Relax about Dirrell vs. Froch...

Hmm. Why would you say that in this thread?:huh

 

It was a dirty fight on BOTH sides. Let's not pretend that Froch as going out fighting a gentlemanly bout. He hit on the break (first illegal thing done in the fight), hit behind the head, pushed Dirrell's head down and even hip tossed the kid. Dirrell, in my mind, responded in kind by making it a dirty fight.

Dirrell landed the more active punches, was able to hit Froch when he wanted and avoid getting hit when he didn't. He hurt Froch noticably a few times in the fight and was EFFECTIVE when he chose to be aggressive. Froch failed to cut off the ring, landed only two telling punches in the whole fight, and flat out missed most of his others. Sorry, but if Dirrell was close enough to hit Froch, and he clearly was at times, the Froch was close enough to hit Dirrell, yet he didn't.

Even when Froch had Dirrell within range or backup up into a corner or against the ropes he was hesitant to throw because he was concerned about getting countered. It's not like he came in guns blazing. Walking towards a guy and then standing there is not "effective aggression". Froch could have done more to initiate exchanges when Dirrell was in range but he was afraid of getting countered and he threw very little with any malicious intent.

Ugly fight, close only in the sense that in the middle rounds you almost hate to give it to either fighter, but Dirrell clearly got the better of him and deserved the nod.

He also showed that his has the ability to fight 12 rounds and with some more maturity and another half dozen high level fights under his belt he can be a real force. Froch, on the other hand, is as good as he'll ever be, which isn't saying much. Kessler makes him look like a journeyman, and I think Kessler is merely a solid good fighter, not a great one.

 

great thread

 

- thanks for saving me the trouble .

 

Or any thread, while we are at it.

 

Dirrel is not as good as everyone was claiming. Dirrel held, fell down on the canvas, complained to the referee, just did not want to fight. I don't think either will win tournament.

 

Both didnt deserve to win. That's one ugly fight...too dirty and too much running.

 

I'll admit, I tuned out after the eighth because I knew Dirrell would "lose" one way or another. It sounds like he put on a clinic late.

Let's put it like this. When you are laterally moving (a nice term for running) for 2:30 of the round, whining to the ref, bouncing off the ropes, falling over after slight brushes, and getting hip tossed, it's kind of hard for me to remember the clean shots you landed. I thought Dirrell's overall ring generalship was atrocious tonight through the first eight, and his offensive output wasn't anything close to consistent.

Sues, we're both big Hopkins fans. Did this really look like the Tito fight to you in terms of "boxing"?

 

not the worst robbery ever but it was stolen from the slickster. he did some running got punished for leaning(not holding) and the other guy got no more than a waving finger in his face for all his rough house tactics. 115-112 just doesnt work out for me. thats 7-5 with no point deduction. the only card where it was applied was the one that dirrel won on.

 

what he said

 

this

 

These idiots don't understand that froch only landed a few punches so they talk about how they don't like how dirrell fights without acknowledging that he was SNAPPING FROCH'S HEAD BACK ON A REGULAR BASIS.

Count how many times each fighter got thier head snapped back and it would be around 50 punches for dirrell to less than 5 for froch.

FROCH'S JAB WASN'T DOING ANYTHING CLOSE TO DIRRELLS SO STOP WITH THE IGNORANT FROCH EXCUSES. Dirrell got robbed.

 

threadstarter is correct with his call...no one got robbed...fight was ugly and was difficult to score. Too many close rounds to call it a robbery.