After watching Groves v DeGale, it seemed Groves' gameplan was very similar to Dirrell's against Froch (probably because they sparred). Very defensive, negative some say, yet he was awarded the decision. As the British title seems to take precedence over the Commonwealth, should you not have to be more offensive in order to take the title. It would be ok if James fought that way, as it's just his job to keep it, not win it. If that isn't the case, should Dirrell have been awarded the decision (although it was close).
Both were close fights, as the scores reflect. I personally scored it for Dirrell, but you could argue a Froch victory. Same for the Groves-DeGale fight. It was close but you could argue either way. (can't change what happened, though)
i think he underestimated groves. he was surprised the "ugly boy" could use speed, feints, and boxing against him and come out the victor. he probably was expecting groves to come out throwing bombs, which would have worked to degales favor
degale lost the fight because he wasn't active enough. he was stalking groves, but nothing else. it's his own fault. froch had a much higher workrate against dirrell than degale did with groves. landed way more punches as well. dirrell was way too negative to get the decision. he was bending down all the time, and falling over. it was pathetic to watch. froch came to win, dirrell didn't. so he lost. and rightly so.