728 x 90

“It is said the warrior’s is the twofold Way of pen and sword,” writes the legendary Japanese swordsman Miyamoto Musashi in The Book of Five Rings. “And he should have a taste for both Ways.” Though in the hallowed halls of professional boxing where the sports premiere news organizations either selectively report on the truth or simply choose not to report on it at all, warriors are in increasingly short supply. Fortunately, those in the alternative media are gradually picking up the slack where the “professionals” have all but fallen off the map in combat sports. And with the Josh Taylor vs Jack Catterall controversial decision still fresh on the minds of the general public, the British Boxing Board of Control (BBBofC) has found itself at the center of a mounting controversy that in any other sport would threaten to shake the board to its very foundation.

“Alright, now then as you can see very kindly the Secretary of the British Boxing Board of Control, Robert Smith, has given up some time to come and talk to us,” explains Fight Disciples’ Adam Catterall in their 3/02/2022 YouTube video titled, “Robert Smith | “I am not corrupt” | “Our Officials are not corrupt” | Josh Taylor vs Jack Catterall.” In a point Smith wanted to make clear in upon questioning as to why the BBBofC chose to launch an investigation in the first place, “Well, I thought it was a very close contest and closer than other people actually,” said Smith.

“And I had Jack winning it by a couple of rounds. I have no problems with Howards scoring or Victors scoring, because I think it was a scrappy fight,” explained Smith. “Joshua was doing all the work, etc. And when Jack put his shots together, he looked very good in them. And they were clean shots, so I think it could have went either way that way.”

“Ian’s scores surprised me somewhat,” Smith would later go on to admit. “A lot wider than I thought. And I am surprised that people think that Jack won it by such a wide margin because it was a scrappy contest and I think some of the rounds were very, very close. I also think that the rounds that Jack won, he won well. And the rounds that Josh won, he just got them. So, that’s how I saw the fight.”

“I’ve actually had time to look at the fight with the commentary on yesterday afternoon,” Smith continued. “And again, I will be looking at it again before next week. And I haven’t changed my mind, I think it was a very, very close fight. Scrappy fight.”

In what could be a foreshadowing of the subjective nature in which the BBBofC will ultimately use as an excuse to justify the unjustifiable, according to Smith, “And there’s, it’s what your interpretation of the bout is. And as I say, I thought that Jack just nicked it but with regard to the other two scores I’m quite satisfied. I just really want an explanation, etc. Don’t forget, I’m only working for the board,” explained Smith. “We want an explanation [of] how they came to the decision.”

When pressed on exactly what the process would look like in regards to the BBBofC’s line of inquiry into judge Ian John-Lewis’s scoring, Smith again went on to reiterate, “Well, I work for the board. Ultimately, I report back to the board of control.”

So, who exactly is the British Boxing Board of Control? According to their website, “Nobody who has a financial interest in the sport (other than say a Doctor who charges a fee for a medical or similar) may sit as a Steward of the Board. Hence decisions by the Stewards, whether popular or unpopular cannot have been said to be have been made for commercial personal considerations.” Additionally, the subsection goes on to state that, “The Chairman of the Board is Mr. Charles Giles, former Chairman of the Midlands Area Council and current Chairman of the Referees’ Committee, a businessman and also a well-known ‘man about boxing’ in the Midlands over the last four decades. The President is John Williamson MBE.”

And the British Boxing Board of Control isn’t the only monster who has been caught with their hand in the Catterall-Taylor cookie jar either. “And we also reached out to the WBO,” explains Fight Disciples' host Adam Catterall in their March 10, 2022 YouTube video titled, “WBO President Francisco Valcarcel answers our questions | Josh Tavlor vs Jack Catterall.” According to the report, “Because following our conversations that we had last week, the WBO’s name popped up a couple of times that they were the people that sorted out the officials for this particular fight. It was their fight to sanction.”

“We reached out to the WBO,” explains Catterall, “in the hope of speaking to their president Francisco Valcarcel, Esq. and we were due to speak to him today, but a matter has come up, so therefore we haven’t been able to speak to him face to face. But his legal counsel have been in contact with us and have sent us a letter and an email response to one of the questions, not all of the questions that we were asking on Tuesday,” explained Catterall. “But they have answered one of the questions, which they have brought to light off the back of a conversation that we had with Ben Shalom on last Friday’s show.”

Catterall goes on to explain, “So before we read you the official letter that they sent my way, this is the email correspondence that was sent to me:

'Dear Adam,

Kindly note that in light of Ben Shalom’s statements during the recent Fight Disciples podcast asserting that the WBO appointed the officials for the Taylor-Catterall bout, I am forwarding you the letter issued by the WBO who timely objected to the appointees. The objection was based on the WBO’s lack of knowledge of their credentials, experience and certification with the ABC (Association of Boxing Commissions). Nonetheless, the British Boxing Board of Control proceeded with the appointments.’"

“So, this letter was sent on January the 26th,” explains Catterall of the information forwarded to him by the World Boxing Organization legal counsel to the British Boxing Board of Control. “One month prior to the bout taking place in Glasgow at the back end of February. And this is a letter from the president of the WBO Francisco Valcarcel, Esq.:

‘Dear Robert [Smith],

I refer to your email correspondence Tuesday, January 22, 2022, regarding the subject matter appointment. Kindly note that we acknowledge referee Marcus McDonnell and judge Howard Foster as WBO affiliated officials. As to the remaining judges, Victor Loughlin and Ian John-Lewis, per our records neither of them have attended our annual WBO convention and therefore the WBO lacks knowledge of who they are, their respective credentials or whether they are capable at officiating at the world championship level.

Notwithstanding the forgoing, if the British Boxing Board of Control has appointed these officials for the subject matter bouts, we are sure that such responsibility was discharged responsibly. Therefore, we expect competent officiating from the appointees.

In closing, we wish the British Boxing Board of Control and all parties involved all the best during fight night. If you have any further questions do not hesitate to contact the WBO offices on behalf of the WBO.

We thank you for your continued support.
World Boxing Organization President,
Francisco Valcarcel, Esq.’”

So, the million-dollar question is,” interjects Fight Disciples' co-host Nick Peet in immediate response to the letter sent by the WBO to the British Boxing Board of Control. “Quick shoutout as well to Jake Donovan from BoxingScene," said Peet. "Because he alluded to this in a story a couple days ago. Well done, Jake. First to it. This corroborates what Jake wrote a couple days ago.”

“And the million-dollar question is,” Peet continues. “If the government body raises an objection regarding officials, questions the validity and the capability of said officials being involved in such a high-profile match, why in God's name did the British Boxing Board of Control continue with that appointment?”

Which is a fair question to ask in the aftermath of a fight that should have investigators scrambling for answers as we continue to grapple with the fallout surrounding a controversial decision where we would go on to discover that two of the three judges were inserted by the British Boxing Board of Control against the objections of the World Boxing Organization. With one of the scorecards from those two judges later going on to come under immense scrutiny after the fact. In addition to these irregularities with the bout highlighted above, is the fact referee Marcus McDonell’s performance has also come under scrutiny. Who, unlike judges Ian John-Lewis and Victor Loughlin, is in fact an official recognized by the World Boxing Organization.

With the lawyers at the WBO lawyering up while simultaneously pointing the finger at the British Boxing Board of Control in a defensive manner, the hunters have now become the hunted as the governing bodies normally in charge of calling the shots in boxing are left now having to schedule their own colonoscopy exams. Those in the alternative press leading the way as the mainstream media pundits all but confirm their invertebrate status. “It is said the warrior’s is the twofold Way of pen and sword, and he should have a taste for both Ways,” writes the legendary Japanese swordsman Miyamoto Musashi in The Book of Five Rings. Yet, with the sports premiere news outlets selectively reporting on the truth or simply choosing not to report on it at all, warriors count their numbers few in the coliseum of combat sports journalism.