Very clearly, close but clear and not a real argument for Froch. I'm guessing LUFC had Dirrell beating Froch as he's not on his list, I did too
Froch gets disassembled by Ward -> he is hopeless A fight later after KOing an untested Bute -> he is beating Calzaghe in a decision Maybe we should be discussing if Froch can KO Hagler at MW.
Because ultimately these are our opinions, they count for nothing, neither are consensus robberies, just close fights. If you to discuss this objectively, then opinions can't affect your judgement and thus Kessler beat Froch, and Froch bear Dirrell regardless of yours and my opinion
Judgement is entirely based on opinions in a sport as subjective as this. In my world where i'm comparing froch and calz, my opinion is the be all and end all. If I see a fight as a victory I count it as a victory. It's that simple.
This idea that the sport is entirely subjective is not one I can jive with. The boxers have three people they need to imperss to win - the judges. Blatant robberies aside (and even then, i'd proceed with caution when watching a fight on TV), if you manage to impress the judges in accordance with the rules of boxing, then you have done enough, and that should be respected. You won't see people second guessing the judges at the gymnastics this Olympics, or ice-skating, or skateboarding etc. etc. etc. Boxing does itself no favours, but there is no reasonable reason to start over-turning justifiable results you've seen on television. That's not how boxing is scored, nor should it be. It would result in favouritism towards showey, fast punches, lots of landed shots as opposed to hard punches going in solidly. There's a difference in perception here that is important to acknoweldge and understand.