OLYMPIC BOXING

Hokitika Guardian, 17 June 1933, Page 6

OLYMPIC BOXING

f* 1 f. : ( r.t :<■ STANDARD OF REFEREEING PRAISE FOR NEW ZEALANDERS Confirmation of a complaint which has been frequently voiced after previous Olympic Games about the low standard of refereeing and judging, in oxiiii' contests is contained in the report of the late Mr W. J. Hecnan. who accompanied the New Zealand Olymoic team to Los Angeles, as boxing coach Mr Heenau- does not excuse the Nnv Zealanders’ defeats. He does not claim that they would have won an event, out he expresses alarm lest the future of boxing at the Games be imperilled, ‘The judging on the whole was bad, he said. “No two judges seemed to have the same *ideas of point scoring and far too- mfich credit was given for a knock-down blow.-It was not going too far to say that as a general rule one knock-down blow, n<bmatter how flukey, wiped out any score of gcod boxing points. . “Not only did the boxing competition suffer from lack of generally accepted standards of judging, but also from the incompetence of some of the individual referees and judges. This was more remarkable because the headquarters of the International Amateur Boxing Federation which made- the appointments was in England. Unless something yvas done to remedy the present state of affairs the future of boxing as- an Olympic sport might be impWril led A Tliis Avon 1 d be disastrous; because boxing was just assuming impoitance and popularity at the Games, .second only to the track arid fieldevents.’

‘The boxing results were personally more disappointing to me than our nonsuccess, in track and field, because the. standard throughout was. not (as it was in other sports) beyond anything we had been accustomed to in New Zealand,

“The fact that Thomas and Pur die, like Morgan in 1028, had each, on account of overweight, to fight in the next grade, made no difference in my opinion, to their chances of success. Thomas fought under the handicap of his two defeats by. BorcoVsky in ' New Zealand. He felt too much, I think, his responsibility to make good, and hot until the third round did he show his real New Zealand best, when his recovery, .after having taken considerable punishment, made a very good impression, Thomas was beaten on his merits-in a good qlass.

“Purdie was the victim of an atrocious decision, which, so ; annoyed, the crowd that the uproar continued through the next bout. He was one of the cleverest boxers at the Games, but at the same time I do not consider he would have won the final. “Lowe suffered from lack of height and reach, and his slowness in following up an advantage. His German opponent said afterwards that Lowe rocked him with one very heavy blow, and that if it had been followed up immediately the bout might have resulted differently. The German undoubtedly won.

. “In spite of our three defeats,. New Zealand amateur boxing in my considered ooinion is, in its best years, as good as that’, of any of the countries represented at Los Angeles. I saw nothing superior and very few equal to such boxers as Johnny Leckie. Tommy Donovan, -Reg. Trowern and Dick Loveridge in their amateur days. With competent instructors and sufficient com petition. New Zealand need never fear she would not be able t-' perform with credit at the Olympic Games. r ,

“The best boxing team was undoubtedly the South African, with the Germans next. The Germans had imported the best English instructors procurable, and were very enthusiastic arid eager to Team, They were good exponents of the.. Mace style. <>f boxing and if tlieir present rate of. progress was maintained, it would not be surprising ta see them make almost a clean sweep of the boxing at the next Games.”