Carl Froch "Dirrell´s weak"

Dirrell is just too soft for this sport :-(

 

It was a Ring magazine interview with Dirrell before the Abraham fight.

The sole reason you question that it's true, is because it directly goes against your opinion. The bad news for you is, it's a genuine article.

 

Posted to the MitchiganWarrior, in a bid to help the imbecile from being brutally schooled again.
I tried to warn him, but he didnt listen :-(

I noted how Jack had made him look foolish, but he came back for more, unlike Dirrell when under attack

Things never change, MitchiganWarrior gets taken apart and owned again atsch

 

Reading through the responses on this thread it seems most believe Froch got schooled and Dirrell got robbed. I challenge any ESBer to come up with a card having Froch winning 6 rounds.

Dirrell has enough punching power. If you watched the fight you'd know Dirrell hurt Froch. Dirrell also put Abraham on his ass twice.

 

Post it then. You lie alot I dont readily believe anything you say. You arent the most honorable of individuals you see.

 

I don't know what Froch ia talking about. I had Dirrell winning that fight.

 

:good Yep. I've never seen a fighter talk so much about a fight he won. He knows he got a gift. He knows how bad he was made to look. He was in the ring with him.

 

i thought was a very close fight, it wasnt a huge robbery.

 

im so glad dirrel did'nt get that decision, he boxed like a *****, tried to run and fall his way through the fight, the sad thing is he could have seriously schooled froch that night, he is clearly very talented

 

Dirrell "accepts that he lost"? This is patently and provably false. Provably false from the very SAME article you quote from. From the previous paragraph:


“I thought I won the fight,” Dirrell said. “I felt fantastic the whole time. I did what I wanted to do, and Froch couldn’t touch me. He had to fight dirty just to compete.”


Jack, I'm disappointed with you. I'm tempted to call you a "dirty debater". Selective quoting, quoting out of context, etc. are the rabbit punches of honest debate.

http://ringtv.craveonline.com/blog/123201-dirrell-says-froch-experience-will-help-him-beat-abraham

 

http://ringtv.craveonline.com/blog/123201-dirrell-says-froch-experience-will-help-him-beat-abraham

 

I said the exact same thing as you did in other posts. I don't deny the fact Dirrell thinks he won and I have said so several times. What I am saying, is that Dirrell knows why he lost the fight. They are two entirely different things. There are some fights where I thought a guy won and when the decision has gone the other way, I've said that I understand why it has despite me thinking my guy should have won.

If you want to misquote me and imply I am being deceptive, that's fine. I think everyone knows what I meant though.

 

There you go again. I didn't misquote you. You're a dirty debater! Dirtier than Andre Ward. Much dirtier!

 

Yes you did. You implies that I had said Dirrell thought he lost, which I didn't say. I know Dirrell thought he won. My argument is that he admits fault, something MichiganWarrior refuses to do. Dirrell admits it was close and accepts he could have done more.

That's my point. I didn't say Dirrell thought he lost.