There was alot of English fans, media alike just as disgusted with Dirrell vs Froch verdict as anybody else. But, it shouldn't have been a big surprise because Dirrell would had to Ko Froch just to get a draw in England. Dirrell control the fight from start to finish and landed at a 2-1 pace the whole fight. Wheather you like Dirrell way of fighting or not he still won the fight even a blind man could see that. Dirrell won the fight hands down and haters saying he lost is like I'm saying Jones Jr was robbed agaist Calazage. Yes, Dirrell was that dominate during the whole fight, 1.
I'm not a hater . . . but I scored it Froch ahead by a round. Dirrel doesn't have to KO FROCH . . . he just need to throw more punches. :deal
Like Lewis needed to KO Holyfield to get a draw in the US ? You guys have had home advantage for years. Mayweather, Jones and Hopkins combined have fought once abroad. You want all the advantages. Now that your boys are no longer a force in boxing they have to go on the road. As for Dirrell there is a saying that sums him up perfectly, "you can teach a man to box but you can't teach a man to fight" He boxed well in spurts, but when he should have fought he held and bitched. Thats what cost him
From an article of The Sweet Science: I don't think people, except for the jackasses on ESB who "know boxing", are disgusted. It was a close, ugly, difficult-to-score fight. Froch got the decision because he wanted to fight and Dirrell didn't stand his ground until much too late in the fight.
He also needed to stop clinching, it seemed he wanted to sodomize Froch! You r supposed to come to a fight , not to a rubbing contest!
Dirrell outlanded and outhre Froch 2-1 in the fight. Punch stats are not avaliable to Showtime boxing, it never has been. those numbers would have backed up Dirrell great performance agasit froch. Frotch did nothing to win the fight except for take punches to the face and miss punches all night. I agree there have been several bad decision in America and each time I said the fighter I rooted for lost the fight and didn't make nothing up saying he won. Right is right and wrong is wrong, 1.
If the stats aren't available, where are you getting the 2:1 ratio? It was a lousy performance - there can't be anyone who thought that was a mature, composed showing, surely? He was run ragged around the ring because he was scared to engage. Personally, I think he needed the loss - it'll make him grow up as a fighter and realise he needs to bring it to his opponent and THEN get away to make them look foolish.
Common sense and following boxing over 20 years cleary states it was atleast 2-1 in punches thrown and landed by Dirrell. Some have suggested it was almost 3-1. Froch lost there no two ways about it. Dirrell won 8-9 rounds in the fight if your being honest with yourself.
I had Froch leading with one point and my friend watching with me had Froch up by two points. That wasn’t a robbery just a close fight. Dirrel throw some rounds away with his inactivity and that ultimately cost him the fight.
I dont agree. When he was having good rounds and Froch could lay a glove on him, he should have been stepping it up for a while and guaranteeing that he got the round. Instead he left a lot of rounds on the table. I had it very close, could have seen it go either way, but i felt it was Dirrells to win after a few rounds and he didnt do enough to make sure.
So no facts, just estimation. That's not empirical and therefore not valid. That's not common sense, that's using your opinion as evidence - it's not, it's your opinion. There are no official stats. End of discussion. Punch stats have been the biggest detriment to fights this decade - everyone makes out that punches landed = winner of the fight. It doesn't. I have been honest - I felt Dirrell had won it at the time, but you are dreaming if you think Dirrell's pitiful activity and constant running/clinching meant there were 8-9 rounds you could score clearly for him. Even the majority of the press in favour of Dirrell scored it incredibly close - because it was a close, scrappy ugly fight. All that matters in this discussion is one cold, hard fact: Froch SD W12 Dirrell And whatever you say, that's how it will be forever - all your know-it-all bollocks won't change it because the judges, the professionals in charge of scoring the fight, felt Froch won.
