HUGHIE Fury’s failed bid to wrest the WBO heavyweight title from Joseph Parker in Manchester on Saturday night paled in comparison to the extraordinary allegations levelled by his team in the wake of the majority points defeat.
Fury’s promoter Mick Hennessy accused “dark forces” of conspiring against Fury, the cousin of former world champion Tyson, after two of the ringside judges scored 118-110 in favour of the New Zealander, with a third scoring a 114-114 draw.
Hennessy promised a bid to “protest and overturn” the result, insisting Fury’s back-foot performance, which most neutral observers agreed had not quite been enough to take the title in a poor fight, had offered “shades of Ali”.
It ended another bizarre boxing night even by the standards of the WBO heavyweight title, which has been contested in such fistic hotbeds as the Norwich Sports Village, and which once famously allowed a fighter to be plucked from the audience to take on Tommy Morrison in 1993.
Hennessy insisted: “We will put in an appeal and protest this as strongly as we can. A rematch has to be a worst-case scenario – we want to get this overturned.
“I thought it was a masterclass [by Fury]. I thought he wiped the floor with him. He was gliding round the ring hitting him with jabs at will – it was shades of Ali the way he was moving.
“There’s something going on. To me it is corruption at the highest level in boxing. I’m telling you now there are dark forces at work in boxing.”
Fury snr added: “I thought the scorecards were ridiculous. I had Hughie at least four rounds ahead because Parker was swinging and missing. Hughie has had a very bad decision. My son is sitting there and should be crowned the world champion today all because of political influence.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here