OK, points taken on all sides. But let me ask you this:
1. If all three judges are so incompetant that the bout has to be re-judged by video (still a shocking rule) - will they be used again by WPKL? Of course they will. Dan Green was a judge when my fiasco took place and he has subsequently judged again. He is clearly able to do the job but apparently not now! Are the three judges so bad that a second jury has to be called in? Can they really all be incorrect? Or was it a close fight with opinions (as many are)?

Dave calls it absolutely right when he says do we get another jury to sit in judgement on the second jury. This is what I said earlier in a more sarcastic turn or phrase.
If you open the doors to this kind of appeal then it can be endless. For as long as people don't agree (and they won't), they must have every right to appeal continuosly, as one party was allowed to appeal in this way in the first place.

Dan, I take your point about the judges, not the decison being in question, but all roads lead to the same place.
If you don't like the judges you ask for replacements before the fight not once you have heard the decision.
If you are not aware of the judges credentials, you ask about them - before the bout.
Anyone can find a reason to make a fuss (however you want to dress it up) when things don't go their way!

There has clearly been nothing blatent here with regards to dis-honest judging.
And for the credibilty of the judges to be brought into question when a second jury could not agree unanimously (that is right is'nt it?), what more can you say.

For the WPKL to allow this whole procedure to take place is comical.