I think Froch deserved the victory. Reading this tonight got me thinking. A lot of people diasagree with my opinion. So i rewatched the fight with no volume, still I had Froch winning a close fight. Then i began to wonder if I am just being biased agianst Dirrels style. I looked at the scorecard of one of the best boxing sport writers. Dan Rafael. He had Froch winning 114-113. People can argue with english viewers being biased. But this is a well respected man who picked Dirrel to win the fight.
I agree, and people often forget the wonderous effect that turning the volume down can have when watching a fight. i found it especially peculiar that on the british broadcasting of the fight the two commentators John thaxton and John Rawless (i think) said that by around the 8th round (which i had froch winning) that froch was 2 points ahead, and yet by the start of the 11th (in spite of the point deduction) Dirrell was now 2 points up. now i'm no genius but for a fighter to pickup 5 points in 2 rounds without knocking down your opponent or them being penalised, is pretty much impossible.
Whats funny is I had music balsting and people talking so I couldn't hear the commentary until I rewatched the fight this morning and guess what Dirrell still won the fight !:good
But my point is, a lot of posters on here have said its all hometown politics. If this was the case there would be no reason for Rafael to score in favour of Froch. I wanted to find someone who picked Dirrel but felt Froch deserved the nod. Just to prove there are people out there who felt Froch genuinely won.
It could have gone either way.. the majority of NON US fans I've come across have said Dirrell.. But my problem is hugely with the scores some of the judges came out with.. it was a shame for boxing..
fair enough. i certainly believe dirrell won the fight but i also believe he could have been busier and sealed the win.
Rafeal is not the gospel of boxing ..This the same man that picked Kelly Pavlik to beat Hopkins by KO ! Dirrell won that fight with ease ..For anyone to score the 12th rd for Froch is beyond me .
No. Dirrell was robbed. It was not "one of those fights" that "could have gone either way". Either you know how to score boxing and you realise that Dirrell won, or you don't.
If he'd have fought 1-9 as he did 10-12 he would've won in everyone's eyes. He should've been busier but he wasn't. I'm sure he'll improve throughout the tourney.
Again I didn't say he was the gospel of boxing. My point is that there are people who genuinely thought he won!
Of course, I don't know how to score boxing, neither does Dan Rafael, neither does the two JUDGES who's job it is to score. You are right, we are all wrong.
In my opinion Direll did more and should have got the decision. Froch was wobbly/hurt from a single shot from round 10 to 12, Direll, as expected didn't do much to take advantage of it. Neither guy DESERVED a victory. Froch is just terrible in general and Direll was over cautious for my taste. If you're using movement backing up at least throw some damn punches, the guy is terrible enough to be wide open for a SINGLE shot the entire damn night. He only decided to throw in the 10th and when he did Froch was wobbly.
If you think that there were seven rounds of that fight that are clear and undisputable for either fighter, then you aren't watching properly.
I noticed that too. They had Froch ahead and then all of a sudden they say that Froch is in the same situation as in Taylor fight, can he KO his opponent.