Tuesday, May 26, 2026
Today's Edition

EveryNews

Stories that matter, signal over noise

Sports

Usyk Called the Stoppage "Robbery," WBC Deemed It Legitimate: What the Dispute Over the Usyk-Verhoeven Fight Actually Resolved

# Hollywood Actor and WBC President Give Opposite Assessments of One Referee and One Stoppage Between them — an appeal by Verhoeven and judge's scorecards, where the Dutchman was leading on points.

Tetiana Suchkova-Ladik

By Tetiana Suchkova-Ladik

May 26, 2026 · 2 min read

Usyk Called the Stoppage "Robbery," WBC Deemed It Legitimate: What the Dispute Over the Usyk-Verhoeven Fight Actually Resolved

The fight between Oleksandr Usyk and Rico Verhoeven, which took place in Giza, Egypt, on the night of May 24, officially ended in a technical knockout in the 11th round. However, the discussion surrounding referee Mark Lasson's decision did not fade after the final bell — it simply extended beyond the ring.

What happened in the 11th round

Until the penultimate round, the fight was unfolding not in Usyk's favor: according to judges' scorecards, two arbiters recorded a draw, one — an advantage for Verhoeven. Then Usyk knocked down the Dutchman twice. Verhoeven got up, but after the follow-up attack, the referee stopped the fight, awarding the victory to the Ukrainian via TKO. For Usyk, this is his 25th professional win, of which 16 came by knockout.

Verhoeven himself stated that the decision shocked him: "I understood that I just needed to work out that time on my feet. Put my hands up and block the punches. It seems to me that's what I was doing." Verhoeven's team filed an official protest on the night of the fight.

Statham and "robbery"

Hollywood actor Jason Statham — a longtime friend and public supporter of Verhoeven — reacted on Instagram emotionally and briefly:

"Rico! You did it, brother! Absolutely explosive performance! You were robbed, not given the chance to finish the job. An absurd stoppage right before the final round. This is a robbery."

— Jason Statham, Instagram

Separately, the actor called Usyk one of the greatest fighters in history — meaning the complaints were directed not at the champion, but at the referee and the system of recording results.

What the WBC said

WBC President Mauricio Sulaiman publicly assessed the judging and supported Lasson's decision: according to the organization's rules, a referee has the right to stop a fight if he believes the boxer is unable to defend himself — even when the fighter is heading to his corner or is already there. Verhoeven's appeal, thus, collided with a formal interpretation of the regulations, rather than a subjective assessment of the moment.

Why this is more than just a "spoiled finale"

This controversy is neither the first nor the last regarding the boundary between boxer protection and depriving him of a chance. Verhoeven came to heavyweight from kickboxing, completed 11 competitive rounds against the absolute champion and, by objective scorecards, was winning on points at the moment the fight was stopped. If the WBC reviews the appeal and supports the referee — this will become a precedent that will procedurally close the discussion, but not substantively.

If the appeal reveals violations in Lasson's actions — the question arises whether a rematch will be scheduled and under what conditions Usyk will agree to it against an opponent who officially lost.

Related

Latest

Business

EU Against Google: Why the Latest Fine Could Change More Than Previous Ones

# European Regulators Target Google Again — This Time Over Digital Markets Act Violations. What's Behind the Accusations and Why It Matters Beyond the Corporation European regulators have renewed their scrutiny of Google, this time focusing on alleged violations of the Digital Markets Act. The charges underscore Brussels' increasingly aggressive stance on big tech monopolies and what officials say are anticompetitive practices. The accusations center on how Google leverages its dominance across multiple digital services — from search to advertising to mobile platforms — to disadvantage competitors. Regulators claim the company is using its market power in ways that stifle innovation and limit consumer choice. The case carries significance far beyond Google itself. It signals how the EU is attempting to enforce its landmark Digital Markets Act, legislation designed to curb the gatekeeping power of tech giants. A potential penalty could set precedent for how other large technology companies face similar scrutiny. For consumers and smaller tech firms, the outcome could reshape the digital landscape by creating more room for competition. For Google, fines and operational restrictions could fundamentally alter its business model in Europe, the world's most stringent regulatory market. The case also reflects a broader geopolitical divide, with the EU pursuing a regulatory approach that contrasts sharply with the lighter-touch oversight favored in the United States.

May 26, 2026