By Gabriel Princewill-

Lindsay Tucker told the eye of media.com that both Tyson Fury and Wladimir Klitschko’s team would have known that an immediate rematch was against the IBF rules.

A rematch contract cannot be entered into on occasions when the winner of a championship fight must have a mandatory defence immediately after., Tucker explained.

The world title fight between Klitschko and Fury was embedded with a rematch clause stipulating the former’s right to an immediate rematch in the event of defeat.

This agreement was counter to the rules imposed by the IBF  that states an obligation that the winner of the fight faces the mandatory opponent( in this case Vyacheslou Glazkov )in their next defence, Tucker told the eye of media.com

”Klitschko obviously wanted to be able to fight for his belts back if he lost, which is why he asked for the rematch clause.   But Klitschko and his team should have known that it was against the rules”. Fury’s team should have known this too. Tucker admitted that the contract had mo legal binding force. He said  ”it wasn’t legal because it was against the rules.” It was done in another country, but we still told Fury the rules.

Against the rules, but easily broken by the reigning world champion at the time, Klitschko called his own shots. In response to the IBF’s call on Fury to defend his belt, the former world champion argued illegitimately that he had to honour his contract to Klitschko for a rematch.  Tucker explained ” we told him that the rematch contract was against the rules and that he must choose between the rematch with Klitschko or defending his IBF belt. against Russian opponent Glasgov.

Fury, understandably wanted the extra money a rematch with Klitschko would fetch; money that eventually eluded him following his subsequent withdrawal from this same rematch.  Yet, in the midst of his stubborn defiance, was a readily obvious truth in relation to the limited efforts made by team Fury.  Neither Fury nor his team tried hard enough to secure the IBF mandatory defence, without necessarily losing the rematch against Wladimir Klitschko.

 Team Fury somehow failed to grasp the straightforward fact that they could have both the rematch fight and the IBF defence, one after the other, but the mandatory defence must come first.  The IBF rules do not stand in the way of a champion earning a rematch, they just prohibit an arrangement for a rematch immediately following a championship contest in which a mandatory opponent waits in the wings.  Fury and his team must have known this.  If they didn’t know the obvious, why did the IBF not clarify this?

”We were not made aware of the rematch contract at the time it was made, Tucker told the eye of media.com. This was all coming out after their fight”, he said.

There is also the hidden and added possibility that Tyson Fury did not want to risk losing the IBF belt. Russian Vyachesku Glasgov may have posed a theoretical risk to Fury, but not a big one.  Tyson Fury had already surprised many fans and boxing pundits by comprehensively defeating Wladimir Klitschko on points in November 2015. In doing so, Fury captured the WBC, WBO,  and IBF belts from Klitschko who had held the belts and dominated the division for 11 years.

He would have beaten Glasgov too, but he and his team may have been disinclined to take the risk.  Glasgov eventually handed the belt to Martin who won by default, after the Russian knee went during the fight. Martin also unwittingly handed the title to Joshua when he was sparked out in two uneventful rounds at the 02 arena.

That victory was the start of a potentially great journey for Joshua, but one which would also ignite the destructive force of jealousy and bitterness in Tyson Fury. He had just conquered Klitschko, but another future potentially conqueror with an impressively cut figure was posing around with one of his belts.

Klitschko admitted he was hurting and shocked from the loss. He yearned the opportunity to be even with Fury in the rematch, but that opportunity may have now disappeared forever.

With Fury off the scene,  promoter Eddie Hearn jumped in to fill the void by presenting Anthony Joshua to replace Fury.

A deal for the Joshua-Klitschko fight was agreed, and with that deal comes the strong likelihood that Klitschko will suffer his second consecutive loss, probably more devastating than the first. Then he will be gone with the wind, for who would want to see him in action after that?

Fury’s  team believe the IBF belt stripped from him began the cycle of depression which culminated in his well-documented mental health issues. He apparently felt aggrieved and cheated, but Fury was wrong in feeling so.  He is still wrong.

The hard truth is that the gypsy former king and his handlers were either too inadequate and incompetent to handle the seeming dilemma properly at the time. Intelligent and well thought out negotiations would have provided the ideal scenario in which Fury defended the IBF belt and still earn a tonne from a rematch he stood a good chance of winning again.

 The alternative explanation is that team Fury knew what they were doing and simply wanted to skip the IBF defence.

Whichever of the two theories one adapts, what emerges is this fact: Klitschko’s rematch contract with Tyson Fury was illegal, and Tyson Fury and his team did nothing substantive to rectify it. Klitschko may never get an opportunity to exact revenge against Fury, if as most of us expect, Anthony Joshua puts the final nail in the coffin and blows him away on April 27.

The eye of media.com contacted Klitschko’s manager, Bernd Boente for their comments,  and also Mick Hennessey, who was handling Fury’s career at the time.

Neither was available for a comment.