All good, we're just working with different definitions of 'taking a dive'.Quitting like he did, is diving.
I'm not saying Galls team paid him to do so or anything untoward like that (I think people equate diving with being rigged which isn't the case imo). Browne took a sum of money and had quit before he even got hurt. That's a dive. Both teams don't need to be in on it, Browne hoodwinked the promoter too
Sadly, not many in the media calling it out, they're trying to legitimize Gallen instead which is still laughable. Article this morning that Huni is next. Please be true!!
We see the 'fight' and Browne's performance in the same way: a sad joke upon the sport.
I also agree on the media point. Australian boxing seems reasonably healthy and interesting at the moment, especially given its lack of world champions, and certain aspects of boxing media seem very interested in extracting maximum value from the commodity at the expense of competent analysis.
One thing which has bothered me lately is boxing commentary on Australian fights, which largely shirks the challenge of providing a speculative score on each round and fight. Commentators call the action but don't trouble themselves to give an opinion on who is winning/has won the fight.
Not an issue for some, but it seems to me that they are loathe to be out of step with the official decision, which means that there is not enough questioning of dubious outcomes. There have been a couple of headscratchers lately where 'up and comers' have been given the nod over older fighters, and where the commentators just went with the flow of the result (e.g. Ben Mahoney over Kris George a few weeks back, and Issac Hardman's win over Tej Singh late last year).
Now I'm ranting. What's boxing without some weirdness?