Dirrell's point deduction

Saw it, but it amounts to nothing.

The point deduction was for holding.

 

Dirrell should have gotten a deduction for the illegal bending in the waist with his face towards the ground.

However, I am not sure why the ref gave the deduction.

 

Best thing to happen to Dirrell. Woke him up. I hope he stays awake for the rest of the tourney now.

 

Saw the same thing. I wonder if the ref didn't see it also and just decide to make the deduction for holding based on all of the previous warnings.

Still don't think after the general ugliness of the fight on both sides that the deduction was fair.

 

Both guys fought dirty as hell. Thing is Dirrell's excessive holding was the main instigatorin all this. Had he not clinched so frequently Froch wouldn't have used all those rough house tactics. So the point deduction was well warranted and should have come a few rounds sooner which would have made it a much more enjoyable fight to watch.

 

I LOVE to see a ref take points for holding. (after 2 warnings,,, which Dirrell never got) Alot of sports have tweeked the rules to inject more offence and excitement in the game. Boxing needs to do the same.

In fact, the rule is already clear... no excessive clinching or holding!
it's time to start calling that ****... for the good of the sport.

Apart from that the ref was a total f---ing moron!

How the guy can suddenly decide to take a point from Dirrell, with no clear warning, and yet not penalize Froch at all for his array of fouls is beyond me.

 

Cus the ref was in the middle of the UK, he didnt want to get bum rushed by them druken Froch fans....

and you are 100% correct there is usally a few warnings before a point is taken especially in a title fight.....

Frochs promoters obviously paid the officials very well for the trip over seas.

 

What about the illegal purposely rabbit punching by Froch? What about holding Dirrell with his left hand and throw a punch more then 3 times? What about after the refs say break, Froch nail a cheap shot? I don't see you talking about that. I hate when ****** people like you start a dumb thread like this without any true facts of what happen in a fight.

 

Ref warned him clearly and specifically at least twice and was likely speaking to him most of the times they were broken up. That call could have been made earlier - he gave Dirrell plenty of leeway. If this emboldens refs to make more holding deductions, I have no problem (especially at HW).

Froch would have warrented a deduction no problem, too. AND the ref did let the fight get away from him. He needed to be lecturing BOTH in the corner between rounds. Dirrell hadn't been holding much when Froch threw him - the ref didn't react strongly enough to that.

 

Put it this way, the ref was in Dirrell face most of the time when the ref barely was in Froch face for illegal PURPOSELY shots on the back of the head. What about Froch holding Dirrell head with his left hand to hit Dirrell repeatly with shots? It's like Froch got away with murder.

 

the only thing worse than dirrell holding is that he got a point deduction for it. you can't deduct a point from him w/o deducting a point from froch at some point. especially at that point in the fight. a fight that close that late...****.

on the other hand, who expected the kid to not get rattled being overseas w/ the hometown crowd going nuts over the point deduction he obviously didnt think he was gonna get?? ****, that showed something right there. instead of getting rattled he actaully hurt froch. i agree herm, it sure a **** woke him up.

 

There's no rule against bending at the waist, stop saying that, jesus ****ing christ. You cannot duck below the other guy's beltline. That's the rule. Duck all you want at the waist, as long as your head is above his beltline. The rule is also not entirely clear as to intent or meaning which is why refs almost never call it unless a fighter squats and stays there or something ridiculous.

 

good point. perhaps it will serve to help dirrell focus and fight more.