Dirrell's point deduction

You need to go read the rules again, dude.

The rule state that you have to face your opponent at all times.

Turning your back or bending in the waist so that you face the ground instead of your opponent is illegal. These rules were made for the sake of the fighter to avoid getting hit in the back of the neck which can be dangerous.

 

Good points. People kept saying this was a step up and a step too far for Dirrell. I hope he gained confidence from the way he fought after the deduction. I could then see why people were so high on him coming in and saying he was the sleeper. If he started like that, Dirrell would have stopped Froch in no more than 8. :yep

 

I agree. This is likely.

 

The ref was bad and helped Froch, but the point deduction can be defended if you look at Dirrell's holding as isolated incident, out of the context of this fight. However it isn't as much of a deal as Dirrell won this fight anyway...

 

You missed it, Dirrell was warned for holding more then twice prior to the deduction.

 

So you enjoyed his display of holding, running and not engaging in a fight? Discounting the 10th and 11th rounds, Dirrell was pathetic.

 

so was froch

edit to go on...froch is the champ, and dirrell was supposed to be this green kid that was gonna get mauled and knocked out. froch was TERRIBLE. ive seen a few of his fights but ive never seen him look like that. he did NOTHING that he can hang his hat on in that fight. arthur abraham may end his career if froch walks at aa w/ his hand below his waist rocking his left before flicking a slow jab out there. froch was actually walking at dirrell at one point with his arms straight down by his waist. abraham will kill this guy

 

Feel free to find a source for this rule. I'll wait here.

You cannot turn your head to cause a blow that would otherwise be a legal punch to hit behind the head, but that's not what you're saying and Froch CLEARLY threw at the back of his head.

 

Whenever I hear that rule described, all I can think of is how Sweet Pea milked the hell out of the fact nobody calls that infraction. Like the dude wasn't hard enough to hit without it.

 

Dirrell all but took a bull fighters cape into the ring, yelled Ole and ran Froch into a ring post. Of course we have seen another US fighter do that to a Brit. I guess this was the only way to get payback? :think

 

Yes he did. And it's a valuable lesson for Dirrell.

 

True.

To the other guy - watch this to understand what happened when he did try to punch to the back of the head.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JxWNh7QjoKo[/ame]

 

I remember at least 2 specific warnings to Froch, one for hitting on the break (other break hit was let slide) and one for holding/hitting; I think there was one for rabbit punching.

I don't think he got in Froch's face enough for the toss which at that point was frustration more about being outboxed than holding. Not at all. And around round 8, he should have been in both corners saying "you've both been warned, next round, first guy that does it again loses a point." Almost without fail, someone loses a point in round 9, that statement is probably on camera and the **** stops.

Can you imagine the people RUNNING from being a ref or judge in Dirrell's next fight? Nobody wants that job.

 

Says the man with Roy Jones in his avatar. Not slating Jones, just saying Dirrell reminded me of him a lot on Saturday. Blinding speed, good power, great defense and slippery as a snake.

And why the hell would he get to close to Froch and put him self in the way of grappling, head-holding, throwing and rabbit punching. Dirrell basically pulled a clinic on Froch and totally exposed him to the likes of Kessler and Abraham - both of whom would eat Froch alive within six rounds. By the looks of things Froch has no real power left and his chin was more than a little suspect during the later rounds.

F@ck Froch, he's a tosser.

 

I know right? He'd have been something like 10 - 34 with 34 DQs.