Robert McCracken on Ringside

Great response.

 

if i listed every piece of conjecture on this and other threads we'd be here all week, so that point is bollocks.

define recovery. a neurologist would state froch is still affected by the kd. he looked out when the right landed. what is amazing is that from watching telly you know better than a pro, world champ's corner team.

i have constantly condemned the stoppage as premature and panicky, which shows your last point up as bollocks again.

this *****-fest masquerading as a moral crusade is, i repeat, utterly ****ing pathetic.

 

Like groves said, mccraken doesn't know what mind games are even tho in his position he's working along side the best sociologists and mind coaches uk sport money can buy.

 

but you didn't, instead you posted "the only conjecture came from mccracken".

if people wanna put together cogent, accurate arguments to the relevant authorities, fine. but all that's happening here is a bunch of hysterical conspiracy theory pissing and moaning on the web.

 

You're right. Lets all ignore it whilst the Froch camp try and re-write history. The fact some people think you can't criticise certain fighters is just as pathetic as people griping about minute details. Team Froch's behaviour post fight as been dishonest and people are allowed to take umbrage with that.

 

the fact their opinion differs from yours (and indeed mine) does not mean they are dishonest. by all means criticize froch's defense, and the fact he talked **** directly after the fight, but the only things i have responded to have been utterly ridiculous. if the re-writing of history is your concern, why not comment on the portrayal of froch as a gutless chinny ducker who gasses out? and why pretend i posted something i didn't?

 

Statements such as the referee may have save GG's career are obviously dishonest as was claiming a rematch was a possibility when dessperate for a cheer. The Froch team know they are talking rubbish and that's why they are being dishonest. Carl and Rob are boxing men, they know the score and so they're being disingenuous. Imagine McCracken if Froch had been on the end if such a stoppage?

 

Because anyone with half an ounce of sense knows that anyone calling Froch a gutless chinny wanker is talking bull, especially after the other night!

 

I just rewatched the fight again its about 5 times now with my dad.

For me how can you land the punch of your life in the 1st round and then another 40 hard over hand rights and not KO your opponent. I know Carl's chin is great but come on how did Groves not knock him out?

Everyone wanking over his power and ring IQ need to rewatch it, if Froch had landed that much on groves he would have been in hospital

 

I think pretty much 90% of the posts on this forum is conjecture

 

obvious to you does not equate to fact. but to reiterate, it's the utter bull**** i have a problem with. like you calling froch a ducker, for instance. still a woeful stoppage, like i said all along.

 

Obvious to everyone mate. You don't really think that McCracken genuinely thinks those things.

If Froch ducks the rematch then he is a ducker. He hasn't ducked anyone yet but he seems to be posturing to avoid GG. It is the fight everyone wants, his promoter can make, makes sense financially and his opponent is desperate for. So if he rejects it to fight someone else how could that be interpreted as anything other than a blatant duck? You prob thought Bowe wasn't ducking Lewis right up until he threw his belt in the bin.

 

Just bear this in mind before you talk bollox