In the aftermath of his seventh-round technical decision defeat to Jack Catterall in Manchester, Harlem Eubank has robustly challenged the widely reported reason for the fight`s premature conclusion. While initial reports suggested Eubank`s own facial cut prompted the stoppage, the fighter himself claims this narrative is fundamentally incorrect and, he alleges, actively propagated by broadcast media.
According to Eubank, the decision to halt the contest stemmed not from his relatively minor cut, which he states his corner and ringside doctor deemed manageable, but rather from a significant laceration sustained by his opponent, Jack Catterall. Eubank asserts that while his team was fully prepared and eager to continue, Catterall`s corner was informed their fighter could not proceed. This directly contradicts the live commentary Eubank heard, which he describes as a “fake narrative” being presented in real-time.
Allegations of Bias and `Go-Along` Culture
Eubank did not stop at questioning the stoppage`s cause. He voiced strong concerns regarding what he perceives as a pervasive bias within the British boxing scene, particularly directed towards the Eubank name. He pointed to what he termed the “go-along to get-along gang,” suggesting a network of commentators and figures who operate with a unified, potentially unfavorable, perspective towards certain fighters.
He specifically mentioned former world champion Carl Frampton in this context, expressing disappointment. Eubank also highlighted the presence of Conor Benn before the main event, observing the hand-wrapping process, framing it as another instance of this perceived interconnectedness and scrutiny.
With a touch of irony, Eubank recounted welcoming Benn`s observation, inviting him to take a ringside seat and witness what he anticipated would be a spectacular display of his skill. A display, he contends, the referee ultimately prevented.
Stifled Momentum and Strategic Disruption
Eubank firmly believes the referee`s decision robbed him of a potential victory. Despite judges potentially having the fight scored evenly at the time of the stoppage, Eubank felt he was just beginning to implement his strategy. His game plan, he explained, typically involves weathering early rounds and imposing himself late in fights, often securing stoppages as opponents tire. He felt this was precisely what was unfolding against Catterall, a “negative-style fighter” whom Eubank believed he was starting to make “pay late,” landing clean, effective shots.
He reflected on a warning from his uncle, the legendary Chris Eubank Sr. (who was absent from the fight), about entering what could be considered a “lion`s den” environment. Eubank feels, for the first time, he truly experienced the purported disdain or difficulty faced by those bearing his surname in British boxing, suggesting the stoppage was an external force preventing him from executing his signature late-fight surge.
In summary, Harlem Eubank`s post-fight account paints a picture of a contest concluded under contentious circumstances, where he views the official reason for the stoppage as incorrect and alleges a misleading broadcast narrative potentially influenced by underlying biases within the sport`s media landscape.
