I tried, folks. 

No, really, I did.

But I just don’t see it.

No matter where I cruised in the cyber boxing universe early Sunday morning – within hours of the 140-pound title fight in Glasgow – I just couldn’t muster the indignance others have seemed to manage.

Even though I did everything you’re supposed to do in these situations. I watched every second of every round, lest I miss a decisive moment. I did so with the sound turned off on the first watch, lest I be influenced by complicit broadcasters. And yet somehow, in the aftermath, I’m not ridden with angst.

Yes, Josh Taylor retained his junior welterweight/super lightweight titles.

And yes, life has gone on here in the new country.

For the record and before everyone catalogues my illicit allegiances and identifies all the parties aligning to help make my monthly mortgage payments, I had Jack Catterall winning by a 113-112 score.

Specifically, I gave him rounds 1, 4, 5, 6, 8 and 12 – including a two-pointer in the eighth. That leaves rounds 2, 3, 7, 9 and 10 for the champion – including a two-pointer in the 10th. Last but not least, it was a 9-9 count in the 11th, thanks to a ridiculous referee call.

But even though only judge Howard Foster agreed with my tabulations on each and every round, I’m not insulted because Victor Loughlin and Ian John-Lewis went slightly in the other direction.

It was their 114-111 (7-4-1) and 113-112 (6-5-1) scores that overrode Foster’s lone outlier card (and mine, too) and leaned it in Taylor’s favor – allowing him to cling to his four title belts.

And the reason I’m not inclined to impugn their scoring integrity today is simple.

Because it was a close fight. Not a runaway. Not a robbery. Not the result of some grand promotional conspiracy. Yes, Catterall threw and landed more shots. And yes, he scored a legit knockdown. But even given those realities, which are inarguable, it’s still not a controversy to me.

Because nearly every round and exchange looked the same across 36 minutes. 

Catterall would stand in a southpaw stance, flick an intermittently violent right jab, and try either an overhand left to the head or a hard shot to the body as Taylor pressed forward. 

Then the two would tie up. 

One of the fighters would wrap the other in a front headlock and over-officious referee Marcus McDonnell would come in, grab their wrists, and issue a sweeping declaration both would ignore. 

The only variety to that pattern came when Taylor would be a little more patient, perhaps throw a combination or two, or somehow manage to evade his foe’s attempts to smother the offense. 

It occurred a bit more in the fight’s second half than the first, which provided the optics that support the notion that Taylor rallied down the stretch and did enough to offset statistical differences. 

It was good enough for me to give him a 3-2-1 rounds edge across the final six after I’d given Catterall a 4-2 advantage through the initial half dozen. And it was good enough for some others, too.

No less an authority than two-division champ Tim Bradley leaned into the optics angle, suggesting that it carried a good bit of weight in a fight this tight. “Taylor could be winning these rounds,” he said. “They’re close rounds. Just on body language. He’s pressing forward. He’s being a champion.”

Bradley’s broadcast partner, Andre Ward, agreed.

He scored it 114-112 in the champion’s favor. 

And unless you’re ready to say a guy with a “Son of God” nickname, a Hall of Fame resume, and a reputation that’s beyond reproach in a perpetually seedy business is in on it all, too, it’s a moot point.

You think Taylor won? Terrific. You think Catterall won? Great. Either way, it’d be hard for anyone not sharing bloodlines with one of the principals to suggest either man won more than seven rounds. 

And if you do suggest that with any conviction, might I suggest a refresher course or two.

In spite of knee-jerk headlines that drift into ALL CAPS or others that insist a consistently narrow fight in the eyes of respected arbiters was somehow the biggest robbery in the history of British boxing, there’s just no comparison when it comes to real crimes against boxing’s royal humanity.

Go ahead, my jolly, old, tinfoil-hatted friends, and ask yourself if it was worse than Lewis-Holyfield I in New York, in which the British-based lion was denied a unified title? Or was it more outrageous than Fury-Wilder I, in which another Brit was denied another heavyweight run in Las Vegas?

And if you stretch the debate to a worldwide stage, it gets even more difficult to come up with a rationale that it even registers as a blip on the bad decision radar – even within the last 12 months.

The unanimous nod for Gabriel Maestre over Mykal Fox in their 12-rounder at welterweight seemed far more worthy of frustration last summer in Minneapolis. And back in England, how about running back Campbell Hatton’s six-rounder over Sonni Martinez on the Joshua-Usyk undercard before even thinking – let alone saying out loud – that the Taylor-Catterall decision was anything beyond debate-worthy.

I know it’s a clicks business these days. And I understand that clicks pay the bills.

But to these eyes, the worst decisions of the weekend came far more from writers than judges.

* * * * * * * * * * 

This week’s title-fight schedule: 

No title fights scheduled.

Last week's picks: 2-0 (WIN: Taylor, Okolie) 

2022 picks record: 4-2 (66.7 percent percent) 

Overall picks record: 1,213-394 (75.5 percent) 

NOTE: Fights previewed are only those involving a sanctioning body's full-fledged title-holder – no interim, diamond, silver, etc. Fights for WBA "world championships" are only included if no "super champion" exists in the weight class. 

Lyle Fitzsimmons has covered professional boxing since 1995 and written a weekly column for Boxing Scene since 2008. He is a full voting member of the Boxing Writers Association of America. Reach him at fitzbitz@msn.com or follow him on Twitter – @fitzbitz.