And what do any of those questions have to do with the refs bs decision? You can have your opinion on what would have happened but since we have never seen Groves in the same situation at that level we dont know the outcome do we-and even if we had just because a fighter reacts one way once doesnt mean they will again- clearly ridiculous to assume the same thing would happen and surely very simple boxing logic. No 2 fights are the same So your questions mean absolutely nothing in respect of this fight
Billy how are things with ricky I have a lot of American friends given me the usual rubbish about Crawford , I have told them straight Crawford will be finished by the 9th ! come on the rickster, hope he is back to his best
I watched it again the other night and tried to be as objective as possible, and just don't see how Groves was in any big trouble, enough to be stopped, his legs weren't wobbled in the least.
I know mate there's something fishy going on its either the Sky team or Froch and his brothers because these ****s are not true boxing fans.
What's the deal with continously bringing this fight up around here? I know Groves deserves a rematch but please let it go for a while. I also get the feeling like if this had been about let's say Georgiy Gorovic from Belarus who got 'brit reffed' against Froch there wouldn't be much of a fallout at all. I know it's a lot more low key, but where was the outrage about Chisora's 9 count win against Scott when clearly behind on points? He wasn't 'gone' at all. Clearly Scott deserves a rematch as well getting screwed over like that. Bottom line, let it go. Froch clearly isn't giving Groves the rematch, he knows it's going to be tough while he can make good money fighting lesser opponents.
I am sometimes stubborn and I may be in a minority however I will categorically state that I will NOT buy a PPV to watch Froch UNLESS it's the rematch against GG.
I did, because it was hard to miss. But a different situation of course. Beltran vs Burns was a completed fight, wich was clear in Beltran's favor. The Froch vs Groves and Chisora vs Scott were incomplete with both a bullsh|t stoppage in round 9 with the opponent clearly ahead on points and a pretty good chance to win the fight when the fight was allowed to continue. So in the Beltran case it was about can you defend the draw, while the others were about can you defend the come from behind british stoppage.
Meh, I have lost interest in a rematch due to the way they both behave. I think the stoppage was premature and believe that Groves would have probably won but it is not inconceivable that Froch can be well beaten for the majority of a fight and pull out the win (Jermaine Taylor). I actually think a rematch is still a 50-50 affair if it were to happen anyway as I believe that Froch didn't believe that Groves belonged in the ring with him and wasn't prepared properly.
Problem is and always has been on here, people let their likes / dislikes get in the way of a rationale discussion. The whole Froch / Groves stuff is boring now, very boring. There's opinons/arguments for why the re-match should happen and why not, at the end of the day it was a great fight that we were robbed of seeing the proper end result. It's not like it's the first time its happened and it definately wont be the last. It is neither fighters fault what occured and yes they can all talk nonsense but respect what these guys do and what they have achieved. Regardless of the re-match Groves should focus on beating everyone else as I think he can dominate the division. There always a time where there's a clash in era where one fighter is near the end and the other is coming through.