think George convinced himself he had Froch beat in every department, which wasn't really true, so he made the mistake of believing his own hype ^^^Agree with that rski. However even if the first fight went on and froch genuinely stopped groves...i still say there was a call for a rematch either way. Still to this day i thought groves would have stopped froch that night...no one could be sure about weather george would have weathered that storm or not. No one can be certain...i still say that stoppage was an absolute scandal. One of the worst i ve ever seen...when you've got one guy winning the fight handily, which he was. The first sign of trouble which it was, george was in trouble how much nobody can really say...and the referee stopped it. It was corruption...especially after seeing the cards. Dont get me wrong it wasn't a case of eddie sitting down with referees and judges and saying this is whats going to happen...but they were definetely 100% influenced imo...with matchroom like they all are the pundits/fighters etc. Sorry not corruption but influenced. It's something eddie has to cut out completely. He's been a breath of fresh air...but he's letting himself down with some of the underhand tactics.
I also noticed he seemed less explosive. I assumed it was because Groves was trying not to expend too much energy. It could also have just been that Froch was timing him better and keeping him at bay with the jab or a combination of both.
Yeah i m totally undecided...weather it was down to froch, or they were trying not to expend too much energy or it was just down to being less explosive. I know that it was the first full camp with the new s & c coach...but i m sure he was onboard for the first fight but he only done some work as opposed to a full camp. Also thought george was a bit thin around the face on the night it was the first thing i noticed when he was on his way out to the ring. ^^^^They are excuses...but i totally 100% accept that froch would have won the fight either way on saturday night regardless of what george turned up...and it could have probably been the same george anyway
yes, and he was jabbing and feinting to stop groves from setting. it wasn't a different groves but a different froch.
Groves wasn't allowed to tee off at will like in the first fight. They really did their homework and as some others have suggested, Froch stayed out of range on a constant basis, which didn't allow Groves to hit Froch with his overhand rights. Add to the fact that Froch was jabbing or keeping his left out more, which was successful in putting Groves off balance and disturb his game plan. I think it did the trick. This is what big fight experience brings you and Froch has plenty of it.
Thats the problem i had with the game-plan...right from the off...george conceded the centre of the ring happily obviously because of the game plan. He didn't seem to go looking for that big right hand like he did in the first fight. As much as what yous have all said about froch offsetting it...personally i think it played a big part...but was some of it down to the game plan. He wasn't coming out to throw it anyway. He wasn't coming out to take the centre of the ring anyway...even though carl controlled it with his jab. ..george didn't want it. He conceded it. Thats the one thing that would mess me up if i was george groves today...what could have been. Personally i think george's bottle went a bit, not in the fight but with the game plan. With the audacity he had in the first fight, the magnitude of the second fight...i would have loved to have seen him come out there and take the fight to carl. I thought his build up was brilliant...it didn't work in the end, it's made him look a bit silly, it stopped working after the first fight but was refreshing to see a 26 year old guy taking on 36 year old veteran...go up against pretty much everyone else and being audacious while doing it...and then bottling it at the last minute with the game plan. Personally think froch had too solid a game plan for it too work a second time...but i would have loved to have seen him go out there and asked carl the questions and seen what the answers were.
Groves seemed caught between styles, whether that's down to complacency or Froch making improvements who really knows. I do believe if he'd stuck with Booth he wouldn't have been allowed to entertain the complacency with the gameplan. Its funny that the one thing I believe George really needs is a strong coach like Booth who will try to force him to stick to a gameplan, which also appears to be the one thing George isn't willing to have. Its a shame he split with Booth, its hurt George not being with him. I do like Fitzpatrick, I just don't believe he's the no.1 guy in the camp. By all means keep him as a no.2 or whatever. When fighters start dictating to they're trainers it doesn't seem to work out - Manny Steward said before Leonard-Hearns I, Hearns told Steward he wanted to run his camp the way Ali used to near the end, which led to Hearns mistakenly coming in light for the Leonard fight and gassing late. I'm not sure Booth would have allowed George to entertain that left hook KO scenario. I believe Booth would have put everything he had into making Groves box on the back foot the entire fight, which, seemingly, was the original gameplan when the first fight was signed - something Haye alluded to in commentary. Regardless, George put up a great fight in the first, and a close fight before the KO in the rematch, nothing to be ashamed of. The problem is that first fight was there to be won, and he lost, albeit controversially. Ultimately, it was Carl who adjusted for the rematch, not George, or at least it was Carl's adjustments that actually worked - which seems to owe largely to Rob McCracken.
Quality post LJ.....Agree with pretty much all of that. I think in paddy's defence, it was a hard fight to prepare for, from their point of view because they had so much success in the first fight knowing that mckracken and froch would probably go away and prepare for the same thing. Whereas mckracken had a lot of adjustments to make and plan for, the first fight gave them something to break down it gave away a lot of george's strengths which they ended up doing even though george fought to a different plan...it was ultimately always about stopping that right hand getting through and stopping george backing froch up. It's widely regarded that going into a firefight with froch for groves was suicide...i think going into a firefight with hooks was...they should have kept it straight all night...went there hunting froch like the first fight and seen what would have happened. I think froch would always eventually catch up with groves on the back foot at this stage of george's career. I also think froch would have eventually dealt with groves if he came in with the same game plan as the first fight probably quicker than he did...but if george got his punches off...it changes the fight completely. They went with the sensible approach...except trying to hook with froch etc. But i would have had george out there trying to grab the centre of the ring pushing froch back...we all know froch prepared for it...but what would have happened. Froch is a different fighter on the back foot as he is coming forward. The problem with groves is and he's shown it at a good level is he can fight a couple of different ways...but i genuinely believe if he went out there on the attack he would finish a lot of people off including people at world level. And revert back to the boxing on the back foot...if it wasn't working. Pretty much like haye, before they started masterminding his wins...there is a danger of him being carl thompsoned...but thats what they essentially are front foot fighters. It's like they use it all the way to the top level, have confidence in the style booth teaches, then the bottle goes. Would have also liked to seen haye do the same against klitchko. Just tried to outgun him...if they're was ever a fight that they needed to go in their and try to bomb the other man out it was that one. Yeah they might get taking out in 3, but they could also have taking klitch out too...why get them their using the style and then revert to another style...when the big ones come up.
^^^essentially your not far wrong. I dont think too many are of the opinion he would beat him 5 times of the ten or 4, or 3 or 2, or even once. At the end of the day...we're just discussing the fight...thats all.
Also think as much as mckracken got it right with the second fight...he got it very wrong for the first one.
I just think not durable enough and never will be to be elite or make so many title defences that a carl froch has. Can still win a world title though...like many guys that are flawed can nowadays. Carl Froch hit the nail on the head a week before the fight saying he wasn't durable enough to stay on the world scene or something like that.