Boxing must change.

I recently watched the European middleweight title fight between Spada and Barker.

The latter was close to landing twice as many punches as his opponent (official stats) - and his work was harder, crisper and more effective.
Consequently, I marked the twelve rounds as a massive win to Barker by a whopping 120 to 110 points. Commentator and former World Lightweight Champion, Jim Watt, marked it as 119 - 110. The Italian might just have sneaked one round but I sincerely doubt it.
The three judges all got the overall result correct but by margins of just two/three rounds. Meaning that Spada had been awarded an unbelievable FIVE rounds.
So, happily no evidence of dodgy dealings as Mr Barker rightly gained his title.
But if the fight had been just a fraction closer, it is bizarre but conceivable that Spada could have been awarded the fight!
From time time appalling decisions are made and - British boxing is 'clean' and as is European, apparently, so it is the systems which must be looked at.
It is perhaps overdue for experimentation with the scoring being announced after each round. That way, possibly perverse decisions become apparent earlier and make ongoing bad judgements less likely because of the psychological pressure which would be exerted on judges and scoring referees.
Part of the problem is that some rounds in boxing are very subjective and entirely dependent on the judges' attitudes and prejudices. That was emphatically not the case in this fight.