Who do you think won that fight, Froch or Dirrell?

I think the judges got it about right, the fight was close enough to go either way,Dirrell maybe didnt do quite enough to become world champion,but Froch struggled getting near a fast switch hitter,maybe Froch looked the more assured and agressive always looking to get on the front foot and swung the judges view
Styles make fights , this was a poor spectacle that looked ugly at times ,Abraham /Taylor was more interesting and a Froch/Abraham clash would be very exciting if probably short................

 

Ive never understood that either, its like people are admitting he won yet didnt deserve to win the title.

If a fighter wins 7 rounds and has no points taken away for knockdowns, misbehaving etc he should win the fight, whether its away against a world champ or not.

And to answer the topic question - Dirrell 8 - 4 I had it.

 

I agree. Why is all the onus on Dirrell? Yeah he made it ugly, he ran, leaned on, stunk the place out really. But he won.
Froch didn't land more than four shots on Dirrell. He got shown up.
I'm embarrassed by the decision.

 

I'm not saying people aren't entitled to say Froch won, but they shouldn't be using the title thing as part of their argument.

 

The argument is painfully thin without it though:yepWith or without infact

 

Had Dirrell by a single point.

Is there a way to see the rbr breakdown of the official scores? If not, it should only be a matter of time before these are made available to fans after the fight, surely?

 

I didn't have Froch winning on that basis.

 

You can infer what you like and I'm sure you'll draw inferences which best suit your argument but that isn't what I said. Personally I had Froch winning 114-113. My point is that JUDGES in BOXING (not me) have almost always favoured the home fighter. JUDGES in BOXING almost always favour the reigning champion and guess what? JUDGES in BOXING almost always favour the guy that is being aggressive and trying to make a fight of it. When there is little in the fight to otherwise determine a winner these factors usually come in to play and it is NAIVE and FOOLISH to ignore this well precedented pattern. Dirrells corner were obviously well aware of this, hence the remark going into the 12th to "to take out Froch, saying Dirrell wouldn't get a decision" Dirrell did little to make good on this advice and the result was him losing a split decision as his corner's past experience led them to predict.

 

Well said that man

 

You don't need to write words in capitals for me to acknowledge them, I'm not a child. I take on board your points but Carl wasn't using effective aggression, he looked very amateur at times. It was a close fight, with some rounds hard to score, but there's no way Dirrell lost 7 rounds.

As for what Dirrell's corner said to him before he came out for the last round, that could be construed as kidology (which there is also a precedent for) but whatever suits your argument eh?

 

My impression of the fight was Dirrell didn't deserve to win for the way he behaved.

Froch was absolutely shite and showed his limitations at this level but it didn't help that all Dirrell did was spoil and throw the odd counter. He was falling all over the shop and whining when there really was no need most of the time. It certainly wasn't a boxing masterclass from Dirrell.

He looks like he has the skills but the way he was grabbing hold and falling all over the place there is no way he should be called a World Champion.

Froch was missing wildly and should've been more composed on the occasions he got Dirrell onto the ropes, if he fought with a bit more intelligence he probably could've won the fight with less controversy.

I actually thought Taylor caused Froch more problems in terms of skill difference than Dirrell, Dirrell made the fight a close scrappy affair though.

 

"You're no daisy - no daisy at all"

:good

 

Froch didn't score highly in any of the categories that win a fight.

Clean effective punching - He landed about 3 power punches all night and was missing wildly. Not just hitting gloves and arms but he was whooping some air. The jab was his best punch but was still ineffective compared to his fights with Taylor and Pascal.

Defence - He was hurt at least 2 times quite badly, he was tagged clean throughout particularly towards the end.

Effective aggressiveness - Aggressive yes, effective not even close.

Ring generalship - You might think he was the ring general just because he marched forward and Dirrell was 'running' but in reality Dirrell was the one doing what he came in to do, he was moving and walking Carl onto all his punches. Carl wanted to apply effective pressure and he didn't do it.

 

:good

 

Would be good to watch it on YT in the next few days.... see if my mind is changed.