Malik Scott’s promoter Dan Goossen has opened up to WBN on his fighter’s recent controversial stoppage defeat to Dereck Chisora as the debate rages on as to whether Phil Edwards was right to call a halt on Saturday night.
Edwards began his count near five in line with the automatic ringside count after Scott was dropped by a scuffing right hand by Chisora and all seemed normal until around the eight mark.
Surprisingly Scott failed to rise to his feet on eight, even though his head looked clear, and took an extra second to do so once Edwards had clearly stated to the American that his count was at nine.
Now here is where the controversy comes in as Edwards immediately waved off the fight upon reaching nine as Scott leaped to his feet to get back into the fight that he was already leading on the scorecards.
Goossen believes that it was certainly a premature ending to the contest, which I agree with, as Scott looked more than capable of defending himself. No one can fault ‘The King’ for taking that extra second to rise to his feet, but ultimately the fight should have been allowed to continue.
“It comes down to a simple determination when a fighter is knocked down,” Goossen exclusively told World Boxing News.
“This means he is knocked off his feet with other parts of his body on the canvas. Is it a KO when the referee counts to 9 and the fighter has only his feet on the canvas at the count of nine, or does the referee have to count to ten (or not waive the fight off until a full 10 seconds had elapsed) while the fighter has more than just his feet on the canvas?
“In our mind, there was no doubt that the count did not reach ten before Malik getting up.
“The referee reached nine, and simultaneously Malik stood up. The bottom line, he was up at the count of nine.
“The key is the decision has ruled a KO and not a TKO where the referee could determine he was unfit to defend himself and subsequently, no need to count to 10. But that wasn’t the case here.”
A formal protest from Goossen and Scott has reportedly already been lodged this week in response to the decision from Edwards, which would definitely warrant a rematch at the very least, in my opinion – although it will probably not be forthcoming.