how Victor Ortiz? claims pertaining to the so called ?sucker punch? that Floyd subjected him to in their fight caused widespread uproar and and an almost total boxing-scribe-interest across the globe about all the resulting misinterpretation/misunderstanding, whom was right/wrong, and how the rules applied in those circumstances . . . . .

Insofar as Mundine?s;


-
So called ?cheap shot? that occurred within round 1 of the Green V2 Mundine fight and how (his appeal quite accurately details) it was mismanaged and poorly officiated.
-
Overall appeal-points tally; that itself effectively renders the so called ?cheap shot? matter (a matter that is very similar to that above-mentioned which Victor Ortiz and Mayweather themselves courted widespread boxing writer interest over) as but one of about 50 concerns that Mundine explicitly details within his entire appeal.

For some reason - and this is despite the proportionally similar interest in and also the rush to label both Floyd?s and Anthony?s punches as ?cheap shots? and/or ?sucker punches? and reporting on them as such - currently there appears to be very little follow-up story written about the facts of the matter and in particular the appeal related to Anthony?s incident; especially now that it has become reasonably clear that Mundine may have not executed a cheap shot after all, and that the referee himself (along with the questionable reporting) may be to blame.




B) Perhaps, implicitly and unintentionally, also goes some way to explaining the slight (but nonetheless contagious) oversights to adequately scrutinize Green V2 Mundine material and the fight itself. Oversights that were themselves possibly also accompanied by what might also be phrased as a curiously gullible hastiness to accept the *aforementioned prewritten Green V2 Mundine fight scripts on face value and publish them in goodwill. Regardless of the true story behind Mundine V1 Green which both, occurred more than 10 years ago and appears reasonably well captured within one of the links contained within the above post #8.



Think about it. How can all the superficial, promotional, and genuine, fanfare/energy that was seemingly associated with both, the Green V2 Mundine fight and also all the publications that were associated with it that we were simply awash in, now, all of a sudden (now that the above Mundine-appeal, *considerations, and other points have been raised) somehow be so totally absent and/or exhausted that there is absolutely no interest in what is happening to Mr. Mundine and the fraudulent circumstances that may have been associated with the heavily promoted and highly charged/hyped Green V2 Mundine fight? Where has all that energy, interest, and fanfare gone? Particularly now that the real story is off the leash, out, and orphaned? Perhaps the answer lies in how the Green V2 Mundine promoters and their army of loyalist, fawning, and un-scrutinizing media/other scribes are simply not prepared to ask what's happening - let alone do their own research and release reliable reports about the matters in hand; which in turn possibly means that others - particularly those outside of Australia - have no scripts to follow or tailcoats to ride. Ahh . . . . It?s always handy to have a good sense of humour with these things. I mean you have to be able to laugh. Like there were no (ignored) warning signs to this debacle. But, of course warning signs really and meaningfully only exist if you want to see them, don?t they? I mean, with the Green V2 Mundine fight, here we had a boxing contest that involved someone (Danny Green) whom is typically a cruiserweight fighter that was looking to do anything he can to avenge an embarrassing loss that he pretty much brought upon himself and publicly begged for. With Green, here we had a cruiserweight fighter whom decides that;


A) In order to avenge a previous, embarrassing, and (some say) thoroughly well-deserved loss (to Mundine); revenge will be accomplished by fighting Anthony a second time. However, this time the fight will be engineered such so that it takes place when Mundine is older, slower, and also at a weight where he is almost certain to be much smaller/lighter than Green; say like when Anthony is both, 13 years older than when he first fought Green and when he?s (typically campaigning four divisions lower than Green as) a light middleweight.
B) Provided the public?s hatred of Mundine (itself a social emotion that, whilst being largely fuelled by Green for the last 15 years or so, is often misplaced and also highly questionable) is reignited and/or stirred up - whilst simultaneously other misdirections are thrown into the promotional fire; the large majority of Australian and other boxing fans and writers will probably overlook the huge ?approach with caution? neon sign that is hanging over the fight for various reasons; some of which include the fact that Green is typically a cruiserweight and Mundine is typically a light middleweight.

A good question may be; who meaningfully raised any alarms about this and what it normally means for a fight and it?s outcome? The answer probably is; very few boxing scribes. And the reasons why, are most likely given herein, above, and also below. Yes, folks - believe it or not - despite all the boxing mishaps and controversies that have occurred during the last 5 years, and despite the aforementioned huge ?approach with caution? sign that was hanging over the Green V2 mundine fight . . . . . . Predictably, all that was required to set the boxing world and all its scrutinizing experts at ease about the above weight disparity and any concerns pertaining to Green V2 Mundine was Danny Green?s assertion, which went something like this . . .


"?Don?t worry peeps, come fight night there won?t be much (weight discrepancy) between us?"

And, what could possibly go wrong when the entire fight and promotion was underpinned with the above-mentioned approach, intentions, interests, and assertions, from someone as implicated and reliable as Green; you may ask? And just like that, we were then awash with what were effectively Green V2 Mundine promotional articles and claims. With not an editorial magnifying glass, scrutinizing question, or fine enquiring mind, to be seen, heard - or even imagined. And, perhaps for some that?s a reasonable approach. After all, aside from those mentioned within Mundine?s appeal that have already been largely ignored; what possible advantage could a cruiserweight (Green) gain by fighting a guy (Mundine) whom;


A) Typically fights as a light middleweight fighter.
B) In order to make the fight happen, must drastically come up in weight (to what is his maximum/slowest weight possible) and then also face the prospect of fighting a hard punching cruiserweight (Green) whom - come fight night and despite Danny?s assurances otherwise - was always going to be significantly heavier than the agreed catchweight.

I mean, it?s not as if such a contractual approach to the fight, itself;


A) Formed a warning sign.
B) Was envisaged to ensure Green possessed both a strength and size advantage.

Is it? Remarkably, these warning-siren like components that were associated with the aforementioned flashing neon ?approach with caution? sign - that itself cast an ominous shadow over the Green V2 Mundine fight/promotion reminiscent of thunderclouds over a picturesque rural setting - were still largely ignored and pushed aside. And, the warnings were all pushed aside and ignored for several main reasons, including . . . . . The unrestrained preference that was shown for what was no doubt easy access to prefabricated promotional Green V2 Mundine material. Material that (perhaps just as much as it had obviously been manufactured by those familiar with the distinctive combination of skills and dark artistry normally associated with amalgamating activities such as propaganda and promotion) had also undoubtedly been the subject of considerable proactive planning/marketing; as evidenced by the fact that almost all the distributed information Green Machine Promotions (GMP) released to its unsuspecting tergets appeared to be just as ready made, pre-fabricated, and designed for an intended purpose - as the stories it ultimately gave rise to became themselves misdirected, skewed, biased, and fodder for this post. In fact, had the above-mentioned GMP promotional material not been so predictably effective at the task it set out to do (which clearly was ensure the majority of boxing outlets/writers adopted a bias position on the Green V2 Mundine fight and advertised it as if it were original and sanctimonious) one could then perhaps feel comfortable saying that the aforementioned prefabricated promotional Green V2 Mundine material - which was relied upon by the majority of boxing outlets/writers - was deliberately insultive the majority of boxing outlets/writer?s intelligence. Not in the least, as the promotionally released Green V2 Mundine material clearly (and successfully) assumed that most of its targets would accept the information without scrutiny due to its pre-fabricated state, and therefore how easy it appeared to be able to be quickly massaged into what could later be redistributed/sold as unique boxing-news scoops. Yes, despite all the suspicious activities that are known to go down in this sport and despite all those that matters within it that are also concerning and written about, and despite all the below/above-mentioned Green V2 Mundine warning signs; somehow with it all Green V2 Mundine was (then before the fight, and still now after the fight {just as was the case with Green V1 Mundine}) largely given a free pass by the entire boxing press. And in itself that is probably as remarkable as it is symbolically representative of a failure to learn from the same mistakes that it appears to willingly facilitate and represent. Not in the least, because (even if we push aside and turn a blind eye to the fact that Green - whom, initially, more than 10 years ago, quite literally stalked/trolled Mundine?s fights - built his reputation off of bagging Anthony - constantly begged and publicly pleaded {both, with and without the help of broadcasters} for Mundine to fight him - then precipitously/openly and questionably claimed that Anthony was too scared to fight - only to then, in the end, simply get thoroughly outclassed, embarrassed, and flogged for all his questionable actions/efforts in what was then labeled as Australia?s biggest fight; Mundine V1 Green) it?s hard to imagine a promotional boxing match of recent years that;


-
Has more warnings, advantages, and concerns, associated with it; than Green V2 Mundine.
-
Has such a comprehensive, well detailed, and easy to understand/quantify appeal associated with it; than Green V2 Mundine.
-
Involves fighters that, particularly Green, appear to have an historical involvement with curious matchmaking and fight results/circumstances; as much as Green V2 Mundine.

Which all points to the fact that - if we?re not playing silly buggers - it?s hard to imagine a promotional boxing match of recent years that?s more worthy of webpage real estate and attention than the true story behind the Green V2 Mundine fight. Which - for those whom enjoy being in receipt of and/or working from pre-prepared boxing material - appears to be already detailed above and also within Mundine?s appeal?


->https://dailytelegraphatnewscorpau.files.wordpress.com/2017/02/mundine-appeal.pdf

So, the sixty four thousand dollar question is then surely . . . .

""Why is this matter and Mundine?s appeal not getting sufficient air/thread time?" "Not even from those whom assisted the promotion and saw an interest in it back then.""

It?s worth some thoughts folks, fans, spectators, and boxing experts. I mean . . . . How (particularly when many lesser poor decisions and lesser boxing tragedies before it have received more attention) could such a potential travesty of Australian boxing justice (particularly after the fight itself has been so energetically promoted by all) simply be allowed to pass under the bridge without any meaningful scrutiny as it floats down the canals of boxing?s sewer; without anyone so much as even affording it (pound for pound and/or proportionally) the same fanfare, excitment, and attention as, say;


-
The initial Green V2 Mundine fight/material.
-
The real/imagined wrongdoings associated with MayPac.
-
The real/imagined wrongdoings associated with Hauser?s ?Can We Trust USADA? piece.
-
The real/imagined wrongdoings associated with Mayweather V Ortiz.

Could the answer be somewhere within the below and/or above *content of this post? Could it be found in how (some of) those whom may be reluctant to report on the real issues are the same that were also quick to initially jump on board the Green V2 Mundine bandwagon? After all, let?s not forget . . . In the case of Mundine?s appeal (unlike most of the above-mentioned and similarly related MayPac/Hauser and other matters that caused many to attack the keyboard, publish stories, fantasize, and/or raise their arms/eyebrows in outrage and concern) here we have a detailed list of legitimate and easy to understand concerns that are all neatly compiled by a lawyer whom does not work for any promotional or boxing writing entity. Additionally, some of the concerns Mundine?s appeal details explicitly describe (with proof) fight-outcome altering matters that appear to be clearly in breach of the relevant/accepted guidelines (eg; scoring). Furthermore, some of Mundine?s appeal concerns ask reasonable (fight-outcome altering) questions such as;


A) How can a round be scored 10-10 for both fighters within a 10 point must system and also when one fighter (the cruiserweight; whom already had his share of advantages going into the fight) has been deducted a point for elbowing the other (the light middleweight)?
B) How can what has been labeled as a ?cheap shot? by Mundine really/legitimately be a foul and worthy of the 1 point deduction it received by the referee - when the referee didn?t;


b1) Bring the action to a stop (before Mundine threw the punch); as per the guidelines.
b2) Subsequently (after the punch) officiate the matter and/or tend to the claimed fouled fighter properly; as per the guidelines.


C) How can the result of the Green V2 Mundine fight be considered to be fair, reasonable, and legitimate, when the fight?s scorecards;


c1) Tallies themselves were obviously erroneous/questionable; in conflict with the relevant guidelines.
c2) Were not signed by the appropriate authority; in conflict with the relevant guidelines.
c3) Were publicly released - including to the media (whereby they then {like the aforementioned GMP material that many simply swallowed up without questioning} became instantly published) - "before" both, the scoredards were signed by the appropriate authority and/or even witnessed/announced by the referee; in conflict with the relevant guidelines.



In fact (provided one was prepared to donate 1/100th of the time it took to eagerly assist with the unscrutinized promotion of Green V2 Mundine) an argument could quite possibly be mounted to assert that the entire spectrum of Mundine?s appeal covers, if not more, then certainly an equivalent amount of concerns/questions, than;


A) Even just those detailed within the directly above points ?A?, ?B?, and ?C?.
B) Some of those issues that have previously presented great cause for this and/or other boxing websites and forums to be up in arms, outraged, and attacking the keyboards over.

But, sadly . . . At the moment both Mundine?s appeal and also the real, multi-dimensional, and untapped, story it actually presents appears to be as lonely and abandonded as both the MayPac and FloydClinch round by round count that was forever talked about, but never quite eventuated. And, as if all the above doesn?t constitute strangely ignored boxing-tabloid fodder and/or overlooked concerns, enough . . . Perhaps more telling and (negatively) entertaining is Danny Green?s response to Anthony?s appeal (and all the serious, clearly obvious, and well referenced problems, that it details). It?s both a curious and interesting response for many reasons. Including how it suggests that Green feels Mundine?s tabled appeal-concerns have (despite their prima facie strength and legitimacy) such little basis that they deserve to be ignored - possibly even treated, say, just as he might have (successfully) expected the catchweight matter related to the actual Green V2 Mundine fight would be. Yes, perhaps Green?s response - along with going some way to explain why Green himself is quick to dismiss Mundine?s appeal - provides us with a suitable insight into the entire matter; which surely now must also include the ?white elephant in the room? consideration (itself overlooked by many in the lead up to the fight in question) that Green appears himself to not exactly be without a irregular and/or suspicious history. Especially when it comes to matchmaking, explanations, and/or other matters pertaining to his fight outcomes. When asked about Anthony?s above-mentioned appeal, Danny Green said . . .


"?All it is is an appeal - it doesn?t mean anything is going to happen. I expect nothing less from such a poor sport.?"

Hmmmm . . . . . The contempt for Green shows for the industry and his own fan?s intelligence with comments like these, is almost palpable. It takes a ?special? person to ignore/disregard all the points contained within Mundine?s appeal; particularly those in relation to the scoring. Looks like Danny is hoping everyone will simply continue to treat the real and concerning issues Mundine has raised - just as Green himself has.

And just as many;


A) Currently are now.
B) Did in the lead up to both the Mundine V1 Green and the Mundine V2 Green fights, despite all the warning signs that loudly screamed and brightly flashed back then.



Which surely is best described as . . . . Looking the other way and turning a blind eye. So, in this respect it appears that nothing changes and that it?s business as usual. And, just as this is not the first time;


A) Green has been involved in a controversial fight/outcomes.


-
- Green V Stipe Drews.

Actionless/predictable transaction where the main parties wore boxing gloves and called it a world title. Some very well known/respected identities within boxing accurately labeled Drews as the worst champion they had ever seen; and it is hard to argue with that as the fight was simply disgraceful even if it were not a world title bout.


-
- Green V1 Markus Beyer.

Green?s extremely questionable actions/denials in relation to Green blatantly headbutting Beyer during the fight and just as he started to noticeably lose, which ultimately then brought about the fight?s disqualification; possibly served as an early indicator/warning as to how future fights would be managed and made.


-
- Green V Paul Briggs.

Briggs (once a formidable fighter) was known to all in the industry at the time to be washed up, physically/psychologically unfit to fight, and also desperate for income. By the time this fight took place Green?s approach to matchmaking/fighting was becoming reasonably well known and as such (despite Green?s attempts to cast blame on Briggs for taking a dive) many within Australia?s boxing fraternity knew the truth and supported Johnny Lewis when he claimed . . .



"Danny wanted a sausage (as an opponent) and that's what he got?.


-
Green V Manny Siaca.

By the time Green got to Siaca he was washed up, fighting tomato cans, and had (even before Green fought/beat both, Drews and Siaca) already lost quite easily to a guy that Drews had beaten; Silvio Banco. The risk and action was incredibly low for a world title fight, and as such this fight too (like the Drews fight) stunk a little as it took on the appearance of a predictable transaction where the main parties wore boxing gloves and attempted to legitimize it by calling it a (IBO) world title.


-
Green V2 Mundine.

Please see above.




B) The true reasons behind the aforementioned and controversial Green fight/outcome(s) have not always been properly acknowledged, examined, scrutinized, and reported on.

So, too, corruption (in boxing) often thrives when good people (particularly those that initially bought into the legitamcy of the fight and/or are in positions that can bring light to and/or change matters) do and say absolutely nothing. Cheers,
Storm :) :) :)


-stormcentre :

Sadly, I am not surprised at how unsurprised I am at the seemingly widespread lack of interest in the real story and/or lack of substance behind/associated with this fight and in particular how the result was achieved. Not in the least, as far lesser and less tangible injustices have received far more attention previously. Whilst it is always easy to get excited about and report on the promotional aspects of a fight and its results . . . . It never ceases to amaze how often the underlying (and sometimes more interesting) story is often allowed to go by the wayside. Particularly if it suggests that greater scrutiny should perhaps have been applied when all the glossy fight-promotion-reports were initially released and then quickly accepted, facsimiled, and/or re-published.

If one looks at the scale of concerns within Anthony Mundine?s appeal (linked within the above post #8) - and, of course, provided one was motivated to do so in an evenhanded manner - it?s then quite easy for any boxing scribe and/or reliable forum member/poster to;


-
Formulate a unique and referenced story about the concerns that is at least as interesting/reliable as those aforementioned publications that supported the original promotion.
-
See that many of Mundine?s appeal related concerns are actually quite real and factual, and supported by what appears to be - if not indisputable, then - strong evidence.
-
See that something extremely wrong - that is something that is the exact antithesis of almost all the initial pre/post Green V2 Mundine fight reports that were published about this fight - has taken place during the Danny Green V2 Anthony Mundine fight.
-
See, that, perhaps even before the fight started, the writing about the Green V2 Mundine fight was both, on the wall and also ignored.

This above/last consideration seems to be supported by;


A) Not only, Green?s below-mentioned and previous involvement in - if not predetermined, then certainly - controversial fight/outcomes.
B) But also, a fight where the fact that a (traditional) cruiserweight boxer (in Green) elected to avenge what was really a well deserved and previous loss (that itself - even after all these years - still constitutes {like the recent Green V2 Mundine fight} yet another example of how some fighters/fights are successively, deliberately, and/or otherwise poorly scrutinized) in a fight where his opponent was now a (traditional) light middleweight boxer.







Yet, strangely (along with Mundine?s appeal) none of these related points currently appear to be getting ?mined? and/or utilized out of Australia for their worth and what they are. Which surely is; useful and highly exploitable boxing-writing material that (aside from potentially revealing an author?s principles as they pertain to originality and reliability) provides a unique insight into how the dark and other sides of boxing sometimes works; in the ring, out of the ring, whilst in front of the keyboard, and also at the (virtual) publishing ?office?. For what it?s worth I personally think that the lack of interest in these matters allows such problems within boxing to flourish, propagate, and fester. Not in the least as;


A) The matters Anthony Mundine raises within his appeal possess and/or highlight a potentially negative bearing/aspect on the sport that, if we?re being honest, appears to be far greater in sensationalistic/other magnitude than, say, even how ?great? and ?magnificent? the initial (but questionable) glossy Green V Mundine promotional material purported to be; which itself was the same stuff that led and motivated some to immediately jump upon the Green V2 Mundine promotional dais without questioning - to wave the promotional banner.
B) It sends the wrong message.

That is, unless one openly supports and subscribes to the questionable/skewed philosophy of . . .

" ?Yes, we will report on potential miscarriages of boxing/other related justices - but only if doing so doesn?t expose how our initial perception, trust, and reporting of the matter may have been left wanting?".





As such (and I think this stands even if we discount {which, mind you, is a discount that?s quite unnecessarily generous to the matter in hand} all the fanfare that accompanied the initial wave of Green V2 Mundine promotional releases and scripted/copied fight reports - that were themselves effectively scattered around the globe at various unscrutinizing and other media/boxing outlets) I would have thought that these important appeal related matters (that potentially reveal how the sport can be manipulated) deserved, at least, some ?thread/air time?. If for no other reason, they deserved some ?thread/air time? so that the potential injustices and other related matters could be suitably exposed and/or treated for what they are. Exposed and/or treated for what they are, say, perhaps, in the same way that Hauser ?uncovered? all that misplaced trust we all supposedly had in USADA; post Mayweather V Pacquaio.


->http://www.sbnation.com/longform/2015/9/9/9271811/can-boxing-trust-usada

Yet, in reality . . . .

And, this is despite how the Green V2 Mundine result-appeal matter itself represents and contains some extremely real, tangible, and provable, concerns/indiscretions . . .

The fact of the matter is that there appears to be no boxing scribe outside of Australia that?s willing to run with it in a meaningful way - let alone one that takes on the same kind of enthusiasm that some of the/their original articles exhibited. It?s interesting because I would have thought that;

At least the same ?thread/air time?, that was given to, say, the initial (in *house released) Green V2 Mundine fight promotional material that, both;


A) Some boxing scribes worked from; without applying too much scrutiny.
B) In effect, misled the public.

Would have been lent to this matter.

However, it appears not. Instead, it appears that the real story on just how concerning and easily manipulated boxing can be is (well, at least in this Mundine-appeal instance) going to be left to drift off into the darkness. Treating the matter in this (quiet) manner is both disappointing and also an injustice to boxing. The reason being is that doing so ensures that other/future circumstances like this will certainly repeat themselves and come back again to haunt us; perhaps not as a Green V Mundine orchestration - but almost certainly in the form of another bout.

In fact, after one reads this entire post (and all the references and links I refer to; including those contained within the above post #8) I dare/challenge anyone to present a reasonable argument that opposes the view that, the reason we have the debacle that now is the (ignored) Mundine-appeal points/matter . . . . . Is, at least in part, due to the fact that the origin, history, and concerns around Green V1 Mundine - along with other the other curiosities associated with some of Green?s other previous fights - were themselves simply left to drift like ignored ?floaters? down the canal - possibly because in the dangerous act of examining these ?floaters? and their inherent complexity and curiosness (if it were to ever happen) one might also discover the part oneself played in;


A) Being easily marketed to.
B) Any associated bias.
C) Manipulating public opinion in a questionable manner.

You see (when it comes to ensuring a boxing scam, fix, and/or other questionable boxing related intention, is not heavily scrutinized and/or reported upon after the fact and/or when more material, information, and facts pertaining to it may become later available) the recipe is as relatively well known to (some) promotional entities - as it is both, simple and reasonably reliable. And, it goes a little like this . . . .

Provided the fight is promoted in such a way where those that write/report about it and can expose the concerns;


A) Only have access to ~pre-manufactured, ~questionable, and sometimes ~bias/hate-driven material.
B) Have ?bought in? enough on the ~above-mentioned material beforehand . . . . . Such that self preservation can be relied upon by both those disseminating the ~questionable information and also others to ensure
(i) that the true extent of the questionable conduct,
(ii) just how much the cards are really stacked on one person?s favor, and
(iii) in general the overall wrongdoing in relation to the fight . . . . is never truly exposed by those whom have the scribing and/or keyboard power to do so.



The result is that, usually, very few will take the time to go back and write about the fight?s injustices and in doing so both, conflict with their?s/others initial reports and take the chance of implicitly revealing how easily they may have been utilized for promotional purposes and/or misled; which, in turn, almost always ensures that the above-mentioned scams and wrongdoings remain in a state where they have far less publication interests cast upon them than they should. Certainly far less publication interest than the same information that was originally disseminated by promotional/other interests and subsequently utilized in an unscrutinised manner. And, this is how some fighters, managers, and promoters, get a free pass at the expense of boxing?s reputation.

Some may think that view is a little harsh and I accept that. However, even aside from the fact that to counter that view is to effectively suggest that you?re able to meangfully respond to the points raised . . . . Please also recall that the supposed ?cheap shot? Mayweather unloaded onto Victor Ortiz some years back (even taking into account the popularity difference between the bouts in question) received far more ?thread/air time? than the "entire" spectrum of appealable Green V2 Mundine matters that are mentioned within Anthony Mundine?s appeal.

An appeal that;


A) Appears to (along with the vast array of other concerning guidline breaches and claims that the Mayweather V Ortiz bout itself was not ever involved/associated with) include yet another so called ?cheap shot? and/or ?sucker punch? - that (like the Mayweather V Ortiz bout) to some extent potentially comes down to ?poor officiating? and/or a ?referee? and/or an ?questionable incident?,where;


a1) In the case of ?referee?; he - once again - simply doesn?t know how to follow the rules when breaking fighters up and/or stopping them.
a2) In the case of ?questionable incident? and ?poor officiating?; whilst the so called ?cheap shot? that was authored by Mundine and occurred in round 1 of the Green V2 Mundine fight is not too disimiliar to that incident which occurred within the Mayweather V Ortiz bout - the fact of the matter is that Mundine?s so called ?cheap shot? and how (his appeal details) it was mismanaged and poorly officiated, only constitutes but one of tens of concerns that Mundine explicitly details within his entire appeal.
a3) In the case of ?questionable incident?, ?referee?, and also ?poor officiating?; "
like" how Victor Ortiz? claims pertaining to the so called ?sucker punch? that Floyd subjected him to resulted in widespread misinterpretation and misunderstanding across the globe about whom was right/wrong and how the rules applied in those circumstances. So too, has the same occurred (to a proportionally lesser extent) within the context of Mundine?s so called ?cheap shot? that occurred within round 1 of the Green V2 Mundine fight.
a4) In the case of ?questionable incident?, ?referee?, and also ?poor officiating?; "
unlike" how Victor Ortiz? claims pertaining to the so called ?sucker punch? that Floyd subjected him to in their fight caused widespread uproar and and an almost total boxing-scribe-interest across the globe about all the resulting misinterpretation/misunderstanding, whom was right/wrong, and how the rules applied in those circumstances . . . . .

Insofar as Mundine?s;


-
So called ?cheap shot? that occurred within round 1 of the Green V2 Mundine fight and how (his appeal quite accurately details) it was mismanaged and poorly officiated.
-
Overall appeal-points tally; that itself effectively renders the so called ?cheap shot? matter (a matter that is very similar to that above-mentioned which Victor Ortiz and Mayweather themselves courted widespread boxing writer interest over) as but one of about 50 concerns that Mundine explicitly details within his entire appeal.

For some reason - and this is despite the proportionally similar interest in and also the rush to label both Floyd?s and Anthony?s punches as ?cheap shots? and/or ?sucker punches? and reporting on them as such - currently there appears to be very little follow-up story written about the facts of the matter and in particular the appeal related to Anthony?s incident; especially now that it has become reasonably clear that Mundine may have not executed a cheap shot after all, and that the referee himself (along with the questionable reporting) may be to blame.




B) Perhaps, implicitly and unintentionally, also goes some way to explaining the slight (but nonetheless contagious) oversights to adequately scrutinize Green V2 Mundine material and the fight itself. Oversights that were themselves possibly also accompanied by what might also be phrased as a curiously gullible hastiness to accept the *aforementioned prewritten Green V2 Mundine fight scripts on face value and publish them in goodwill. Regardless of the true story behind Mundine V1 Green which both, occurred more than 10 years ago and appears reasonably well captured within one of the links contained within the above post #8.



Think about it. How can all the superficial, promotional, and genuine, fanfare/energy that was seemingly associated with both, the Green V2 Mundine fight and also all the publications that were associated with it that we were simply awash in, now, all of a sudden (now that the above Mundine-appeal, *considerations, and other points have been raised) somehow be so totally absent and/or exhausted that there is absolutely no interest in what is happening to Mr. Mundine and the fraudulent circumstances that may have been associated with the heavily promoted and highly charged/hyped Green V2 Mundine fight? Where has all that energy, interest, and fanfare gone? Particularly now that the real story is off the leash, out, and orphaned? Perhaps the answer lies in how the Green V2 Mundine promoters and their army of loyalist, fawning, and un-scrutinizing media/other scribes are simply not prepared to ask what's happening - let alone do their own research and release reliable reports about the matters in hand; which in turn possibly means that others - particularly those outside of Australia - have no scripts to follow or tailcoats to ride. Ahh . . . . It?s always handy to have a good sense of humour with these things. I mean you have to be able to laugh. Like there were no (ignored) warning signs to this debacle. But, of course warning signs really and meaningfully only exist if you want to see them, don?t they? I mean, with the Green V2 Mundine fight, here we had a boxing contest that involved someone (Danny Green) whom is typically a cruiserweight fighter that was looking to do anything he can to avenge an embarrassing loss that he pretty much brought upon himself and publicly begged for. With Green, here we had a cruiserweight fighter whom decides that;


A) In order to avenge a previous, embarrassing, and (some say) thoroughly well-deserved loss (to Mundine); revenge will be accomplished by fighting Anthony a second time. However, this time the fight will be engineered such so that it takes place when Mundine is older, slower, and also at a weight where he is almost certain to be much smaller/lighter than Green; say like when Anthony is both, 13 years older than when he first fought Green and when he?s (typically campaigning four divisions lower than Green as) a light middleweight.
B) Provided the public?s hatred of Mundine (itself a social emotion that, whilst being largely fuelled by Green for the last 15 years or so, is often misplaced and also highly questionable) is reignited and/or stirred up - whilst simultaneously other misdirections are thrown into the promotional fire; the large majority of Australian and other boxing fans and writers will probably overlook the huge ?approach with caution? neon sign that is hanging over the fight for various reasons; some of which include the fact that Green is typically a cruiserweight and Mundine is typically a light middleweight.

A good question may be; who meaningfully raised any alarms about this and what it normally means for a fight and it?s outcome? The answer probably is; very few boxing scribes. And the reasons why, are most likely given herein, above, and also below. Yes, folks - believe it or not - despite all the boxing mishaps and controversies that have occurred during the last 5 years, and despite the aforementioned huge ?approach with caution? sign that was hanging over the Green V2 mundine fight . . . . . . Predictably, all that was required to set the boxing world and all its scrutinizing experts at ease about the above weight disparity and any concerns pertaining to Green V2 Mundine was Danny Green?s assertion, which went something like this . . .


"?Don?t worry peeps, come fight night there won?t be much (weight discrepancy) between us?"

And, what could possibly go wrong when the entire fight and promotion was underpinned with the above-mentioned approach, intentions, interests, and assertions, from someone as implicated and reliable as Green; you may ask? And just like that, we were then awash with what were effectively Green V2 Mundine promotional articles and claims. With not an editorial magnifying glass, scrutinizing question, or fine enquiring mind, to be seen, heard - or even imagined. And, perhaps for some that?s a reasonable approach. After all, aside from those mentioned within Mundine?s appeal that have already been largely ignored; what possible advantage could a cruiserweight (Green) gain by fighting a guy (Mundine) whom;


A) Typically fights as a light middleweight fighter.
B) In order to make the fight happen, must drastically come up in weight (to what is his maximum/slowest weight possible) and then also face the prospect of fighting a hard punching cruiserweight (Green) whom - come fight night and despite Danny?s assurances otherwise - was always going to be significantly heavier than the agreed catchweight.

I mean, it?s not as if such a contractual approach to the fight, itself;


A) Formed a warning sign.
B) Was envisaged to ensure Green possessed both a strength and size advantage.

Is it? Remarkably, these warning-siren like components that were associated with the aforementioned flashing neon ?approach with caution? sign - that itself cast an ominous shadow over the Green V2 Mundine fight/promotion reminiscent of thunderclouds over a picturesque rural setting - were still largely ignored and pushed aside. And, the warnings were all pushed aside and ignored for several main reasons, including . . . . . The unrestrained preference that was shown for what was no doubt easy access to prefabricated promotional Green V2 Mundine material. Material that (perhaps just as much as it had obviously been manufactured by those familiar with the distinctive combination of skills and dark artistry normally associated with amalgamating activities such as propaganda and promotion) had also undoubtedly been the subject of considerable proactive planning/marketing; as evidenced by the fact that almost all the distributed information Green Machine Promotions (GMP) released to its unsuspecting tergets appeared to be just as ready made, pre-fabricated, and designed for an intended purpose - as the stories it ultimately gave rise to became themselves misdirected, skewed, biased, and fodder for this post. In fact, had the above-mentioned GMP promotional material not been so predictably effective at the task it set out to do (which clearly was ensure the majority of boxing outlets/writers adopted a bias position on the Green V2 Mundine fight and advertised it as if it were original and sanctimonious) one could then perhaps feel comfortable saying that the aforementioned prefabricated promotional Green V2 Mundine material - which was relied upon by the majority of boxing outlets/writers - was deliberately insultive the majority of boxing outlets/writer?s intelligence. Not in the least, as the promotionally released Green V2 Mundine material clearly (and successfully) assumed that most of its targets would accept the information without scrutiny due to its pre-fabricated state, and therefore how easy it appeared to be able to be quickly massaged into what could later be redistributed/sold as unique boxing-news scoops. Yes, despite all the suspicious activities that are known to go down in this sport and despite all those that matters within it that are also concerning and written about, and despite all the below/above-mentioned Green V2 Mundine warning signs; somehow with it all Green V2 Mundine was (then before the fight, and still now after the fight {just as was the case with Green V1 Mundine}) largely given a free pass by the entire boxing press. And in itself that is probably as remarkable as it is symbolically representative of a failure to learn from the same mistakes that it appears to willingly facilitate and represent. Not in the least, because (even if we push aside and turn a blind eye to the fact that Green - whom, initially, more than 10 years ago, quite literally stalked/trolled Mundine?s fights - built his reputation off of bagging Anthony - constantly begged and publicly pleaded {both, with and without the help of broadcasters} for Mundine to fight him - then precipitously/openly and questionably claimed that Anthony was too scared to fight - only to then, in the end, simply get thoroughly outclassed, embarrassed, and flogged for all his questionable actions/efforts in what was then labeled as Australia?s biggest fight; Mundine V1 Green) it?s hard to imagine a promotional boxing match of recent years that;


-
Has more warnings, advantages, and concerns, associated with it; than Green V2 Mundine.
-
Has such a comprehensive, well detailed, and easy to understand/quantify appeal associated with it; than Green V2 Mundine.
-
Involves fighters that, particularly Green, appear to have an historical involvement with curious matchmaking and fight results/circumstances; as much as Green V2 Mundine.

Which all points to the fact that - if we?re not playing silly buggers - it?s hard to imagine a promotional boxing match of recent years that?s more worthy of webpage real estate and attention than the true story behind the Green V2 Mundine fight. Which - for those whom enjoy being in receipt of and/or working from pre-prepared boxing material - appears to be already detailed above and also within Mundine?s appeal?


->https://dailytelegraphatnewscorpau.files.wordpress.com/2017/02/mundine-appeal.pdf

So, the sixty four thousand dollar question is then surely . . . .

""Why is this matter and Mundine?s appeal not getting sufficient air/thread time?" "Not even from those whom assisted the promotion and saw an interest in it back then.""

It?s worth some thoughts folks, fans, spectators, and boxing experts. I mean . . . . How (particularly when many lesser poor decisions and lesser boxing tragedies before it have received more attention) could such a potential travesty of Australian boxing justice (particularly after the fight itself has been so energetically promoted by all) simply be allowed to pass under the bridge without any meaningful scrutiny as it floats down the canals of boxing?s sewer; without anyone so much as even affording it (pound for pound and/or proportionally) the same fanfare, excitment, and attention as, say;


-
The initial Green V2 Mundine fight/material.
-
The real/imagined wrongdoings associated with MayPac.
-
The real/imagined wrongdoings associated with Hauser?s ?Can We Trust USADA? piece.
-
The real/imagined wrongdoings associated with Mayweather V Ortiz.

Could the answer be somewhere within the below and/or above *content of this post? Could it be found in how (some of) those whom may be reluctant to report on the real issues are the same that were also quick to initially jump on board the Green V2 Mundine bandwagon? After all, let?s not forget . . . In the case of Mundine?s appeal (unlike most of the above-mentioned and similarly related MayPac/Hauser and other matters that caused many to attack the keyboard, publish stories, fantasize, and/or raise their arms/eyebrows in outrage and concern) here we have a detailed list of legitimate and easy to understand concerns that are all neatly compiled by a lawyer whom does not work for any promotional or boxing writing entity. Additionally, some of the concerns Mundine?s appeal details explicitly describe (with proof) fight-outcome altering matters that appear to be clearly in breach of the relevant/accepted guidelines (eg; scoring). Furthermore, some of Mundine?s appeal concerns ask reasonable (fight-outcome altering) questions such as;


A) How can a round be scored 10-10 for both fighters within a 10 point must system and also when one fighter (the cruiserweight; whom already had his share of advantages going into the fight) has been deducted a point for elbowing the other (the light middleweight)?
B) How can what has been labeled as a ?cheap shot? by Mundine really/legitimately be a foul and worthy of the 1 point deduction it received by the referee - when the referee didn?t;


b1) Bring the action to a stop (before Mundine threw the punch); as per the guidelines.
b2) Subsequently (after the punch) officiate the matter and/or tend to the claimed fouled fighter properly; as per the guidelines.


C) How can the result of the Green V2 Mundine fight be considered to be fair, reasonable, and legitimate, when the fight?s scorecards;


c1) Tallies themselves were obviously erroneous/questionable; in conflict with the relevant guidelines.
c2) Were not signed by the appropriate authority; in conflict with the relevant guidelines.
c3) Were publicly released - including to the media (whereby they then {like the aforementioned GMP material that many simply swallowed up without questioning} became instantly published) - "before" both, the scoredards were signed by the appropriate authority and/or even witnessed/announced by the referee; in conflict with the relevant guidelines.



In fact (provided one was prepared to donate 1/100th of the time it took to eagerly assist with the unscrutinized promotion of Green V2 Mundine) an argument could quite possibly be mounted to assert that the entire spectrum of Mundine?s appeal covers, if not more, then certainly an equivalent amount of concerns/questions, than;


A) Even just those detailed within the directly above points ?A?, ?B?, and ?C?.
B) Some of those issues that have previously presented great cause for this and/or other boxing websites and forums to be up in arms, outraged, and attacking the keyboards over.

But, sadly . . . At the moment both Mundine?s appeal and also the real, multi-dimensional, and untapped, story it actually presents appears to be as lonely and abandonded as both the MayPac and FloydClinch round by round count that was forever talked about, but never quite eventuated. And, as if all the above doesn?t constitute strangely ignored boxing-tabloid fodder and/or overlooked concerns, enough . . . Perhaps more telling and (negatively) entertaining is Danny Green?s response to Anthony?s appeal (and all the serious, clearly obvious, and well referenced problems, that it details). It?s both a curious and interesting response for many reasons. Including how it suggests that Green feels Mundine?s tabled appeal-concerns have (despite their prima facie strength and legitimacy) such little basis that they deserve to be ignored - possibly even treated, say, just as he might have (successfully) expected the catchweight matter related to the actual Green V2 Mundine fight would be. Yes, perhaps Green?s response - along with going some way to explain why Green himself is quick to dismiss Mundine?s appeal - provides us with a suitable insight into the entire matter; which surely now must also include the ?white elephant in the room? consideration (itself overlooked by many in the lead up to the fight in question) that Green appears himself to not exactly be without a irregular and/or suspicious history. Especially when it comes to matchmaking, explanations, and/or other matters pertaining to his fight outcomes. When asked about Anthony?s above-mentioned appeal, Danny Green said . . .


"?All it is is an appeal - it doesn?t mean anything is going to happen. I expect nothing less from such a poor sport.?"

Hmmmm . . . . . The contempt for Green shows for the industry and his own fan?s intelligence with comments like these, is almost palpable. It takes a ?special? person to ignore/disregard all the points contained within Mundine?s appeal; particularly those in relation to the scoring. Looks like Danny is hoping everyone will simply continue to treat the real and concerning issues Mundine has raised - just as Green himself has.

And just as many;


A) Currently are now.
B) Did in the lead up to both the Mundine V1 Green and the Mundine V2 Green fights, despite all the warning signs that loudly screamed and brightly flashed back then.



Which surely is best described as . . . . Looking the other way and turning a blind eye. So, in this respect it appears that nothing changes and that it?s business as usual. And, just as this is not the first time;


A) Green has been involved in a controversial fight/outcomes.


-
- Green V Stipe Drews.

Actionless/predictable transaction where the main parties wore boxing gloves and called it a world title. Some very well known/respected identities within boxing accurately labeled Drews as the worst champion they had ever seen; and it is hard to argue with that as the fight was simply disgraceful even if it were not a world title bout.


-
- Green V1 Markus Beyer.

Green?s extremely questionable actions/denials in relation to Green blatantly headbutting Beyer during the fight and just as he started to noticeably lose, which ultimately then brought about the fight?s disqualification; possibly served as an early indicator/warning as to how future fights would be managed and made.


-
- Green V Paul Briggs.

Briggs (once a formidable fighter) was known to all in the industry at the time to be washed up, physically/psychologically unfit to fight, and also desperate for income. By the time this fight took place Green?s approach to matchmaking/fighting was becoming reasonably well known and as such (despite Green?s attempts to cast blame on Briggs for taking a dive) many within Australia?s boxing fraternity knew the truth and supported Johnny Lewis when he claimed . . .



"Danny wanted a sausage (as an opponent) and that's what he got?.


-
Green V Manny Siaca.

By the time Green got to Siaca he was washed up, fighting tomato cans, and had (even before Green fought/beat both, Drews and Siaca) already lost quite easily to a guy that Drews had beaten; Silvio Banco. The risk and action was incredibly low for a world title fight, and as such this fight too (like the Drews fight) stunk a little as it took on the appearance of a predictable transaction where the main parties wore boxing gloves and attempted to legitimize it by calling it a (IBO) world title.


-
Green V2 Mundine.

Please see above.




B) The true reasons behind the aforementioned and controversial Green fight/outcome(s) have not always been properly acknowledged, examined, scrutinized, and reported on.

So, too, corruption (in boxing) often thrives when good people (particularly those that initially bought into the legitamcy of the fight and/or are in positions that can bring light to and/or change matters) do and say absolutely nothing. Cheers,
Storm :) :) :)


-stormcentre :

Sadly, I am not surprised at how unsurprised I am at the seemingly widespread lack of interest in the real story and/or lack of substance behind/associated with this fight and in particular how the result was achieved. Not in the least, as far lesser and less tangible injustices have received far more attention previously. Whilst it is always easy to get excited about and report on the promotional aspects of a fight and its results . . . . It never ceases to amaze how often the underlying (and sometimes more interesting) story is often allowed to go by the wayside. Particularly if it suggests that greater scrutiny should perhaps have been applied when all the glossy fight-promotion-reports were initially released and then quickly accepted, facsimiled, and/or re-published.

If one looks at the scale of concerns within Anthony Mundine’s appeal (linked within the above post #8) - and, of course, provided one was motivated to do so in an evenhanded manner - it’s then quite easy for any boxing scribe and/or reliable forum member/poster to;


-
Formulate a unique and referenced story about the concerns that is at least as interesting/reliable as those aforementioned publications that supported the original promotion.
-
See that many of Mundine’s appeal related concerns are actually quite real and factual, and supported by what appears to be - if not indisputable, then - strong evidence.
-
See that something extremely wrong - that is something that is the exact antithesis of almost all the initial pre/post Green V2 Mundine fight reports that were published about this fight - has taken place during the Danny Green V2 Anthony Mundine fight.
-
See, that, perhaps even before the fight started, the writing about the Green V2 Mundine fight was both, on the wall and also ignored.

This above/last consideration seems to be supported by;


A) Not only, Green’s below-mentioned and previous involvement in - if not predetermined, then certainly - controversial fight/outcomes.
B) But also, a fight where the fact that a (traditional) cruiserweight boxer (in Green) elected to avenge what was really a well deserved and previous loss (that itself - even after all these years - still constitutes {like the recent Green V2 Mundine fight} yet another example of how some fighters/fights are successively, deliberately, and/or otherwise poorly scrutinized) in a fight where his opponent was now a (traditional) light middleweight boxer.







Yet, strangely (along with Mundine’s appeal) none of these related points currently appear to be getting “mined” and/or utilized out of Australia for their worth and what they are. Which surely is; useful and highly exploitable boxing-writing material that (aside from potentially revealing an author’s principles as they pertain to originality and reliability) provides a unique insight into how the dark and other sides of boxing sometimes works; in the ring, out of the ring, whilst in front of the keyboard, and also at the (virtual) publishing “office”. For what it’s worth I personally think that the lack of interest in these matters allows such problems within boxing to flourish, propagate, and fester. Not in the least as;


A) The matters Anthony Mundine raises within his appeal possess and/or highlight a potentially negative bearing/aspect on the sport that, if we’re being honest, appears to be far greater in sensationalistic/other magnitude than, say, even how “great” and “magnificent” the initial (but questionable) glossy Green V Mundine promotional material purported to be; which itself was the same stuff that led and motivated some to immediately jump upon the Green V2 Mundine promotional dais without questioning - to wave the promotional banner.
B) It sends the wrong message.

That is, unless one openly supports and subscribes to the questionable/skewed philosophy of . . .

" “Yes, we will report on potential miscarriages of boxing/other related justices - but only if doing so doesn’t expose how our initial perception, trust, and reporting of the matter may have been left wanting”".





As such (and I think this stands even if we discount {which, mind you, is a discount that’s quite unnecessarily generous to the matter in hand} all the fanfare that accompanied the initial wave of Green V2 Mundine promotional releases and scripted/copied fight reports - that were themselves effectively scattered around the globe at various unscrutinizing and other media/boxing outlets) I would have thought that these important appeal related matters (that potentially reveal how the sport can be manipulated) deserved, at least, some “thread/air time”. If for no other reason, they deserved some “thread/air time” so that the potential injustices and other related matters could be suitably exposed and/or treated for what they are. Exposed and/or treated for what they are, say, perhaps, in the same way that Hauser “uncovered” all that misplaced trust we all supposedly had in USADA; post Mayweather V Pacquaio.


->http://www.sbnation.com/longform/2015/9/9/9271811/can-boxing-trust-usada

Yet, in reality . . . .

And, this is despite how the Green V2 Mundine result-appeal matter itself represents and contains some extremely real, tangible, and provable, concerns/indiscretions . . .

The fact of the matter is that there appears to be no boxing scribe outside of Australia that’s willing to run with it in a meaningful way - let alone one that takes on the same kind of enthusiasm that some of the/their original articles exhibited. It’s interesting because I would have thought that;

At least the same “thread/air time”, that was given to, say, the initial (in *house released) Green V2 Mundine fight promotional material that, both;


A) Some boxing scribes worked from; without applying too much scrutiny.
B) In effect, misled the public.

Would have been lent to this matter.

However, it appears not. Instead, it appears that the real story on just how concerning and easily manipulated boxing can be is (well, at least in this Mundine-appeal instance) going to be left to drift off into the darkness. Treating the matter in this (quiet) manner is both disappointing and also an injustice to boxing. The reason being is that doing so ensures that other/future circumstances like this will certainly repeat themselves and come back again to haunt us; perhaps not as a Green V Mundine orchestration - but almost certainly in the form of another bout.

In fact, after one reads this entire post (and all the references and links I refer to; including those contained within the above post #8) I dare/challenge anyone to present a reasonable argument that opposes the view that, the reason we have the debacle that now is the (ignored) Mundine-appeal points/matter . . . . . Is, at least in part, due to the fact that the origin, history, and concerns around Green V1 Mundine - along with other the other curiosities associated with some of Green’s other previous fights - were themselves simply left to drift like ignored “floaters” down the canal - possibly because in the dangerous act of examining these “floaters” and their inherent complexity and curiosness (if it were to ever happen) one might also discover the part oneself played in;


A) Being easily marketed to.
B) Any associated bias.
C) Manipulating public opinion in a questionable manner.

You see (when it comes to ensuring a boxing scam, fix, and/or other questionable boxing related intention, is not heavily scrutinized and/or reported upon after the fact and/or when more material, information, and facts pertaining to it may become later available) the recipe is as relatively well known to (some) promotional entities - as it is both, simple and reasonably reliable. And, it goes a little like this . . . .

Provided the fight is promoted in such a way where those that write/report about it and can expose the concerns;


A) Only have access to ~pre-manufactured, ~questionable, and sometimes ~bias/hate-driven material.
B) Have “bought in” enough on the ~above-mentioned material beforehand . . . . . Such that self preservation can be relied upon by both those disseminating the ~questionable information and also others to ensure
(i) that the true extent of the questionable conduct,
(ii) just how much the cards are really stacked on one person’s favor, and
(iii) in general the overall wrongdoing in relation to the fight . . . . is never truly exposed by those whom have the scribing and/or keyboard power to do so.



The result is that, usually, very few will take the time to go back and write about the fight’s injustices and in doing so both, conflict with their’s/others initial reports and take the chance of implicitly revealing how easily they may have been utilized for promotional purposes and/or misled; which, in turn, almost always ensures that the above-mentioned scams and wrongdoings remain in a state where they have far less publication interests cast upon them than they should. Certainly far less publication interest than the same information that was originally disseminated by promotional/other interests and subsequently utilized in an unscrutinised manner. And, this is how some fighters, managers, and promoters, get a free pass at the expense of boxing’s reputation.

Some may think that view is a little harsh and I accept that. However, even aside from the fact that to counter that view is to effectively suggest that you’re able to meangfully respond to the points raised . . . . Please also recall that the supposed “cheap shot” Mayweather unloaded onto Victor Ortiz some years back (even taking into account the popularity difference between the bouts in question) received far more “thread/air time” than the "entire" spectrum of appealable Green V2 Mundine matters that are mentioned within Anthony Mundine’s appeal.

An appeal that;


A) Appears to (along with the vast array of other concerning guidline breaches and claims that the Mayweather V Ortiz bout itself was not ever involved/associated with) include yet another so called “cheap shot” and/or “sucker punch” - that (like the Mayweather V Ortiz bout) to some extent potentially comes down to “poor officiating” and/or a “referee” and/or an “questionable incident”,where;


a1) In the case of “referee”; he - once again - simply doesn’t know how to follow the rules when breaking fighters up and/or stopping them.
a2) In the case of “questionable incident” and “poor officiating”; whilst the so called “cheap shot” that was authored by Mundine and occurred in round 1 of the Green V2 Mundine fight is not too disimiliar to that incident which occurred within the Mayweather V Ortiz bout - the fact of the matter is that Mundine’s so called “cheap shot” and how (his appeal details) it was mismanaged and poorly officiated, only constitutes but one of tens of concerns that Mundine explicitly details within his entire appeal.
a3) In the case of “questionable incident”, “referee”, and also “poor officiating”; "
like" how Victor Ortiz’ claims pertaining to the so called “sucker punch” that Floyd subjected him to resulted in widespread misinterpretation and misunderstanding across the globe about whom was right/wrong and how the rules applied in those circumstances. So too, has the same occurred (to a proportionally lesser extent) within the context of Mundine’s so called “cheap shot” that occurred within round 1 of the Green V2 Mundine fight.
a4) In the case of “questionable incident”, “referee”, and also “poor officiating”; "
unlike" how Victor Ortiz’ claims pertaining to the so called “sucker punch” that Floyd subjected him to in their fight caused widespread uproar and and an almost total boxing-scribe-interest across the globe about all the resulting misinterpretation/misunderstanding, whom was right/wrong, and how the rules applied in those circumstances . . . . .

Insofar as Mundine’s;


-
So called “cheap shot” that occurred within round 1 of the Green V2 Mundine fight and how (his appeal quite accurately details) it was mismanaged and poorly officiated.
-
Overall appeal-points tally; that itself effectively renders the so called “cheap shot” matter (a matter that is very similar to that above-mentioned which Victor Ortiz and Mayweather themselves courted widespread boxing writer interest over) as but one of about 50 concerns that Mundine explicitly details within his entire appeal.

For some reason - and this is despite the proportionally similar interest in and also the rush to label both Floyd’s and Anthony’s punches as “cheap shots” and/or “sucker punches” and reporting on them as such - currently there appears to be very little follow-up story written about the facts of the matter and in particular the appeal related to Anthony’s incident; especially now that it has become reasonably clear that Mundine may have not executed a cheap shot after all, and that the referee himself (along with the questionable reporting) may be to blame.




B) Perhaps, implicitly and unintentionally, also goes some way to explaining the slight (but nonetheless contagious) oversights to adequately scrutinize Green V2 Mundine material and the fight itself. Oversights that were themselves possibly also accompanied by what might also be phrased as a curiously gullible hastiness to accept the *aforementioned prewritten Green V2 Mundine fight scripts on face value and publish them in goodwill. Regardless of the true story behind Mundine V1 Green which both, occurred more than 10 years ago and appears reasonably well captured within one of the links contained within the above post #8.



Think about it. How can all the superficial, promotional, and genuine, fanfare/energy that was seemingly associated with both, the Green V2 Mundine fight and also all the publications that were associated with it that we were simply awash in, now, all of a sudden (now that the above Mundine-appeal, *considerations, and other points have been raised) somehow be so totally absent and/or exhausted that there is absolutely no interest in what is happening to Mr. Mundine and the fraudulent circumstances that may have been associated with the heavily promoted and highly charged/hyped Green V2 Mundine fight? Where has all that energy, interest, and fanfare gone? Particularly now that the real story is off the leash, out, and orphaned? Perhaps the answer lies in how the Green V2 Mundine promoters and their army of loyalist, fawning, and un-scrutinizing media/other scribes are simply not prepared to ask what's happening - let alone do their own research and release reliable reports about the matters in hand; which in turn possibly means that others - particularly those outside of Australia - have no scripts to follow or tailcoats to ride. Ahh . . . . It’s always handy to have a good sense of humour with these things. I mean you have to be able to laugh. Like there were no (ignored) warning signs to this debacle. But, of course warning signs really and meaningfully only exist if you want to see them, don’t they? I mean, with the Green V2 Mundine fight, here we had a boxing contest that involved someone (Danny Green) whom is typically a cruiserweight fighter that was looking to do anything he can to avenge an embarrassing loss that he pretty much brought upon himself and publicly begged for. With Green, here we had a cruiserweight fighter whom decides that;


A) In order to avenge a previous, embarrassing, and (some say) thoroughly well-deserved loss (to Mundine); revenge will be accomplished by fighting Anthony a second time. However, this time the fight will be engineered such so that it takes place when Mundine is older, slower, and also at a weight where he is almost certain to be much smaller/lighter than Green; say like when Anthony is both, 13 years older than when he first fought Green and when he’s (typically campaigning four divisions lower than Green as) a light middleweight.
B) Provided the public’s hatred of Mundine (itself a social emotion that, whilst being largely fuelled by Green for the last 15 years or so, is often misplaced and also highly questionable) is reignited and/or stirred up - whilst simultaneously other misdirections are thrown into the promotional fire; the large majority of Australian and other boxing fans and writers will probably overlook the huge “approach with caution” neon sign that is hanging over the fight for various reasons; some of which include the fact that Green is typically a cruiserweight and Mundine is typically a light middleweight.

A good question may be; who meaningfully raised any alarms about this and what it normally means for a fight and it’s outcome? The answer probably is; very few boxing scribes. And the reasons why, are most likely given herein, above, and also below. Yes, folks - believe it or not - despite all the boxing mishaps and controversies that have occurred during the last 5 years, and despite the aforementioned huge “approach with caution” sign that was hanging over the Green V2 mundine fight . . . . . . Predictably, all that was required to set the boxing world and all its scrutinizing experts at ease about the above weight disparity and any concerns pertaining to Green V2 Mundine was Danny Green’s assertion, which went something like this . . .


"”Don’t worry peeps, come fight night there won’t be much (weight discrepancy) between us”"

And, what could possibly go wrong when the entire fight and promotion was underpinned with the above-mentioned approach, intentions, interests, and assertions, from someone as implicated and reliable as Green; you may ask? And just like that, we were then awash with what were effectively Green V2 Mundine promotional articles and claims. With not an editorial magnifying glass, scrutinizing question, or fine enquiring mind, to be seen, heard - or even imagined. And, perhaps for some that’s a reasonable approach. After all, aside from those mentioned within Mundine’s appeal that have already been largely ignored; what possible advantage could a cruiserweight (Green) gain by fighting a guy (Mundine) whom;


A) Typically fights as a light middleweight fighter.
B) In order to make the fight happen, must drastically come up in weight (to what is his maximum/slowest weight possible) and then also face the prospect of fighting a hard punching cruiserweight (Green) whom - come fight night and despite Danny’s assurances otherwise - was always going to be significantly heavier than the agreed catchweight.

I mean, it’s not as if such a contractual approach to the fight, itself;


A) Formed a warning sign.
B) Was envisaged to ensure Green possessed both a strength and size advantage.

Is it? Remarkably, these warning-siren like components that were associated with the aforementioned flashing neon “approach with caution” sign - that itself cast an ominous shadow over the Green V2 Mundine fight/promotion reminiscent of thunderclouds over a picturesque rural setting - were still largely ignored and pushed aside. And, the warnings were all pushed aside and ignored for several main reasons, including . . . . . The unrestrained preference that was shown for what was no doubt easy access to prefabricated promotional Green V2 Mundine material. Material that (perhaps just as much as it had obviously been manufactured by those familiar with the distinctive combination of skills and dark artistry normally associated with amalgamating activities such as propaganda and promotion) had also undoubtedly been the subject of considerable proactive planning/marketing; as evidenced by the fact that almost all the distributed information Green Machine Promotions (GMP) released to its unsuspecting tergets appeared to be just as ready made, pre-fabricated, and designed for an intended purpose - as the stories it ultimately gave rise to became themselves misdirected, skewed, biased, and fodder for this post. In fact, had the above-mentioned GMP promotional material not been so predictably effective at the task it set out to do (which clearly was ensure the majority of boxing outlets/writers adopted a bias position on the Green V2 Mundine fight and advertised it as if it were original and sanctimonious) one could then perhaps feel comfortable saying that the aforementioned prefabricated promotional Green V2 Mundine material - which was relied upon by the majority of boxing outlets/writers - was deliberately insultive the majority of boxing outlets/writer’s intelligence. Not in the least, as the promotionally released Green V2 Mundine material clearly (and successfully) assumed that most of its targets would accept the information without scrutiny due to its pre-fabricated state, and therefore how easy it appeared to be able to be quickly massaged into what could later be redistributed/sold as unique boxing-news scoops. Yes, despite all the suspicious activities that are known to go down in this sport and despite all those that matters within it that are also concerning and written about, and despite all the below/above-mentioned Green V2 Mundine warning signs; somehow with it all Green V2 Mundine was (then before the fight, and still now after the fight {just as was the case with Green V1 Mundine}) largely given a free pass by the entire boxing press. And in itself that is probably as remarkable as it is symbolically representative of a failure to learn from the same mistakes that it appears to willingly facilitate and represent. Not in the least, because (even if we push aside and turn a blind eye to the fact that Green - whom, initially, more than 10 years ago, quite literally stalked/trolled Mundine’s fights - built his reputation off of bagging Anthony - constantly begged and publicly pleaded {both, with and without the help of broadcasters} for Mundine to fight him - then precipitously/openly and questionably claimed that Anthony was too scared to fight - only to then, in the end, simply get thoroughly outclassed, embarrassed, and flogged for all his questionable actions/efforts in what was then labeled as Australia’s biggest fight; Mundine V1 Green) it’s hard to imagine a promotional boxing match of recent years that;


-
Has more warnings, advantages, and concerns, associated with it; than Green V2 Mundine.
-
Has such a comprehensive, well detailed, and easy to understand/quantify appeal associated with it; than Green V2 Mundine.
-
Involves fighters that, particularly Green, appear to have an historical involvement with curious matchmaking and fight results/circumstances; as much as Green V2 Mundine.

Which all points to the fact that - if we’re not playing silly buggers - it’s hard to imagine a promotional boxing match of recent years that’s more worthy of webpage real estate and attention than the true story behind the Green V2 Mundine fight. Which - for those whom enjoy being in receipt of and/or working from pre-prepared boxing material - appears to be already detailed above and also within Mundine’s appeal?


->https://dailytelegraphatnewscorpau.files.wordpress.com/2017/02/mundine-appeal.pdf

So, the sixty four thousand dollar question is then surely . . . .

""Why is this matter and Mundine’s appeal not getting sufficient air/thread time?" "Not even from those whom assisted the promotion and saw an interest in it back then.""

It’s worth some thoughts folks, fans, spectators, and boxing experts. I mean . . . . How (particularly when many lesser poor decisions and lesser boxing tragedies before it have received more attention) could such a potential travesty of Australian boxing justice (particularly after the fight itself has been so energetically promoted by all) simply be allowed to pass under the bridge without any meaningful scrutiny as it floats down the canals of boxing’s sewer; without anyone so much as even affording it (pound for pound and/or proportionally) the same fanfare, excitment, and attention as, say;


-
The initial Green V2 Mundine fight/material.
-
The real/imagined wrongdoings associated with MayPac.
-
The real/imagined wrongdoings associated with Hauser’s “Can We Trust USADA” piece.
-
The real/imagined wrongdoings associated with Mayweather V Ortiz.

Could the answer be somewhere within the below and/or above *content of this post? Could it be found in how (some of) those whom may be reluctant to report on the real issues are the same that were also quick to initially jump on board the Green V2 Mundine bandwagon? After all, let’s not forget . . . In the case of Mundine’s appeal (unlike most of the above-mentioned and similarly related MayPac/Hauser and other matters that caused many to attack the keyboard, publish stories, fantasize, and/or raise their arms/eyebrows in outrage and concern) here we have a detailed list of legitimate and easy to understand concerns that are all neatly compiled by a lawyer whom does not work for any promotional or boxing writing entity. Additionally, some of the concerns Mundine’s appeal details explicitly describe (with proof) fight-outcome altering matters that appear to be clearly in breach of the relevant/accepted guidelines (eg; scoring). Furthermore, some of Mundine’s appeal concerns ask reasonable (fight-outcome altering) questions such as;


A) How can a round be scored 10-10 for both fighters within a 10 point must system and also when one fighter (the cruiserweight; whom already had his share of advantages going into the fight) has been deducted a point for elbowing the other (the light middleweight)?
B) How can what has been labeled as a “cheap shot” by Mundine really/legitimately be a foul and worthy of the 1 point deduction it received by the referee - when the referee didn’t;


b1) Bring the action to a stop (before Mundine threw the punch); as per the guidelines.
b2) Subsequently (after the punch) officiate the matter and/or tend to the claimed fouled fighter properly; as per the guidelines.


C) How can the result of the Green V2 Mundine fight be considered to be fair, reasonable, and legitimate, when the fight’s scorecards;


c1) Tallies themselves were obviously erroneous/questionable; in conflict with the relevant guidelines.
c2) Were not signed by the appropriate authority; in conflict with the relevant guidelines.
c3) Were publicly released - including to the media (whereby they then {like the aforementioned GMP material that many simply swallowed up without questioning} became instantly published) - "before" both, the scorecards were signed by the appropriate authority and/or even witnessed/announced by the referee; in conflict with the relevant guidelines.



In fact (provided one was prepared to donate 1/100th of the time it took to eagerly assist with the unscrutinized promotion of Green V2 Mundine) an argument could quite possibly be mounted to assert that the entire spectrum of Mundine’s appeal covers, if not more, then certainly an equivalent amount of concerns/questions, than;


A) Even just those detailed within the directly above points “A”, “B”, and “C”.
B) Some of those issues that have previously presented great cause for this and/or other boxing websites and forums to be up in arms, outraged, and attacking the keyboards over.

But, sadly . . . At the moment both Mundine’s appeal and also the real, multi-dimensional, and untapped, story it actually presents appears to be as lonely and abandonded as both the MayPac and FloydClinch round by round count that was forever talked about, but never quite eventuated. And, as if all the above doesn’t constitute strangely ignored boxing-tabloid fodder and/or overlooked concerns, enough . . . Perhaps more telling and (negatively) entertaining is Danny Green’s response to Anthony’s appeal (and all the serious, clearly obvious, and well referenced problems, that it details). It’s both a curious and interesting response for many reasons. Including how it suggests that Green feels Mundine’s tabled appeal-concerns have (despite their prima facie strength and legitimacy) such little basis that they deserve to be ignored - possibly even treated, say, just as he might have (successfully) expected the catchweight matter related to the actual Green V2 Mundine fight would be. Yes, perhaps Green’s response - along with going some way to explain why Green himself is quick to dismiss Mundine’s appeal - provides us with a suitable insight into the entire matter; which surely now must also include the “white elephant in the room” consideration (itself overlooked by many in the lead up to the fight in question) that Green appears himself to not exactly be without a irregular and/or suspicious history. Especially when it comes to matchmaking, explanations, and/or other matters pertaining to his fight outcomes. When asked about Anthony’s above-mentioned appeal, Danny Green said . . .


"“All it is is an appeal - it doesn’t mean anything is going to happen. I expect nothing less from such a poor sport.”"

Hmmmm . . . . . The contempt for Green shows for the industry and his own fan’s intelligence with comments like these, is almost palpable. It takes a “special” person to ignore/disregard all the points contained within Mundine’s appeal; particularly those in relation to the scoring. Looks like Danny is hoping everyone will simply continue to treat the real and concerning issues Mundine has raised - just as Green himself has.

And just as many;


A) Currently are now.
B) Did in the lead up to both the Mundine V1 Green and the Mundine V2 Green fights, despite all the warning signs that loudly screamed and brightly flashed back then.



Which surely is best described as . . . . Looking the other way and turning a blind eye. So, in this respect it appears that nothing changes and that it’s business as usual. And, just as this is not the first time;


A) Green has been involved in a controversial fight/outcomes.


-
- Green V Stipe Drews.

Actionless/predictable transaction where the main parties wore boxing gloves and called it a world title. Some very well known/respected identities within boxing accurately labeled Drews as the worst champion they had ever seen; and it is hard to argue with that as the fight was simply disgraceful even if it were not a world title bout.


-
- Green V1 Markus Beyer.

Green’s extremely questionable actions/denials in relation to Green blatantly headbutting Beyer during the fight and just as he started to noticeably lose, which ultimately then brought about the fight’s disqualification; possibly served as an early indicator/warning as to how future fights would be managed and made.


-
- Green V Paul Briggs.

Briggs (once a formidable fighter) was known to all in the industry at the time to be washed up, physically/psychologically unfit to fight, and also desperate for income. By the time this fight took place Green’s approach to matchmaking/fighting was becoming reasonably well known and as such (despite Green’s attempts to cast blame on Briggs for taking a dive) many within Australia’s boxing fraternity knew the truth and supported Johnny Lewis when he claimed . . .

""Danny wanted a sausage (as an opponent) and that's what he got”. "




-
Green V Manny Siaca.

By the time Green got to Siaca he was washed up, fighting tomato cans, and had (even before Green fought/beat both, Drews and Siaca) already lost quite easily to a guy that Drews had beaten; Silvio Banco. The risk and action was incredibly low for a world title fight, and as such this fight too (like the Drews fight) stunk a little as it took on the appearance of a predictable transaction where the main parties wore boxing gloves and attempted to legitimize it by calling it a (IBO) world title.


-
Green V2 Mundine.

Please see above.




B) The true reasons behind the aforementioned and controversial Green fight/outcome(s) have not always been properly acknowledged, examined, scrutinized, and reported on.

So, too, corruption (in boxing) often thrives when good people (particularly those that initially bought into the legitamcy of the fight and/or are in positions that can bring light to and/or change matters) do and say absolutely nothing. Cheers,
Storm :) :) :)


-stormcentre :

Sadly, I am not surprised at how unsurprised I am at the seemingly widespread lack of interest in the real story and/or lack of substance behind/associated with this fight and in particular how the result was achieved. Not in the least, as far lesser and less tangible injustices have received far more attention previously. Whilst it is always easy to get excited about and report on the promotional aspects of a fight and its results . . . . It never ceases to amaze how often the underlying (and sometimes more interesting) story is often allowed to go by the wayside. Particularly if it suggests that greater scrutiny should perhaps have been applied when all the glossy fight-promotion-reports were initially released and then quickly accepted, facsimiled, and/or re-published.

If one looks at the scale of concerns within Anthony Mundine?s appeal (linked within the above post #8) - and, of course, provided one was motivated to do so in an evenhanded manner - it?s then quite easy for any boxing scribe and/or reliable forum member/poster to;


-
Formulate a unique and referenced story about the concerns that is at least as interesting/reliable as those aforementioned publications that supported the original promotion.
-
See that many of Mundine?s appeal related concerns are actually quite real and factual, and supported by what appears to be - if not indisputable, then - strong evidence.
-
See that something extremely wrong - that is something that is the exact antithesis of almost all the initial pre/post Green V2 Mundine fight reports that were published about this fight - has taken place during the Danny Green V2 Anthony Mundine fight.
-
See, that, perhaps even before the fight started, the writing about the Green V2 Mundine fight was both, on the wall and also ignored.

This above/last consideration seems to be supported by;


A) Not only, Green?s below-mentioned and previous involvement in - if not predetermined, then certainly - controversial fight/outcomes.
B) But also, a fight where the fact that a (traditional) cruiserweight boxer (in Green) elected to avenge what was really a well deserved and previous loss (that itself - even after all these years - still constitutes {like the recent Green V2 Mundine fight} yet another example of how some fighters/fights are successively, deliberately, and/or otherwise poorly scrutinized) in a fight where his opponent was now a (traditional) light middleweight boxer.







Yet, strangely (along with Mundine?s appeal) none of these related points currently appear to be getting ?mined? and/or utilized out of Australia for their worth and what they are. Which surely is; useful and highly exploitable boxing-writing material that (aside from potentially revealing an author?s principles as they pertain to originality and reliability) provides a unique insight into how the dark and other sides of boxing sometimes works; in the ring, out of the ring, whilst in front of the keyboard, and also at the (virtual) publishing ?office?. For what it?s worth I personally think that the lack of interest in these matters allows such problems within boxing to flourish, propagate, and fester. Not in the least as;


A) The matters Anthony Mundine raises within his appeal possess and/or highlight a potentially negative bearing/aspect on the sport that, if we?re being honest, appears to be far greater in sensationalistic/other magnitude than, say, even how ?great? and ?magnificent? the initial (but questionable) glossy Green V Mundine promotional material purported to be; which itself was the same stuff that led and motivated some to immediately jump upon the Green V2 Mundine promotional dais without questioning - to wave the promotional banner.
B) It sends the wrong message.

That is, unless one openly supports and subscribes to the questionable/skewed philosophy of . . .

" ?Yes, we will report on potential miscarriages of boxing/other related justices - but only if doing so doesn?t expose how our initial perception, trust, and reporting of the matter may have been left wanting?".





As such (and I think this stands even if we discount {which, mind you, is a discount that?s quite unnecessarily generous to the matter in hand} all the fanfare that accompanied the initial wave of Green V2 Mundine promotional releases and scripted/copied fight reports - that were themselves effectively scattered around the globe at various unscrutinizing and other media/boxing outlets) I would have thought that these important appeal related matters (that potentially reveal how the sport can be manipulated) deserved, at least, some ?thread/air time?. If for no other reason, they deserved some ?thread/air time? so that the potential injustices and other related matters could be suitably exposed and/or treated for what they are. Exposed and/or treated for what they are, say, perhaps, in the same way that Hauser ?uncovered? all that misplaced trust we all supposedly had in USADA; post Mayweather V Pacquaio.


->http://www.sbnation.com/longform/2015/9/9/9271811/can-boxing-trust-usada

Yet, in reality . . . .

And, this is despite how the Green V2 Mundine result-appeal matter itself represents and contains some extremely real, tangible, and provable, concerns/indiscretions . . .

The fact of the matter is that there appears to be no boxing scribe outside of Australia that?s willing to run with it in a meaningful way - let alone one that takes on the same kind of enthusiasm that some of the/their original articles exhibited. It?s interesting because I would have thought that;

At least the same ?thread/air time?, that was given to, say, the initial (in *house released) Green V2 Mundine fight promotional material that, both;


A) Some boxing scribes worked from; without applying too much scrutiny.
B) In effect, misled the public.

Would have been lent to this matter.

However, it appears not. Instead, it appears that the real story on just how concerning and easily manipulated boxing can be is (well, at least in this Mundine-appeal instance) going to be left to drift off into the darkness. Treating the matter in this (quiet) manner is both disappointing and also an injustice to boxing. The reason being is that doing so ensures that other/future circumstances like this will certainly repeat themselves and come back again to haunt us; perhaps not as a Green V Mundine orchestration - but almost certainly in the form of another bout.

In fact, after one reads this entire post (and all the references and links I refer to; including those contained within the above post #8) I dare/challenge anyone to present a reasonable argument that opposes the view that, the reason we have the debacle that now is the (ignored) Mundine-appeal points/matter . . . . . Is, at least in part, due to the fact that the origin, history, and concerns around Green V1 Mundine - along with other the other curiosities associated with some of Green?s other previous fights - were themselves simply left to drift like ignored ?floaters? down the canal - possibly because in the dangerous act of examining these ?floaters? and their inherent complexity and curiosness (if it were to ever happen) one might also discover the part oneself played in;


A) Being easily marketed to.
B) Any associated bias.
C) Manipulating public opinion in a questionable manner.

You see (when it comes to ensuring a boxing scam, fix, and/or other questionable boxing related intention, is not heavily scrutinized and/or reported upon after the fact and/or when more material, information, and facts pertaining to it may become later available) the recipe is as relatively well known to (some) promotional entities - as it is both, simple and reasonably reliable. And, it goes a little like this . . . .

Provided the fight is promoted in such a way where those that write/report about it and can expose the concerns;


A) Only have access to ~pre-manufactured, ~questionable, and sometimes ~bias/hate-driven material.
B) Have ?bought in? enough on the ~above-mentioned material beforehand . . . . . Such that self preservation can be relied upon by both those disseminating the ~questionable information and also others to ensure
(i) that the true extent of the questionable conduct,
(ii) just how much the cards are really stacked on one person?s favor, and
(iii) in general the overall wrongdoing in relation to the fight . . . . is never truly exposed by those whom have the scribing and/or keyboard power to do so.



The result is that, usually, very few will take the time to go back and write about the fight?s injustices and in doing so both, conflict with their?s/others initial reports and take the chance of implicitly revealing how easily they may have been utilized for promotional purposes and/or misled; which, in turn, almost always ensures that the above-mentioned scams and wrongdoings remain in a state where they have far less publication interests cast upon them than they should. Certainly far less publication interest than the same information that was originally disseminated by promotional/other interests and subsequently utilized in an unscrutinised manner. And, this is how some fighters, managers, and promoters, get a free pass at the expense of boxing?s reputation.

Some may think that view is a little harsh and I accept that. However, even aside from the fact that to counter that view is to effectively suggest that you?re able to meangfully respond to the points raised . . . . Please also recall that the supposed ?cheap shot? Mayweather unloaded onto Victor Ortiz some years back (even taking into account the popularity difference between the bouts in question) received far more ?thread/air time? than the "entire" spectrum of appealable Green V2 Mundine matters that are mentioned within Anthony Mundine?s appeal.

An appeal that;


A) Appears to (along with the vast array of other concerning guidline breaches and claims that the Mayweather V Ortiz bout itself was not ever involved/associated with) include yet another so called ?cheap shot? and/or ?sucker punch? - that (like the Mayweather V Ortiz bout) to some extent potentially comes down to ?poor officiating? and/or a ?referee? and/or an ?questionable incident?,where;


a1) In the case of ?referee?; he - once again - simply doesn?t know how to follow the rules when breaking fighters up and/or stopping them.
a2) In the case of ?questionable incident? and ?poor officiating?; whilst the so called ?cheap shot? that was authored by Mundine and occurred in round 1 of the Green V2 Mundine fight is not too disimiliar to that incident which occurred within the Mayweather V Ortiz bout - the fact of the matter is that Mundine?s so called ?cheap shot? and how (his appeal details) it was mismanaged and poorly officiated, only constitutes but one of tens of concerns that Mundine explicitly details within his entire appeal.
a3) In the case of ?questionable incident?, ?referee?, and also ?poor officiating?; "
like" how Victor Ortiz? claims pertaining to the so called ?sucker punch? that Floyd subjected him to resulted in widespread misinterpretation and misunderstanding across the globe about whom was right/wrong and how the rules applied in those circumstances. So too, has the same occurred (to a proportionally lesser extent) within the context of Mundine?s so called ?cheap shot? that occurred within round 1 of the Green V2 Mundine fight.
a4) In the case of ?questionable incident?, ?referee?, and also ?poor officiating?; "
unlike" how Victor Ortiz? claims pertaining to the so called ?sucker punch? that Floyd subjected him to in their fight caused widespread uproar and and an almost total boxing-scribe-interest across the globe about all the resulting misinterpretation/misunderstanding, whom was right/wrong, and how the rules applied in those circumstances . . . . .

Insofar as Mundine?s;


-
So called ?cheap shot? that occurred within round 1 of the Green V2 Mundine fight and how (his appeal quite accurately details) it was mismanaged and poorly officiated.
-
Overall appeal-points tally; that itself effectively renders the so called ?cheap shot? matter (a matter that is very similar to that above-mentioned which Victor Ortiz and Mayweather themselves courted widespread boxing writer interest over) as but one of about 50 concerns that Mundine explicitly details within his entire appeal.

For some reason - and this is despite the proportionally similar interest in and also the rush to label both Floyd?s and Anthony?s punches as ?cheap shots? and/or ?sucker punches? and reporting on them as such - currently there appears to be very little follow-up story written about the facts of the matter and in particular the appeal related to Anthony?s incident; especially now that it has become reasonably clear that Mundine may have not executed a cheap shot after all, and that the referee himself (along with the questionable reporting) may be to blame.




B) Perhaps, implicitly and unintentionally, also goes some way to explaining the slight (but nonetheless contagious) oversights to adequately scrutinize Green V2 Mundine material and the fight itself. Oversights that were themselves possibly also accompanied by what might also be phrased as a curiously gullible hastiness to accept the *aforementioned prewritten Green V2 Mundine fight scripts on face value and publish them in goodwill. Regardless of the true story behind Mundine V1 Green which both, occurred more than 10 years ago and appears reasonably well captured within one of the links contained within the above post #8.



Think about it. How can all the superficial, promotional, and genuine, fanfare/energy that was seemingly associated with both, the Green V2 Mundine fight and also all the publications that were associated with it that we were simply awash in, now, all of a sudden (now that the above Mundine-appeal, *considerations, and other points have been raised) somehow be so totally absent and/or exhausted that there is absolutely no interest in what is happening to Mr. Mundine and the fraudulent circumstances that may have been associated with the heavily promoted and highly charged/hyped Green V2 Mundine fight? Where has all that energy, interest, and fanfare gone? Particularly now that the real story is off the leash, out, and orphaned? Perhaps the answer lies in how the Green V2 Mundine promoters and their army of loyalist, fawning, and un-scrutinizing media/other scribes are simply not prepared to ask what's happening - let alone do their own research and release reliable reports about the matters in hand; which in turn possibly means that others - particularly those outside of Australia - have no scripts to follow or tailcoats to ride. Ahh . . . . It?s always handy to have a good sense of humour with these things. I mean you have to be able to laugh. Like there were no (ignored) warning signs to this debacle. But, of course warning signs really and meaningfully only exist if you want to see them, don?t they? I mean, with the Green V2 Mundine fight, here we had a boxing contest that involved someone (Danny Green) whom is typically a cruiserweight fighter that was looking to do anything he can to avenge an embarrassing loss that he pretty much brought upon himself and publicly begged for. With Green, here we had a cruiserweight fighter whom decides that;


A) In order to avenge a previous, embarrassing, and (some say) thoroughly well-deserved loss (to Mundine); revenge will be accomplished by fighting Anthony a second time. However, this time the fight will be engineered such so that it takes place when Mundine is older, slower, and also at a weight where he is almost certain to be much smaller/lighter than Green; say like when Anthony is both, 13 years older than when he first fought Green and when he?s (typically campaigning four divisions lower than Green as) a light middleweight.
B) Provided the public?s hatred of Mundine (itself a social emotion that, whilst being largely fuelled by Green for the last 15 years or so, is often misplaced and also highly questionable) is reignited and/or stirred up - whilst simultaneously other misdirections are thrown into the promotional fire; the large majority of Australian and other boxing fans and writers will probably overlook the huge ?approach with caution? neon sign that is hanging over the fight for various reasons; some of which include the fact that Green is typically a cruiserweight and Mundine is typically a light middleweight.

A good question may be; who meaningfully raised any alarms about this and what it normally means for a fight and it?s outcome? The answer probably is; very few boxing scribes. And the reasons why, are most likely given herein, above, and also below. Yes, folks - believe it or not - despite all the boxing mishaps and controversies that have occurred during the last 5 years, and despite the aforementioned huge ?approach with caution? sign that was hanging over the Green V2 mundine fight . . . . . . Predictably, all that was required to set the boxing world and all its scrutinizing experts at ease about the above weight disparity and any concerns pertaining to Green V2 Mundine was Danny Green?s assertion, which went something like this . . .


"?Don?t worry peeps, come fight night there won?t be much (weight discrepancy) between us?"

And, what could possibly go wrong when the entire fight and promotion was underpinned with the above-mentioned approach, intentions, interests, and assertions, from someone as implicated and reliable as Green; you may ask? And just like that, we were then awash with what were effectively Green V2 Mundine promotional articles and claims. With not an editorial magnifying glass, scrutinizing question, or fine enquiring mind, to be seen, heard - or even imagined. And, perhaps for some that?s a reasonable approach. After all, aside from those mentioned within Mundine?s appeal that have already been largely ignored; what possible advantage could a cruiserweight (Green) gain by fighting a guy (Mundine) whom;


A) Typically fights as a light middleweight fighter.
B) In order to make the fight happen, must drastically come up in weight (to what is his maximum/slowest weight possible) and then also face the prospect of fighting a hard punching cruiserweight (Green) whom - come fight night and despite Danny?s assurances otherwise - was always going to be significantly heavier than the agreed catchweight.

I mean, it?s not as if such a contractual approach to the fight, itself;


A) Formed a warning sign.
B) Was envisaged to ensure Green possessed both a strength and size advantage.

Is it? Remarkably, these warning-siren like components that were associated with the aforementioned flashing neon ?approach with caution? sign - that itself cast an ominous shadow over the Green V2 Mundine fight/promotion reminiscent of thunderclouds over a picturesque rural setting - were still largely ignored and pushed aside. And, the warnings were all pushed aside and ignored for several main reasons, including . . . . . The unrestrained preference that was shown for what was no doubt easy access to prefabricated promotional Green V2 Mundine material. Material that (perhaps just as much as it had obviously been manufactured by those familiar with the distinctive combination of skills and dark artistry normally associated with amalgamating activities such as propaganda and promotion) had also undoubtedly been the subject of considerable proactive planning/marketing; as evidenced by the fact that almost all the distributed information Green Machine Promotions (GMP) released to its unsuspecting targets appeared to be just as ready made, pre-fabricated, and designed for an intended purpose - as the stories it ultimately gave rise to became themselves misdirected, skewed, biased, and fodder for this post. In fact, had the above-mentioned GMP promotional material not been so predictably effective at the task it set out to do (which clearly was ensure the majority of boxing outlets/writers adopted a bias position on the Green V2 Mundine fight and advertised it as if it were original and sanctimonious) one could then perhaps feel comfortable saying that the aforementioned prefabricated promotional Green V2 Mundine material - which was relied upon by the majority of boxing outlets/writers - was deliberately insultive the majority of boxing outlets/writer?s intelligence. Not in the least, as the promotionally released Green V2 Mundine material clearly (and successfully) assumed that most of its targets would accept the information without scrutiny due to its pre-fabricated state, and therefore how easy it appeared to be able to be quickly massaged into what could later be redistributed/sold as unique boxing-news scoops. Yes, despite all the suspicious activities that are known to go down in this sport and despite all those that matters within it that are also concerning and written about, and despite all the below/above-mentioned Green V2 Mundine warning signs; somehow with it all Green V2 Mundine was (then before the fight, and still now after the fight {just as was the case with Green V1 Mundine}) largely given a free pass by the entire boxing press. And in itself that is probably as remarkable as it is symbolically representative of a failure to learn from the same mistakes that it appears to willingly facilitate and represent. Not in the least, because (even if we push aside and turn a blind eye to the fact that Green - whom, initially, more than 10 years ago, quite literally stalked/trolled Mundine?s fights - built his reputation off of bagging Anthony - constantly begged and publicly pleaded {both, with and without the help of broadcasters} for Mundine to fight him - then precipitously/openly and questionably claimed that Anthony was too scared to fight - only to then, in the end, simply get thoroughly outclassed, embarrassed, and flogged for all his questionable actions/efforts in what was then labeled as Australia?s biggest fight; Mundine V1 Green) it?s hard to imagine a promotional boxing match of recent years that;


-
Has more warnings, advantages, and concerns, associated with it; than Green V2 Mundine.
-
Has such a comprehensive, well detailed, and easy to understand/quantify appeal associated with it; than Green V2 Mundine.
-
Involves fighters that, particularly Green, appear to have an historical involvement with curious matchmaking and fight results/circumstances; as much as Green V2 Mundine.

Which all points to the fact that - if we?re not playing silly buggers - it?s hard to imagine a promotional boxing match of recent years that?s more worthy of webpage real estate and attention than the true story behind the Green V2 Mundine fight. Which - for those whom enjoy being in receipt of and/or working from pre-prepared boxing material - appears to be already detailed above and also within Mundine?s appeal?


->https://dailytelegraphatnewscorpau.files.wordpress.com/2017/02/mundine-appeal.pdf

So, the sixty four thousand dollar question is then surely . . . .

"?Why is this matter and Mundine?s appeal not getting sufficient air/thread time?? ?Not even from those whom assisted the promotion and saw an interest in it back then.?"

It?s worth some thoughts folks, fans, spectators, and boxing experts. I mean . . . . How (particularly when many lesser poor decisions and lesser boxing tragedies before it have received more attention) could such a potential travesty of Australian boxing justice (particularly after the fight itself has been so energetically promoted by all) simply be allowed to pass under the bridge without any meaningful scrutiny as it floats down the canals of boxing?s sewer; without anyone so much as even affording it (pound for pound and/or proportionally) the same fanfare, excitment, and attention as, say;


-
The initial Green V2 Mundine fight/material.
-
The real/imagined wrongdoings associated with MayPac.
-
The real/imagined wrongdoings associated with Hauser?s ?Can We Trust USADA? piece.
-
The real/imagined wrongdoings associated with Mayweather V Ortiz.

Could the answer be somewhere within the below and/or above *content of this post? Could it be found in how (some of) those whom may be reluctant to report on the real issues are the same that were also quick to initially jump on board the Green V2 Mundine bandwagon? After all, let?s not forget . . . In the case of Mundine?s appeal (unlike most of the above-mentioned and similarly related MayPac/Hauser and other matters that caused many to attack the keyboard, publish stories, fantasize, and/or raise their arms/eyebrows in outrage and concern) here we have a detailed list of legitimate and easy to understand concerns that are all neatly compiled by a lawyer whom does not work for any promotional or boxing writing entity. Additionally, some of the concerns Mundine?s appeal details explicitly describe (with proof) fight-outcome altering matters that appear to be clearly in breach of the relevant/accepted guidelines (eg; scoring). Furthermore, some of Mundine?s appeal concerns ask reasonable (fight-outcome altering) questions such as;


A) How can a round be scored 10-10 for both fighters within a 10 point must system and also when one fighter (the cruiserweight; whom already had his share of advantages going into the fight) has been deducted a point for elbowing the other (the light middleweight)?
B) How can what has been labeled as a ?cheap shot? by Mundine really/legitimately be a foul and worthy of the 1 point deduction it received by the referee - when the referee didn?t;


b1) Bring the action to a stop (before Mundine threw the punch); as per the guidelines.
b2) Subsequently (after the punch) officiate the matter and/or tend to the claimed fouled fighter properly; as per the guidelines.


C) How can the result of the Green V2 Mundine fight be considered to be fair, reasonable, and legitimate, when the fight?s scorecards;


c1) Tallies themselves were obviously erroneous/questionable; in conflict with the relevant guidelines.
c2) Were not signed by the appropriate authority; in conflict with the relevant guidelines.
c3) Were publicly released - including to the media (whereby they then {like the aforementioned GMP material that many simply swallowed up without questioning} became instantly published) - "before" both, the scoredards were signed by the appropriate authority and/or even witnessed/announced by the referee; in conflict with the relevant guidelines.



In fact (provided one was prepared to donate 1/100th of the time it took to eagerly assist with the unscrutinized promotion of Green V2 Mundine) an argument could quite possibly be mounted to assert that the entire spectrum of Mundine?s appeal covers, if not more, then certainly an equivalent amount of concerns/questions, than;


A) Even just those detailed within the directly above points ?A?, ?B?, and ?C?.
B) Some of those issues that have previously presented great cause for this and/or other boxing websites and forums to be up in arms, outraged, and attacking the keyboards over.

But, sadly . . . At the moment both Mundine?s appeal and also the real, multi-dimensional, and untapped, story it actually presents appears to be as lonely and abandonded as both the MayPac and FloydClinch round by round count that was forever talked about, but never quite eventuated. And, as if all the above doesn?t constitute strangely ignored boxing-tabloid fodder and/or overlooked concerns, enough . . . Perhaps more telling and (negatively) entertaining is Danny Green?s response to Anthony?s appeal (and all the serious, clearly obvious, and well referenced problems, that it details). It?s both a curious and interesting response for many reasons. Including how it suggests that Green feels Mundine?s tabled appeal-concerns have (despite their prima facie strength and legitimacy) such little basis that they deserve to be ignored - possibly even treated, say, just as he might have (successfully) expected the catchweight matter related to the actual Green V2 Mundine fight would be. Yes, perhaps Green?s response - along with going some way to explain why Green himself is quick to dismiss Mundine?s appeal - provides us with a suitable insight into the entire matter; which surely now must also include the ?white elephant in the room? consideration (itself overlooked by many in the lead up to the fight in question) that Green appears himself to not exactly be without a irregular and/or suspicious history. Especially when it comes to matchmaking, explanations, and/or other matters pertaining to his fight outcomes. When asked about Anthony?s above-mentioned appeal, Danny Green said . . .


"?All it is is an appeal - it doesn?t mean anything is going to happen. I expect nothing less from such a poor sport.?"

Hmmmm . . . . . The contempt Green shows for the industry and his own fan?s intelligence with comments like these, is almost palpable. It takes a ?special? person to ignore/disregard all the points contained within Mundine?s appeal; particularly those in relation to the scoring. Looks like Danny is hoping everyone will simply continue to treat the real and concerning issues Mundine has raised - just as Green himself has.

And just as many;


A) Currently are now.
B) Did in the lead up to both the Mundine V1 Green and the Mundine V2 Green fights, despite all the warning signs that loudly screamed and brightly flashed back then.



Which surely is best described as . . . . Looking the other way and turning a blind eye. So, in this respect it appears that nothing changes and that it?s business as usual. And, just as this is not the first time;


A) Green has been involved in a controversial fight/outcomes.


-
Green V Stipe Drews.

Actionless/predictable transaction where the main parties wore boxing gloves and called it a world title. Some very well known/respected identities within boxing accurately labeled Drews as the worst champion they had ever seen; and it is hard to argue with that as the fight was simply disgraceful even if it were not a world title bout.


-
Green V1 Markus Beyer.

Green?s extremely questionable actions/denials in relation to Green blatantly headbutting Beyer during the fight and just as he started to noticeably lose, which ultimately then brought about the fight?s disqualification; possibly served as an early indicator/warning as to how future fights would be managed and made.


-
Green V Paul Briggs.

Briggs (once a formidable fighter) was known to all in the industry at the time to be washed up, physically/psychologically unfit to fight, and also desperate for income. By the time this fight took place Green?s approach to matchmaking/fighting was becoming reasonably well known and as such (despite Green?s attempts to cast blame on Briggs for taking a dive) many within Australia?s boxing fraternity knew the truth and supported Johnny Lewis when he claimed . . .

""Danny wanted a sausage (as an opponent) and that's what he got?. "




-
Green V Manny Siaca.

By the time Green got to Siaca he was washed up, fighting tomato cans, and had (even before Green fought/beat both, Drews and Siaca) already lost quite easily to a guy that Drews had beaten; Silvio Banco. The risk and action was incredibly low for a world title fight, and as such this fight too (like the Drews fight) stunk a little as it took on the appearance of a predictable transaction where the main parties wore boxing gloves and attempted to legitimize it by calling it a (IBO) world title.


-
Green V2 Mundine.

Please see above.




B) The true reasons behind the aforementioned and controversial Green fight/outcome(s) have not always been properly acknowledged, examined, scrutinized, and reported on.

So, too, corruption (in boxing) often thrives when good people (particularly those that initially bought into the legitamcy of the fight and/or are in positions that can bring light to and/or change matters) do and say absolutely nothing. Cheers,
Storm :) :) :)


-SuperLight :

It's taken me a while - because it's a while since I've had both a non-mobile device and some free time to post. It seems the eternal, all-seeing eye of the storm has done it again. I haven't watched the "part II" but now am tempted to do so. If the fight was indeed a case of corruption and/or robbery, as you and others have stated or implied, then it will be well worth a look, despite my and others' misgivings about its being a gimmick/stunt rather than a genuinely exciting bout. It's interesting to compare and contrast the reaction to this fight's result with that to one such as Ward-Kovalev. In the latter case, the various "feeds" were abuzz with cries of robbery, and the usual myth about taking the belt from the champ. This after a fight that was pretty close in the final analysis, without again going into the details. Granted, where Mundine and Green are in age and career trajectory is rather different from Krusher and the "SOG", but nonetheless they are fighters who have at some stage held a form of world title, and fought at an international level over the years. I'd have expected more buzz and outcry in the aftermath. By his own doing, and aided by Green/Fenech and co's apparently concerted goading/smearing over the years, Mundine has long been known as the "negro ya love to hate" (as Ice Cube might put it). I'm among those annoyed at some of his comments regarding race, gender, and politics. Further, his sometime Americanisms and the Ali influence on his sleeve can be off-putting. I dare say most of us think a braggart had better back it up with some exceptional skills. My gut feeling, though, is that Mundine is a guy without a filter or a "spin" mode. It seems he's honestly speaking his mind most of the time and he has my respect for that. He also took it on himself to be a spokesperson for his people, in his rugby league days citing perceived racism in selection, and in various instances thereafter. He might be far from a professional politician or activist, and say some cringe-worthy things along the way, but one can say he's stood for something. Green vs Paul Briggs, was it? Rather suspicious. I've yet not watched him fight anyone but Mundine so can't comment further on the quality of his skills and opposition. What I saw in the first outing between these guys (and I recently watched it again) was Green pawing a lot of air and eating a lot of jabs. He was pressing forward for most of the bout, but the aggression was hardly effective. The biggest compliment I could give is that the had a solid chin or hard head, call it what you will. Conversely it was Mundine who ate a few of those power shots and kept coming back to fight a patient and relatively efficient fight. He wasn't exactly dancing in there, but he fought to his strengths, and all credit to him for doing the basics really well against a guy who was supposed to be out to knock his block off. I can't see why the rematch, all these years later, should go much differently. To the weight game issue, I don't think it's a fair argument because Mundine and his camp should have been well aware of the situation way ahead of fight night. Yes, it was probably stacked for Green, but also probably no surprise. Please correct me if I'm missing something there.


-stormcentre :

Hey SL . . . How?s things? Fair post (on your part). . . Well, I could take issue with a few points (you know me  ) you raised - but I appreciate;


A) It?s your considered opinion.
B) How polarising both guys - particularly Mundine - can (seem to) be.

Mostly, the post and/or expos?e was about how incredibly predictable/poor the bout and it?s officiating was and whether that was something some overlooked both before and after the bout. Cheers,
Storm. :) :) :)


-stormcentre :

Hey SL . . . How?s things? Fair post (on your part). . . Well, I could take issue with a few points (you know me :) ) you raised - but I appreciate;


A) It?s your considered opinion.
B) How polarising both guys - particularly Mundine - can (seem to) be.

Mostly, the post and/or expos?e was about how incredibly predictable/poor the bout and it?s officiating was and whether that was something some overlooked both before and after the bout. Cheers,
Storm. :) :) :)


-SuperLight :

Hey SL . . . How’s things? Fair post (on your part). . . Well, I could take issue with a few points (you know me :) ) you raised - but I appreciate;


A) It’s your considered opinion.
B) How polarising both guys - particularly Mundine - can (seem to) be.

Mostly, the post and/or expos’e was about how incredibly predictable/poor the bout and it’s officiating was and whether that was something some overlooked both before and after the bout. Cheers,
Storm. :) :) :)
I kept getting errors when trying to post. Let's try again. Thanks for asking, all is well here. The kids are OK, business developing, and weather just mild enough to ride in leathers. I always attempt a considered opinion. Wouldn't mind knowing where you take issue - I can hack it =) Hope all's well with you.


-SuperLight :

Hey SL . . . How?s things? Fair post (on your part). . . Well, I could take issue with a few points (you know me :) ) you raised - but I appreciate;


A) It?s your considered opinion.
B) How polarising both guys - particularly Mundine - can (seem to) be.

Mostly, the post and/or expos?e was about how incredibly predictable/poor the bout and it?s officiating was and whether that was something some overlooked both before and after the bout. Cheers,
Storm. :) :) :)
I kept getting errors when trying to post. Let's try again. Thanks for asking, all is well here. The kids are OK, business developing, and weather just mild enough to ride in leathers. I always attempt a considered opinion. Wouldn't mind knowing where you take issue - I can hack it =) Hope all's well with you.


-ForumAdmin :

[video=youtube;-8ABNufB8CE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-8ABNufB8CE[/video]


-SuperLight :

Australia's finest right there!


-SuperLight :

Australia's finest right there!


-stormcentre :

I kept getting errors when trying to post. Let's try again. Thanks for asking, all is well here. The kids are OK, business developing, and weather just mild enough to ride in leathers. I always attempt a considered opinion. Wouldn't mind knowing where you take issue - I can hack it =) Hope all's well with you.
Hey SL, I'm doing alright and thanks for the belated post. I can't remember now precisely what I would have taken you to task on with respect to your earlier post - or even if I intended to. I do think Mundine is easily misinterpreted and often misrepresented, but I am not sure that was it. I agree Anthony knew about the weight difference between him and Green. But that doesn?t remove it and the advantage it represents; from what has been an incredibly persistent and curious *pattern amongst almost all of Green?s (shall we say more ?memorable?) fights. Chock would have known (or at least thought) he could have beaten Green with the weight dis/advantage Green pitched for their last fight (rightly so, too); and Green would have known this too. However, if you look at the Green V2 Mundine fight objectively you can see that the promotional and other hype around it (and particularly Green; that many bought into) was (again) nowhere near what the hype suggested it should have been. Nowhere near it. Given Anthony (whilst in the latter stages of his career) scaled a greater weight disparity than Brook probably did with Triple, and given that Green (in his prime) could have probably hit Triple hard enough to drop him and/or for Gennady to not want more; (again) not enough credit was given to what Chock positively did in Green V2 Mundine . And, whilst at the same time as all that was ignored . . . . Many (including those whom jumped on the Danny Green hype-laden bandwagon also) looked the other way at all the negativities Green himself authored; and, perhaps they did so for the reasons I mentioned in post #9 of this thread. If nothing else it was an interesting exercise on social psychology and the boxing fraternity?s unique mix of intelligence and gullibility.

There are very few Danny Green fights where his approach to contract, matchmaking, and/or explaining what unfolds in the actual promotion and ?contest?, does not bring one to a state of mild shock; where others would notice how your eyebrows were raised and/or jaw dropped. Green's Sydney Olympic draw was the stuff of lotteries as he practically escaped all the dangerous opponents and fought (at best/most) a couple of relatively easy fights, and then went straight into the finals with Lebsiak. In itself, having an easy Olympic draw is not necessarily a bad thing and/or something to ridicule someone over. But from then on it changed and that?s where both, the stink started to set in and Green seemed to automatically realize that there was money to be made from both, exploiting Mundine?s repuatation and also using redneck sophisms to explain his/Green?s own Olympic/other shortfalls. And that was where it all started to get smelly . . . From the initially skewed reporting of Alexander Lebsiak?s absolute destruction of Green within the Sydney 2000 Olympic finals (that involved Lebsiak arrogantly stopping Green) and all the excuses that followed - right through to (even more than) what?s briefly detailed here . . .


->http://www.thesweetscience.com/forums/showthread.php?272167843-Danny-Green-Upends-Anthony-Mundine-in-their-?Senior-Circuit?-Megafight&p=109663&viewfull=1#post109663 Including the closing stages of that post.

And then fast forward to today . . . . To the amount of tangible/credible (and largely ignored) appeal points mentioned within Mundine?s appeal (also linked and mentioned) in the above-mentioned and linked post, tells you all you need to know about Green, the above-mentioned *pattern, and his last fight with Anthony.

Anyway apologies for the delay in responding; as I have been out of the country for a few weeks. In any regards I see as soon as I leave for even a week, I see the place simply slides downhill with wild and/or interesting predictions for Garcia, Paulie and Dawson !!!! From that I can only deduce that it appears that some forecasters, fans, and folks have not been watching their daily diet and/or, glacial milk, watermelon seed, and circulation enhancing cinnamon, intake. :) Tsk, tsk. Anyway, glad to hear your doing OK SL. Cheers,
Storm. :) :)


-stormcentre :

Australia's finest right there!
:)


-stormcentre :

Australia's finest right there!
:)