[mking55]

I just had this happen in a fight.

01:28 Ron Stander connects with an uppercut. He can make good use of that punch if he can continue to get inside.
940 371 27 - 0/0:0/0 - 0:0-10:2

01:28 Referee is giving Ron Stander a warning for using an open glove.
2100 822 21 - 0/0:0/0 - 0:0-10:2

01:28 Referee takes a point away from Stander!
4900 1342 26 - 0/0:0/0 - 0:0-10:2

01:37 Stander's corner is shouting at him to stay off the ropes.
500 230 25 - 0/0:0/0 - 0:0-10:2

01:45 Muhammad Ali gives a nice head feint and then lands a hook to the head of Ron Stander which made him blink.
760 289 27 - 0/0:0/0 - 0:0-12:2

01:45 Ali is being warned for butting. Referee is letting the judges know.
2100 819 21 - 0/0:0/0 - 0:0-12:2

01:49 Referee rules the foul to be blatant! He's disqualifying Muhammad Ali! Stander is the winner by disqualification!
5740 1431 28 - 0/0:0/0 - 0:0-12:2

I think that it is a mistake at the 1:28 mark to say in 1 line that the punch was a good punch and then have the referee see it in the next comment as a foul. The original punch message should be more ambivalent if the ref is going to see a foul.

At 1:45 Ali 'gives a nice head feint' and that hits Stander in the head.
At 1:45 the next comment says that the ref is warning Ali for head butting. But the comment before at 1:45 said it was a hook.
At 1:49 the ref rules the foul to be blatant. Ali is disqualified. What foul? The one at 1:45? If so, he got a warning. If not, where is the comment for the blatant foul that occurred in the previous 4 seconds?

This is very confusing and does not flow. I believe it to be totally out of whack and thought I would let you know.