Did Dirrel Beat Froch? Yes Or No?

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by sp550i, Nov 29, 2010.


  1. Vano-Irons

    Vano-Irons Obsessed with Boxing banned

    17,581
    8
    Jan 18, 2010
    Yay another dirrell - froch post thread!

    IMO no he didn't but it was close. But more importantly OFFICIALLY he lost! Get over it because it's getting boring.
     
  2. Genaro G

    Genaro G Boxing Junkie Full Member

    8,731
    0
    Aug 11, 2009
    who cares, was a **** win for froch anyway
     
  3. BlackBrenny

    BlackBrenny Guest

    some people think he did , i dont

    some people think hopkins beat calzaghe, i dont

    but we can debate because they were close fights. there was no "robbery"

    im irish btw so i have no reason to be biased for the brits, its just the way i saw the fights. dirrells negativity was the big thing

    (ps. can you imagine the reaction from those who think hopkins won by a mile if that fight was in wales?)
     
  4. gooners!!

    gooners!! Boxing Junkie banned

    10,166
    1
    Jan 15, 2009
    Yes, and the only reason opinion has changed, is cause most hate Dirrell now, and most Brits love Froch now.
     
  5. Claypole

    Claypole Boxing Addict banned

    7,071
    4
    Aug 4, 2007
    I don't think either fighter "won" anything in that fight, it was a pile of **** from both boxers.

    I gave it to Dirrell by two rounds, but wasn't surprised (or bothered) they gave it to Froch.
     
  6. lastletter26

    lastletter26 Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,856
    1
    Nov 13, 2008
    Hopkins vs Calzaghe and Dirrell vs Froch are two different fights.

    Calzaghe did hit hopkins in the midst of the flurries. Froch didn't hit dirrell.
    Dirrell's negativity was negated by froch's dirty tactics IMO. Nobody can ignore the fact (unless you are bailey) that Dirrell landed most of all the clean effective shots up stairs. Froch maybe landed 5 clean powershots up stairs. So you really have to ignore the chief scoring criteria (clean effective punching) to give it to froch. Froch had no ring generalship either so there really was no basis to give the fight to froch.

    Who on here can explain the currupt Italian Judge who gave froch the 11th round? That one point won froch the fight. Complete BS.
     
  7. RUSKULL

    RUSKULL Loyal Member banned

    30,315
    8
    Dec 17, 2004
    I agree. There's a first time for everything. :yep

    Froch beat AA with ease & I was impressed, but the judges should've given Dirrel the decision in that fight. I honestly didn't think it was that close. Either way, I would love to see the rematch when the time comes, after the tourney of course.

    For the record I had Calzaghe beating Hopkins comfortably.
     
  8. RUSKULL

    RUSKULL Loyal Member banned

    30,315
    8
    Dec 17, 2004
    I think the reason it's being brought up again is that Froch boxed very well against King Arthur so many are singing his praises. That combined with the Dirrell win puts him near the top of the tourney.

    Oh, and I had Kessler beating Froch in a fairly close fight.