Why does Tarver deserve a rematch?

[dalliance13]

I don't understand... How can this be justified???

[MANGLER]

He had a rematch clause. Dawson had to do it or be stripped.

[larry x]

champions have rematch clauses in their contracts..if dawson didnt fight him again he wouldve been stripped..rematch clause remember that

[DarchinyFAN]

He doesnt deserve one.... He happened to have a clause that granted him one though. I don't think anyone invisioned Dawson blowing out Tarver as bad as he did the first time.

[larry x]

id think after 2 years on this forum you'd know what a rematch clause is

[TheSurgeonMDMPH]

I don't understand... How can this be justified???

Because Dawson signed a piece of legal paper known as a contract that stipulated that in the event of a Tarver loss, a rematch would be in order. Law *****s fan demand any day!

Plus, there were no other big money fights that would allow for Tarver to be bought off for a fight.

[The_Visitation]

I don't understand... How can this be justified???

It was in the contract, as it often is. That's all the justification needed.

Could have been worse. Tarver might have had a brother Chad would have to fight as well if he won the rematch.. ehem...

[Pullcounter]

He had a rematch clause. Dawson had to do it or be stripped.

/thread damn some of uu guys are dense

[dalliance13]

thanks... guess Tarver just wants the cash then? or perhaps he likes public humiliation.

[Chr0nic]

dawson should've just dropped the title and gone to 168
tarver aint worth a rematch after the lesson dawson gave him