We knew it was coming but it is still surprising in a way, because even if I can understand the rules were just being rightfully enforced, at the same time the intent behind the rules should matter too, since even if Usyk was not fighting the mandatory challenger, it is not as if he was doing this to try to keep his belt by avoiding the best possible boxer he could fight, when in fact it is the opposite, so I would have liked for the IBF to give him some leeway, but, alas, it did not happen.
I do understand where you're coming from, but each organisation should only be considering its own ranks, so no one from another organisation can be considered "the best possible boxer" as that spot is always reserved for the mandatory contender.
Also, Usyk has already won against Fury, and they're fighting again mostly because of the contract clause (and big money), which, from the IBF's perspective, cannot be an excuse for not fighting the mandatory fight.
But it's best this way. I'm sure Usyk (or Fury) will get a shot for another unification bout, likely against AJ.
(...)
I honestly cannot see much wrong with the alleged low-punch by Dubois. Anyway Usyk was not complaining subsequently when Dubois kept aiming for the same type of body shot even though he was clearly being hurt. It would make a fascinating fight between Usyk and Dubois for another unification fight if they win against their next opponents first.
(...)
I think the most criticism comes from the fact that the punch might indeed have landed on (or below) the belt, but it was above the groin, which is meant to be the protected area and the reason for the no punches below the belt rule.
But yeah, I think I'd rather see Usyk fighting Dubois than Joshua for the 3rd time.
(...) I'm also sure that they probably would have let Usyk keep it if he paid them a bigger fee which he probably didn't want to do just for the sake of a belt that he can collect again at a later point.
If they indeed asked him for money, that's a sh**y move and I'm glad he said no.
