sab@houca.UUCP (08/14/84)
>From Tom Haapanen: > To top it all, did you see this scene?: Howard Cosell is interviewing > a US boxer who lost his match on points (to me, it was fairly > obvious). So, Jim McKay (that's the anchor's name isn't it?) cuts > into the interview to ask *his* only question: > "Do you think there was international politics involved in > this decision?" Well Tom, it's pretty remarkable that the decision was "fairly obvious" to you considering that you don't know what was going on. The US boxer did not lose the bout on points, but rather on a disqualification for continuing to fight after the referee twice said "Stop". The "decision" being (probably unjustifiably) questioned by Jim McKay was the upholding of the disqualification by the protest arbitration committee. "Criticize things you don't know about" -Steve Martin- Scott