Go Back   Matt-Hughes.com Official Forums > General Discussions > Sports

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 03-19-2010, 03:36 AM
rockdawg21's Avatar
rockdawg21 rockdawg21 is offline
I'm kind of a big deal
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 5,584
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rearnakedchoke View Post
I know I would have been there .. but only if he was singing his new single "Puck Ployd"

Man, i should have been in Dallas selling shirts that said that ... i would have made a killing ...
LOL, heard the video is being released on YouTube soon. They are just waiting to get the court tape videos.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 03-19-2010, 09:20 AM
J.B.'s Avatar
J.B. J.B. is offline
WAR CARDINALS!
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Apache Juntion, AZ
Posts: 8,462
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rockdawg21 View Post
LOL, heard the video is being released on YouTube soon. They are just waiting to get the court tape videos.
I heard Manny filed his defamation lawsuit with Judge Reinhold at "Night Court".
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 03-19-2010, 01:06 PM
rockdawg21's Avatar
rockdawg21 rockdawg21 is offline
I'm kind of a big deal
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 5,584
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by J.B. View Post
I heard Manny filed his defamation lawsuit with Judge Reinhold at "Night Court".
LOL, guess him and Floyd have busy schedules during the day. Floyd bad mouths to the press and Manny tries to sell his concert tickets.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 03-19-2010, 06:08 PM
J.B.'s Avatar
J.B. J.B. is offline
WAR CARDINALS!
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Apache Juntion, AZ
Posts: 8,462
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rockdawg21 View Post
LOL, guess him and Floyd have busy schedules during the day. Floyd bad mouths to the press and Manny tries to sell his concert tickets.
You gotta admit, the lawsuit is silly. Freddie Roach actually hinted that they might consider adding Malignaggi to the case for his comments.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 03-19-2010, 11:36 PM
rockdawg21's Avatar
rockdawg21 rockdawg21 is offline
I'm kind of a big deal
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 5,584
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by J.B. View Post
You gotta admit, the lawsuit is silly. Freddie Roach actually hinted that they might consider adding Malignaggi to the case for his comments.
What's silly is:

1. Pac refusing to take the test.
2. Floyd and family making an attempt to shift burden of proof. It's a propaganda technique which is more of a smear tactic, which is typical of many politicians (Maybe Manny needs to use that now he's going to be a politician, haha!). In a general logic course, this would equate to "false" in calculating a tautology. As put by attorney Stephen E. Jones, "The proponents of a theory, in science or elsewhere, are obligated to support every link in the chain of reasoning, whereas a critic or skeptic may peck at any aspect of the theory, testing it for flaws. He is not obligated to set up any theory of his own or to offer any alternative explanations. He can be purely negative if he so desires." In court, it's the job of the person who is making the statements and claims to do the research and supply the evidence to support his assertions. Aside from the fact that Floyd is just talking and isn't in court, is there any other reason why Floyd's accusations shouldn't be held under the same umbrella?
3. Malig who?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 03-21-2010, 11:08 AM
J.B.'s Avatar
J.B. J.B. is offline
WAR CARDINALS!
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Apache Juntion, AZ
Posts: 8,462
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rockdawg21 View Post
2. Floyd and family making an attempt to shift burden of proof. It's a propaganda technique which is more of a smear tactic, which is typical of many politicians (Maybe Manny needs to use that now he's going to be a politician, haha!). In a general logic course, this would equate to "false" in calculating a tautology. As put by attorney Stephen E. Jones, "The proponents of a theory, in science or elsewhere, are obligated to support every link in the chain of reasoning, whereas a critic or skeptic may peck at any aspect of the theory, testing it for flaws. He is not obligated to set up any theory of his own or to offer any alternative explanations. He can be purely negative if he so desires." In court, it's the job of the person who is making the statements and claims to do the research and supply the evidence to support his assertions.
First of all, it also doesn't help a person's argument when they defer to asking where the burden of proof lies when proving their innocence in the eyes of their accuser is as easy as agreeing to some blood testing.

Secondly, you yourself are also purporting a theory. You are saying that Floyd is using the tests to shift the burden of proof and to smear Manny. According to what we have been told as Boxing fans, that logic would require Floyd to have known Manny was going to refuse to take the tests. The problem with that line of thinking is that it was reported that Manny and his team knew about the request for Olympic style testing for over 2 weeks, and had agreed to do it. During that two week period, everyone from both sides said that the fight was a done deal, and Floyd never came out with any other extra demands of any kind. That fact alone only further proves that Floyd was not using the testing as a means to back out of the fight, which is another popular "theory" that has been thrown around. Also, if Floyd's only intention was to smear Manny by labeling him as a cheater, why did he even bother to keep trying to negotiate after Manny initially refused?

Manny made demands of his own during those negotiations, and all of those were accepted by Floyd. One could also have a "theory" that Manny was using the "10-million dollar clause" to smear Mayweather and get inside his head, and that Floyd responded by asking for the extra testing. Even if that is the case, had Manny accepted the testing it would have been a wash and neither fighter would have gotten much heat in the press or from fans over either of the requests. No matter how you look at the situation, it ultimately boils down to Manny refusing a request that was part of a fight negotiation, and it was that fact alone that cast any real shadow of doubt in the public eye. Everybody is entitled to their opinion, including Floyd and his team, but it wasn't their opinions that made people in the boxing community and sports fans have doubt, it has been Manny's actions.

Quote:
Aside from the fact that Floyd is just talking and isn't in court, is there any other reason why Floyd's accusations shouldn't be held under the same umbrella?
That's a huge umbrella.

Making demands during negotiations has been a part of the sport basically forever, and that is one thing. Taking another fighter to court over some trash talk is just stupid. Could you imagine Joe Frazier doing that to Ali?

Floyd himself has repeatedly stated that his views are nothing more than his opinions, which he is entitled to. It's not as if Manny's actions have not been an influence on those opinions. It seems that when somebody says the idea of Manny filing a lawsuit is ridiculous, many Pac fans try to point to nuances in the law and attempt to make some sort of sense of it all. Frankly, no matter how they try to spin it, these cases are notoriously hard to win and all it does is make Manny look silly for dragging it on.

Quote:
3. Malig who?
See, you can't have it both ways bro...

If Floyd is somehow culpable for defaming Manny's character and deserves to be dragged through court, then so does Paulie Malignaggi. I've now read that Freddie Roach backed off his comments about Paulie being added to the lawsuit, which only goes to show that this is not about seeking some sort of legal justice for defamation, but rather a lame attempt to try to defame Mayweather in revenge for the PR mess Manny got himself into in the first place when he refused the tests and let his crew double talk around the situation.

Last edited by J.B.; 03-21-2010 at 03:06 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 03-21-2010, 04:32 PM
rockdawg21's Avatar
rockdawg21 rockdawg21 is offline
I'm kind of a big deal
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 5,584
Default

I'm not saying Floyd used it to "duck" Pac, I'm done with the whole "ducking" thing. Floyd finally manned-up and chose to fight a real contender in his own weight class, I'm happy for that.

The point is Floyd and family were making accusations prior to the testing demands. Assumptions without evidence do not equate to guilt simply because the proof of a tautology ultimately relies on no assumptions. Does Floyd have evidence that Pac is doping?

Quote:
Secondly, you yourself are also purporting a theory. You are saying that Floyd is using the tests to shift the burden of proof and to smear Manny. According to what we have been told as Boxing fans, that logic would require Floyd to have known Manny was going to refuse to take the tests.
I'm not saying Floyd is using testing to shift burden of proof. Prior to demanding testing, Floyd and family accused Pac of taking PEDs. In this instance, the accuser had already attempted to shift the burden of proof because Floyd and family are accusing Pac of doping without any supporting evidence - it is based 100% on assumption; innocent until PROVEN guilty. Like I said, it's the job of the person who is making the statements and claims to do the research and supply the evidence to support his assertions. What evidence has been presented by Floyd and family to warrant the accusations?

Good point, I am making an assumption that Floyd would have known Manny would refuse the test. However, it is based on prior knowledge that Pac blames his last loss (to Morales) on blood testing prior to the fight. One could logically conclude if Pac could avoid testing in hopes of preventing a loss, he would; doesn't necessarily mean it's a tautology, but it's logically contingent.

Quote:
See, you can't have it both ways bro...

If Floyd is somehow culpable for defaming Manny's character and deserves to be dragged through court, then so does Paulie Malignaggi. I've now read that Freddie Roach backed off his comments about Paulie being added to the lawsuit, which only goes to show that this is not about seeking some sort of legal justice for defamation, but rather a lame attempt to try to defame Mayweather in revenge for the PR mess Manny got himself into in the first place when he refused the tests and let his crew double talk around the situation.
Yeah, but the only outlets I've seen focus on Paulie is the Examiner, that's why I said "Malig who?" Even you have said Examiner isn't that reliable of a source. Anyways, Roach isn't involved with the legal dispute, he's the trainer. Even Koncz and Arum said it's ultimately Manny's decision to consider putting Paulie into the lawsuit, but you're right, if Manny feels his character is defamed, he should go after everybody speaking publicly.
__________________

Last edited by rockdawg21; 03-21-2010 at 09:04 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 03-21-2010, 09:46 PM
J.B.'s Avatar
J.B. J.B. is offline
WAR CARDINALS!
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Apache Juntion, AZ
Posts: 8,462
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rockdawg21 View Post
I'm not saying Floyd used it to "duck" Pac, I'm done with the whole "ducking" thing. Floyd finally manned-up and chose to fight a real contender in his own weight class, I'm happy for that.

The point is Floyd and family were making accusations prior to the testing demands. Assumptions without evidence do not equate to guilt simply because the proof of a tautology ultimately relies on no assumptions. Does Floyd have evidence that Pac is doping?
Weather Pac is guilty or not is NOT the point here. The point is that the testing was part of negotiations for the fight. Floyd and his family and anybody else are as entitled to think that something is suspicious about Manny, as some fans are entitled to think a 10 million dollar penalty for a pound over 147 is fair and reasonable.

Just because there is not a smoking gun piece of evidence doesn't mean it's not true, and just because Floyd and a few other people said they think he is juicing doesn't make it true. Why don't we ask all the Baseball writers of America why they never let Mark McGwire in the Hall of Fame for all those years without any sort of "tautology" to their opinions on McGwire? It wasn't until Mark came out and admitted it that we knew FOR SURE. See my point?


Quote:
I'm not saying Floyd is using testing to shift burden of proof. Prior to demanding testing, Floyd and family accused Pac of taking PEDs. In this instance, the accuser had already attempted to shift the burden of proof because Floyd and family are accusing Pac of doping without any supporting evidence - it is based 100% on assumption; innocent until PROVEN guilty. Like I said, it's the job of the person who is making the statements and claims to do the research and supply the evidence to support his assertions. What evidence has been presented by Floyd and family to warrant the accusations?
Floyd didn't make the demands for extra testing until after team Pacquiao had presented the 10 million dollar clause. What does that LOGICALLY tell us? It was a reactionary call in my opinion, and I don't think Floyd thought it would end up being something that derailed the fight. If he thought he could back Manny into a corner with Olympic testing, it would have been on the table during day one of the negotiations. Kinda like saying, "hey, if your gonna call me to task by insinuating I am a "weight-cheat", I'm gonna throw a curveball right back at you". You know what I mean?

This is not about burden of proof. It's about an "opinion" that Pacquiao could have publicly nipped in the bud by simply agreeing to take the tests. Also, lets not forget that Pac's sticking point ended up being 24 days with the blood testing. Well, he took a blood test 17 days before the Clottey fight and still threw over 1,200 punches in that fight, so that just looks bad too when he says he won't take the testing Floyd is requesting (Texas has very lax testing in comparison to other state commissions and OST's).

Quote:
Good point, I am making an assumption that Floyd would have known Manny would refuse the test. However, it is based on prior knowledge that Pac blames his last loss (to Morales) on blood testing prior to the fight. One could logically conclude if Pac could avoid testing in hopes of preventing a loss, he would; doesn't necessarily mean it's a tautology, but it's logically contingent.
Again, if that was the intention of Floyd from the beginning, I believe it would have been brought to the table from day one. Is it possible that Floyd had this whole thing planned out? Sure, but when you look at it and think about the way things have panned out, Floyd could not have possibly foreseen the bumbling PR mess that became of Manny's side.


Quote:
Yeah, but the only outlets I've seen focus on Paulie is the Examiner, that's why I said "Malig who?" Even you have said Examiner isn't that reliable of a source. Anyways, Roach isn't involved with the legal dispute, he's the trainer. Even Koncz and Arum said it's ultimately Manny's decision to consider putting Paulie into the lawsuit, but you're right, if Manny feels his character is defamed, he should go after everybody speaking publicly.
The Examiner is garbage and Michael Marley writes hit-job articles to up his own reputation. I will say that all day long. However, the Malignaggi involvement has been well documented by many Boxing news sources including Yahoo, BoxingScene, and East Side Boxing.

Either way, a defamation suit is VERY hard to prove. Not only does Manny have to prove malicious intent, but he also has to prove that Floyd and others KNEW what they were saying was a lie. They are RARELY successful in court. Not only that, but "defamation" would imply that this somehow actually hurt his career, and at this point Manny is actually MORE popular than ever.

I know the hardcore Pacman fans hate to hear this, but the truth is that Manny's explosion in mainstream popularity here in America has been largely because of the fact that there IS a Floyd Mayweather Jr. It takes two to tango as they say, and these two seem to be this era's Ali/Fraizier. Again, I will ask the question, could you imagine if Joe Frazier said he was suing Muhammad Ali for calling him an Uncle Tom and hurting his reputation in the Black community? Frazier would have been a laughing stock if he did that, and Joe Frazier gets choked up and pissed off to this very day when talking about some of the things Ali said about him in the press.

Last edited by J.B.; 03-21-2010 at 10:26 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 03-22-2010, 03:49 AM
rockdawg21's Avatar
rockdawg21 rockdawg21 is offline
I'm kind of a big deal
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 5,584
Default

I think we're going off on a different tangent here JB. You're referring to issues with negotiation and why the fight didn't take place. All I'm referring to is the initial accusations made by Floyd prior to anything regarding negotiations of the fight.

The accusations were made before negotiations took place. As long as they continued them, which they did, it was only likely that a defamation suit would take place. You said "You gotta admit, the lawsuit is silly" and I'm stating I don't agree that it's silly, but I think the accusations against Manny are silly, and you're saying the accusations are not silly. It just boils down to the same thing depending on which side one views it:

1. Floyd's test demand is or is not ridiculous.
2. Pac refusal to take the test is or is not ridiculous.
3. The whole situation is ridiculous.

#3 for me

I still think this whole thing is a cooperated effort to sell more tickets. Even if Arum, Floyd, Pac, Roach, etc. all seem to hate each other, they ALL like money
__________________

Last edited by rockdawg21; 03-22-2010 at 03:55 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 03-22-2010, 08:00 AM
J.B.'s Avatar
J.B. J.B. is offline
WAR CARDINALS!
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Apache Juntion, AZ
Posts: 8,462
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rockdawg21 View Post
I think we're going off on a different tangent here JB. You're referring to issues with negotiation and why the fight didn't take place. All I'm referring to is the initial accusations made by Floyd prior to anything regarding negotiations of the fight.

The accusations were made before negotiations took place. As long as they continued them, which they did, it was only likely that a defamation suit would take place. You said "You gotta admit, the lawsuit is silly" and I'm stating I don't agree that it's silly, but I think the accusations against Manny are silly, and you're saying the accusations are not silly. It just boils down to the same thing depending on which side one views it:

1. Floyd's test demand is or is not ridiculous.
2. Pac refusal to take the test is or is not ridiculous.
3. The whole situation is ridiculous.

#3 for me

I still think this whole thing is a cooperated effort to sell more tickets. Even if Arum, Floyd, Pac, Roach, etc. all seem to hate each other, they ALL like money
I never said the "accusations" were "silly" or "not silly". I said Floyd is entitled to have an opinion, weather we think it's silly or not. That opinion is not something that requires him to go out of his way to provide indefinite proof, it's just an opinion and Floyd has said that numerous times.

Hindsight is always 20/20, and it's easy to try and assume that Manny would have filed a defamation lawsuit either way, but thats NOT how it happened, is it? Only a handful of people actually agreed with the Mayweather's and other opinions in the beginning, and it wasn't until Manny refused the testing and his camp used excuses and said things that are perceived as double-talk, that people really started to question him. It wasn't until then that Manny filed his lawsuit.

I DID say I think the lawsuit is silly, and I stand by that. It is silly for fighters to be suing each other over stuff like this. Many other athletes, and specifically fighters, have been accused of juicing and only a few have actually traveled the road of filing a lawsuit. However, I have always maintained that Manny is innocent until proven guilty and I do NOT want him to be dirty, nor am I convinced that he is. Still, I am not going to blindly ignore what is definitely suspicious about some of his comments and actions. I know that some people will perceive that as me being a Manny hater, or a Floyd nuthugger, but YOU have talked to me long enough that I would hope you see that's not the case. If this shoe was on the other foot, and it was Floyd or some other fighter, I would be saying the exact same thing.

The cooperated effort theory seems plausible, and it's crossed my mind plenty of times, but there are also some signs that point to that not being the case. Namely, the fight with Mosley. Golden Boy, went out of their way to make the Shane/Floyd fight happen when the Floyd and Manny fight fell apart. They almost seemed desperate for it, which tells me they didn't plan this. It's also a fight that is dangerous for Floyd, and it could FURTHER derail the meeting between Floyd and Manny. Of course, should the Floyd/Manny fight take place, especially this year, all of this controversy will only help sell more. However, that would also be a natural byproduct of more time passing before the fight happens. Do you think there would be NEARLY as much hype over Floyd vs Shane if it happened 10, 5, or even 3, years ago like we all wanted? I doubt it.

Last edited by J.B.; 03-22-2010 at 11:33 AM.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:49 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.