Scottish Boxer Dies

[Gromit]

// Breaking News image
Scottish boxer Mike Towell has died in hospital after being seriously injured in a bout on Thursday, his management has said.
The 25-year-old, from Dundee, suffered a fifth-round loss to Dale Evans in a St Andrews Sporting Club fight at Glasgow's Raddison Blu Hotel.
He was rushed to the city's Queen Elizabeth University Hospital for treatment.
His management said he passed away with his family at his bedside.
Towell was knocked down in the first round of the fight, before recovering to continue the match.
Referee Victor Loughlin stopped the fight in the fifth round shortly after Towell was knocked down a second time.
He received treatment in the ring and was given oxygen before being taken to an ambulance on a stretcher. //

If this happened anywhere other than in a ring in a luxury hotel, there would be a murder or manslaughter charge and a prison sentence. Odd you can kill someone and get away with it if it is a'sporting' event.

[ludwig]

Boxing is ridiculous.

[Buenchico]

Most victims of murder or manslaughter didn't give willingly their consent for the killer to hit them. Perhaps that makes a rather important difference?

I'm no fan of boxing but I accept that it's statistically less likely to result in serious injury (or death) than playing rugby or engaging in motor sports.

The risk level is probably only akin to that of playing cricket (which, as someone who has twice been knocked out on the pitch by the same fast bowler, I know all about!).

[jno]

I assume they're seen as having consented to take whatever the risk is (don't they usually have to sign waivers?).

Perhaps it's no bad thing that people are allowed to decide for themselves to take risks. You can't hop off the back of a London bus any more because they're scared you'll sue them if you slip. If there was a similar presumption that you've agreed to take a risk when you stand on the back platform, passengers would be freer and lawyers would be poorer.

[ludwig]

In cricket, rugby, and bus travel, no-one is deliberately trying to give you brain damage and vice versa - albeit temporary. I can't think of any other sport where the main aim is to damage the opponent, which is why I say it's ridiculous.

Having said that, yes, he knew the risks. Still ridiculous though.

[naomi24]

I agree with Ludwig. Boxing is barbaric. Hate it.

[murraymints]

very very sad..but thems the risks you knowingly take....

[Gromit]

Men fight in the street all the time. The aquare up to each other so there is some kind of mutual agreement to the fight. But if one is hospitalised or dies, then criminal charges are brought.
Duels were banned even thought it involved mutual consent.
In motor sports, there is a risk, but deaths are usually the result of the drivers own error or a fault. It is not another driver deliberately trying to inflict harm.

[agchristie]

Fights break out regularly in rugby matches and in ice hockey rinks too.

Private prosecutions have been taken out for damages in a few sports such as football.

Boxing is a difficult one. Sometimes the referee is criticised for not stopping fights sooner.

[Baldric]

Sad news, it's a tough game that's for sure. I used to box when I was a RM, the Ref has got a hard job to do, enforce the rules and look out for signs of stress or damage, not always an easy call to make.

[ummmm]

My cousin was a boxer. His last fight he had his jaw broken in the first round and carried on fighting til the end and won. I cannot see what pleasure there is in that.

[Baldric]

ummmm, not a lot of pleasure, but a lot of pride under those circumstances

[mikey4444]

Gromit....while I have sympathy for this boxer, your last paragraph above is somewhat guilty of purple prose......nobody has been murdered.

[ummmm]

And people scrapping in the street/pubs haven't been training to do so for months and months.

[ToraToraTora]

classic deliberate flawed comparison gromit. Sitting on the fence a little here, if we allow a sport that has as its core intent to deliberately damage the opponent then we must accept that occasional tragedy occurs. Ban it or don't but refrain from ridiculous comparisons with everyday thuggery. I like a good boxing match but I would not object if it where banned. The problem there is that it would simply be pushed underground and be far more dangerous.

[anotheoldgit]

It should have been banned years ago, we don't allow fights between animals so why humans? We even teach kids to take part in this barbarous 'sport'.

[-Talbot-]

ludwig
In cricket, rugby, and bus travel, no-one is deliberately trying to give you brain damage and vice versa
_______________________________


Have you played or watched local rugby, ludwig?
Many personal feuds are taken onto the pitch and opponents with a grudge do try and deliberately damage each other.

As Buenchico says, statistically there are sports that result in more deaths and serious injury than boxing ... there never seems to be an outcry to ban those sports/pastimes.

And as TTT says boxing will be driven underground (allthough white collar boxing is thriving regardless )

[Gromit]

It is not a flawed comparison.

A fight is a fight. One man trying to inflict harm on another. The only difference is the venue. Not sure the trained and untrained arguement works when professional boxers are being hospitalised or worse on a regular basis.

[ummmm]

If a boxer knocks down his opponent in the ring he has to wait for him to get up...he can't stick the boot in or hit them over the head with a pool cue.

[Gromit]

Ummm,
So there are rules. But people are dying under those rules?

[naomi24]

Gromit, it is a flawed comparison. Boxing is organised thuggery with rules attached.