Dirrell, Froch, and The Great Train Robbery

Going to have to rewatch tomorrow then try and give an unbiased round by round assessment.

It would be weird for it to be a hometown "cooking" when none of the judges were British. 1 was from Belgium, 1 was from Italy, 1 was from Mexico, and the ref was from Panama. But we will see!

 

Dirrell got robbed and it was as clear as day.

Carl and his supporters will say Dirrell ran, but will never mention who landed the cleaner, harder, more effective shots throughout the fight.

 

I rewatched it last month because I've heard so much *****ing about it on this forum. It was a close fight but Froch edged it by a round or two. To call it a robbery is massively dramatic. I imagine the same people that call this a robbery also think that Calzaghe robbed Hopkins.

 

Dirrel could have fought Ward and if he won got a rematch with Froch. At the time I thought Dirrel had a better chance against Ward then Froch did stylistically. Imagine that lose to Froch, beat AA ( which I don't think he should of gotten DQed if the ref did his job and warned him not to fall everytime AA got close or took a point) but then maybe he would of got KOEd... But yea back to what I was saying. Lose to Froch, beat AA, beat Ward , beat Froch in finale, would of been a good career! Dr Shaw Hi mucked it up!

 

Been saying this for years

 

Not to mention the fact that Dirrell had Froch hurt at one point.

Froch couldn't cope with Dirrell's skill so he used pitiful rough house tactics throughout the fight to try to compensate for lack of skill. He was embarased in that fight.

 

Agreed it was disgusting.......it has helped lead to the British inferiority complex that plagues this forum

 

Too bad Dirrel hasn't shown any of those same explosive skills since the tournament, he looked very ordinary against Edwards.

 

See what youve started Loudon

Couldnt you have done it about a **** fighter instead

 

I don't have a problem with people scoring the fight for Andre Dirrell, but my impression was that Andre moved with the punches that Carl Froch threw. If you sit close up as a judge, that might be hard to measure. It's unclear if the punches landed with any sting behind them, but the punches didn't miss entierly. And Carl threw a lot.

I think that's why he got the nod.

I don't know who won to be honest, but all things considered I think you can make a better case for Andre. Consider harder, cleaner punches and defence, it's in Andres favour. I'll be reading your round by round assessment, though, if you post one :good

 

Champs are supposed to do a lot of things, but not admitt defeats. Ever. If there can be a case made for Carl Froch winning, no matter how bizarre, it's Carls job to hang onto it.