You have to take the title from the champ!!!

Froch didnt win 7 rounds, he won 6 and the point deduction cost Direll the fight. Some of the rounds were very close where Froch would miss a lot and Direll showed execlent defense but didnt capitalize on the misses and only ran and fell to the floor. Those rounds could go either way and the judges prefered to give them to the champion who was trying to make a fight. Us fans want to see entertainment first and foremost but we also enjoy an excellent display of ring generalship even if it consists of running such as Floyd Mayweather's but what Dirrell showed yesterday was not it and its not acceptable. With that kind of performance get the **** out of the turnament and put in someone worthy instead like Bute so we can have the best of the best.

 

I agree entirely, about the notion anyway. A wins more rounds than B A wins champ or no champ

 

You don't have to give him seven rounds for Froch to win. You only have to give him six, owing to the point deduction.

There were four rounds that were clearly Dirrells, 1st, 4th, 9th and 11th. He had the point deduction in the 11th.

There were three rounds that were clearly Frochs, 2nd, 10th and 12th, anyone who didn't score the 12th for Froch needs to realise that Dirrell himself said he gave up that round.

That leaves five rounds that were too close to call. Running away, tying up and clinching and being unwilling to engage may cause a judge to give the closer round to the more aggressive/busier fighter - this is well known in boxing, it's how Hopkins lost to Calzaghe, although Calzaghe was much clearer and precise than Froch.

My scorecard on the first score was 115-112 to Dirrell, but on a second watch, I was 114-113 to Froch.

 

Totally agreeable. The title becomes temporarly vacant from the start of the fight.

 

This is exactly correct but that wasnt the case last night. What happened last night was that the challenger won his rounds more convincingly making it seem like he was the better man, but there were many rounds were he wouldnt capitalize on champions mistakes and eventually forced the judges to give those rounds to the champion because at least the champion was trying to do something, throw some jabs, hit during clinches including some dirty tactics while the challenger was focusing on running, hitting gloves and falling to the ground to avoid being hit and disrupt opponents offence.

 

If a round is very close it should be scored a draw...

 

HE landed more in every round? No. HE landed more on the whole but like you said the rules state that you have to score each round individually. So it doesnt matter that he outlanded Froch 3 to 1 in round 11 and wobbled him because he gave away 6 other rounds of that fight to Froch, 6 very close rounds.

 

10 point must system was in effect I believe. In any case the judges usually give it to the man trying to make a fight not the one trying to spoil the event, especially if that man is defending his title and the other one is trying to take it from him.

 

Well said OP. Dirrell clearly won that but the excuse is he didn't do enough to take the title. Complete bollocks. He's gained another fan in me though.

 

I really thought you knew how boxing worked. It has been this way for all the years I have followed boxing(30).

Even commentators tell you this on occation if a rookieviewer should come on board.

 

Froch is not a ****ing CHAMP!!!

He won a vacant belt and defended it once.

Guys, Tyson was champion, Roy Jones was a champion, Calzaghe was a champion.
Carl Froch is not and will never be a champion.

 

So when judging a fight you only take positives into account? and I really don't how you can say running away from your opponent is ring generalship nor was there any effective agression from Dirrell

we were robbed of a good fight last night because of Dirrells dirty tactics and menatlity

 

No I think you will find he is a "champ" I think the WBC rules dictate that after winning a vacant belt after 2 defenses you are crowned a WBC champ...or I could be wrong