The art of leadership is saying no, not yes. It’s very easy to say yes. – Tony Blair
The veracity of Manny Pacquiao’s largesse is well documented.
The “Pride of the Philippines” created the Manny Pacquiao Foundation which, in its first form, was set up to help retired boxers of the Philippines but subsequently branched out to “foster, support and transform the health education and overall social well-being of communities of disadvantaged people in the Philippines and other countries.”
There is no question to why Pacquiao is so popular not only in the Philippines but the world, he comes across as humble and gracious, giving of himself to others.
He is an exemplar of his ideals not only through words but actions, such as ‘Metro Manilla’ which was created to help the victims and reconstruct damages suffered during Typhoon Ondoy in late September 2009.
Pacquiao donated not only monetarily, taking breaks from his training schedule leading up to his bout with Miguel Cotto to personally deliver relief goods to the victims of the typhoon.
With every great decision and charitable act though, there are those decisions that are called into question.
And with the entrance of celebrity in life, the questions do not necessarily become tougher but more scrutinized.
Pacquiao’s decision to fight Antonio Margarito has been more than scrutinized over the past week and has left almost no room for a grey area.
There are many pundits, myself included, that are of the opinion that Margarito-Pacquiao will be fought over blood money.
It is my belief that Pacquiao could have and should have said no to his promoter Bob Arum concerning the fight.
The plaster of paris-like substance found in Margarito’s gloves prior to his fight with Shane Mosley raised suspicion that Margarito used loaded gloves in other fights.
In November of 2009 the Los Angeles Times reported that, “examination of photos from the Cotto fight show red stains on Margarito’s hand wraps that are consistent with stains on the inserts seized by the California State Athletic Commission when it suspended Margarito’s boxing license for a year.”
Granted there is not a Mayweather to be fought, but there could have been a Timothy Bradley or an Andre Berto.
The fact that Margarito received a license to fight is a shame and the fact that Pacquiao will sign the contract to fight him is no better.
It is not Pacquiao’s job to seek vengeance against Margarito or to execute justice, those are merely attractive selling points for the fight.
Right or wrong, everyone has an opinion and the critics are out in full force.
Perhaps the most notorious of the pundits to make strong remarks concerning the fight is Yahoo Sports columnist Kevin Iole. Writing under the headline ‘Margarito’s return should make fans nauseous’, the bile in the content of the article gets no less stomach churning.
“Never was there a thought of doing the right thing, of setting a good example for the people in his boxing-mad country and refusing to fight an obvious cheater,” Iole wrote. “Instead, Pacquiao grabbed for the money and didn’t care if he rewarded Margarito handsomely in the process. Pacquiao is as despicable as the rest of the bunch.”
The strong article brought instant rebuttal.
Carlos Acevedo, writing for the The Cruelest Sport, sees the fight more as a correct economical decision. Despite what Acevedo calls “pompous criticism”, the fight, at its core, comes down to business. “Arum is hoping that the enmity surrounding Margarito will translate into pay-per-view buys and ticket sales,” wrote Acevedo. “Judging from all the hoopla over the last few days, he may very well be on to something.”
Felix Strunk of Boxing Fighthype wrote a blog entry expressing his belief that Iole directed his ire at the wrong person, that Pacquiao is not to blame. “It’s not his responsibility to determine who is or is not allowed to fight. It’s not his responsibility to determine the rankings of other fighters,” Strunk wrote. “And it’s not his responsibility to pass judgment on others. He simply fights, and he’s damn good at it. If Iole is truly that upset about Margarito’s opportunity to challenge the best pound-for-pound fighter in the world, perhaps he should use his connections to bring about change within the Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation, who has a history of controversy in the sport and approved Margarito’s boxing license in the first place.”
Strunk ended his column with a note to Top Rank: “In lieu of Iole’s recent comments, I’d like to be the first to request his credentials for the November 13 showdown in Texas.”
In antithesis to those articles bashing Iole, and there are more of them, there are those in the boxing community who have rallied around his opinion.
Geno McGahee of the Ringside Report wrote that, “The boxing community should unite to fight this pay per view and Pacquiao’s decision to face a known cheater, but there are those out there that have a financial interest in the fight going forward, the Manny Pacquiao blind followers that will support him no matter what, the writers that want Manny to give them a thumbs up and the conditional love from the blind followers of the Filipino fighter, and the uninformed.”
Michael Marley of Examiner.com backs Iole completely, chastising Pacquiao’s fans for attacking the article and backing Pacquiao’s decision.
“It would’ve been a breath of clean, fresh air for the sport if Pacquaio had taken the high road and told Arum to find another foe,” Marley wrote. “I don’t know whether Iole’s attackers are pistachios, walnuts or mixed assorted.”
In reference to the decision of Pacquiao, it would not be the first contract the Pacman has walked away from, but it would be the most significant personally and morally.
Source: http://www.boxingdispatch.com
0 comments:
Post a Comment