I am still trying to come to terms with the coined word: "split decision " that was used in stealing the victory away from Ngannou in this fight that was obvious even to the blind who the actual victor is. If we're told before hand that it's a fixed boxing match like the ones in the WWE we will understand and shield our swords of words against this denial but instead they're making it a controversial debate by their decision of who the winner is.
This is the problem of having a judge with differing perspective when watching the match. Probably those judge that side to Fury typically only looking to Fury points. There’s a chance too that they are trying to save boxing reputation since Fury is undefeated on boxing while beaten badly by an MMA fighter.
Saving, boxing reputation in a shameful and irrational manner that's laughable if that's the point. Saving boxing reputation should be that He fury would have done that in the ring proven why he's a gypsy king undefeated in the world and not through the way the judges handled the decision depleting our interest to boxing as boxing fans.
With this what would be the motivation for another MMA fighter to rise up to a challenge in the future in the boxing ring if he's unsure he will be giving victory even after dropping valuable punches against his opponent just because he's a champion and shouldn't be denied of it.