I have some questions

Rating: 5/10 (16 January 2006)

Why wasn't the fight stopped when the 'champ' took the -first- blatant ultra-cheap shot, (hitting the opponent already down), -especially- after she'd been repeatedly warned for -much- lesser offenses? Why wasn't the corner going nuts trying to get the fight stopped? Why weren't the -judges- demanding that the ref stop the fight? I know the movie is focused on other matters, but a just little bit of police action after the ATTEMPTED MURDER in the ring would have been nice. Why did her hospital-visiting mother say that she "lost" the fight? Why did Franky say she "didn't win" the fight? Are they saying she was disqualified for not being able to continue? Is this some kind of a joke? Am I missing something here? There must be a way to make the villain a villain without straining suspension of disbelief so severely. This,after all, was not a movie about professional wrestling. How can these absurd errors be tolerated by so many reviewers?