Could Froch have been DQ'd for Rabbit Punches?

For the record: is it "Rabbit" or "Rabid"?
Real Q....
(The name of the illegal shot)

 

Where the hell did all these Froch nut huggers come from. Just 2 weeks ago, everyone on this board had Froch knocked out but like 2 or 3 brits, and now Froch is above criticism?

 

Jack is a good poster, but completely baised when it comes to English fighters, you'll have to let this one go.

 

Dirty tactics are dirty tactics, no matter whether they happen in Nottingham or Oakland. That much is true. However, in the Oakland fights, the victims of Ward's aggression were at least trying to fight back. Dirrell fought a lousy fight, admit it. He got his tactics all wrong.

Imagine: Andre Ward is the SMW champion, fighting a UK challenger called Joe Calzaghe. Calzaghe spends the whole fight like he's in the ring with Frankenstein's monster, running away, grabbing on for dear life, dropping to the floor to avoid shots, repeatedly ducking below the waist, turning his back on his opponent, complaining to the ref when his tactics occasionally backfire - and then he sneaks in a quick flurry on the odd occasion.

Ward is doing all the aggressive work, cutting off the ring, throwing the heavier shots, but Calzaghe's tactics are frustrating him (and the fans, who thought it was going to be a boxing match). In the hypothetical fight, one fighter is a sportsman, trying to beat his opponent in the true spirit of the rules of sport. The other is a gamer, trying to twist, ignore and subvert the rules like a boxing promoter's accountant. Which is which in your opinion?

Would you think it was a robbery if Joe Calzaghe lost a close decision in such circumstances? My guess is not. I can also guess the rather unsavoury reasons behind that sudden change in opinion...

(please note: I am not saying that Calzaghe is anything like Dirrell. It's just a name chosen for a particular effect.)

 

And Dirrell got knocked a point in this fight. Incredible.

 

Whilst Froch shouldn't have punched behind the head why aren't you bringing up Dirrell ducking below the waist not once but twice!! What was the ref doing ffs??

 

no but you are picking once incedent in a fight that was full of fouls from both fighters. Dirrell made the most fouls and was not even willing to fight for many rounds, he had a point taken off for holding and that is indicitive of how he was in the ring against Froch.

 

Too sum this up. Dirrell did duck low sometimes but most of the Froch hits behind the head were when they both were standing upright in clinches. The ones from dirrell ducking low were few and froch hardly landed those. Froch landed the ones standing upright.

 

Kinda helps when your opponent isnt trying to stick his head between your legs every time you try to throw a punch at him.

 

We all realize Dirrell is a total ***** and ran the whole fight, right? Only an idiot would think Dirrell was even close in that fight. Just like he faked an injury against Abe as he was about to get KO'ed.

 

"I'm soooooooooo annnggggrrrrryyyy Froch doesn't suck like I thought he diiiiiiiiidddddd!"

 

No.


Next!