The director of this film is too young to have actually seen the fight on which this film is partially based. Seems like he just jumped on the Norton-was-robbed bandwagon without actually watching the fight so that he could have a nice, catchy double entendre title. The film is also about people who were "robbed" in and around the arena due to a local New York police strike at the time.
As for the actual fight, I watched the fight live on closed circuit at the San Francisco Civic Auditorium and felt confident Ali would win a close decision at the end. I scored it 8-7 Ali in rounds. I even watched the Dick Emberg special that was on national broadcast television a week later where they showed every round and had a panel of experts vote at the end of each round. At the end of the fight, just as many experts had Ali winning the fight as Norton. (At this point, at the end of the show, Dick Emberg looked into the camera and said, "You know what his means? It's YOUR vote that counts.") If Norton was "robbed" all the experts would have scored the fight for Norton.
The footage of the fight was also edited in biased manner to show mainly Norton highlights and to only hear the pro-Norton commentary. Also, it was not all original commentary. ESPN had a boxing series where they took old fights and had Ferdie Pacheo do the fight call with overdub years later. Ferdie Pacheco could be heard calling parts of the Ali-Norton fight in this film which is interesting because Ferdie Pacheco was actually in Ali's corner for this fight as his personal physician which he had been since 1962.
I believe the origins of the "Norton was robbed" myth in the third Ali fight stems from the fact Ali had come off two impressive KO's of Joe Frazier and European Champion Richard Dunn going into the Norton fight. Ali was sitting down on his punches more at this point in his career, exhibiting more power, yet still had that unbelievable speed (actually timed to be faster than the lighter Sugar Ray Robinson and Leonard). Ali had predicted, and many experts were agreeing, that he would stop Norton within five rounds (at the end of the fight, Norton can be heard to yell at Ali over and over, "Five rounds!? Five rounds!?"). So fighting Ali to a stand still instead of being KO'd in five rounds was a major upset and accomplishment for Norton which somehow over the years morphed into "Norton was robbed."
In conclusion--Ali-Norton III: Close decision that could have gone ether way? Yes. Robbery? NO!
If one wants to watch a documentary about the 1976 New York police strike and the robberies that apparently took place in and around Yankee Stadium the night of the fight, maybe this film is worth a look. On the other hand, if its reporting of the strike is as biased as its reporting of the fight, maybe not.
As for the actual fight, I watched the fight live on closed circuit at the San Francisco Civic Auditorium and felt confident Ali would win a close decision at the end. I scored it 8-7 Ali in rounds. I even watched the Dick Emberg special that was on national broadcast television a week later where they showed every round and had a panel of experts vote at the end of each round. At the end of the fight, just as many experts had Ali winning the fight as Norton. (At this point, at the end of the show, Dick Emberg looked into the camera and said, "You know what his means? It's YOUR vote that counts.") If Norton was "robbed" all the experts would have scored the fight for Norton.
The footage of the fight was also edited in biased manner to show mainly Norton highlights and to only hear the pro-Norton commentary. Also, it was not all original commentary. ESPN had a boxing series where they took old fights and had Ferdie Pacheo do the fight call with overdub years later. Ferdie Pacheco could be heard calling parts of the Ali-Norton fight in this film which is interesting because Ferdie Pacheco was actually in Ali's corner for this fight as his personal physician which he had been since 1962.
I believe the origins of the "Norton was robbed" myth in the third Ali fight stems from the fact Ali had come off two impressive KO's of Joe Frazier and European Champion Richard Dunn going into the Norton fight. Ali was sitting down on his punches more at this point in his career, exhibiting more power, yet still had that unbelievable speed (actually timed to be faster than the lighter Sugar Ray Robinson and Leonard). Ali had predicted, and many experts were agreeing, that he would stop Norton within five rounds (at the end of the fight, Norton can be heard to yell at Ali over and over, "Five rounds!? Five rounds!?"). So fighting Ali to a stand still instead of being KO'd in five rounds was a major upset and accomplishment for Norton which somehow over the years morphed into "Norton was robbed."
In conclusion--Ali-Norton III: Close decision that could have gone ether way? Yes. Robbery? NO!
If one wants to watch a documentary about the 1976 New York police strike and the robberies that apparently took place in and around Yankee Stadium the night of the fight, maybe this film is worth a look. On the other hand, if its reporting of the strike is as biased as its reporting of the fight, maybe not.