Froch: "Dirrell is a weasel!"

Well for Haye except vs the Klit brothers he SHOULD have all his fights in manchester because he is the champion.

 

What were the box office numbers on PPV for that fight (i.e, do they equate to the numbers usually found for fights at the MGM)?

 

Trying to fight ppv figures but not having much luck.

 

Giving Froch 5 rounds proves you cant score a fight. Giving Froch 4 rounds is a stretch.

What 5 rounds did you think he deserved? Are you saying Froch deserved the fight more the Dirrell?

It'd last 25 seconds. 5 seconds for each punch he landed in the fight.

Doubt it. Considering the majority opinion that Dirrell was robbed, a dirrell decision would have been more justified, and finding enough highlights for Froch in that fight would have proven to tough a task for anyone.

 

Dirrell would beat Froch convincingly in a rematch, imo.

and Andre does not have a glass jaw.

 

That's your own opinion... the fight is scored different by a lot of people, and was very different on a lot of sites, but mostly CLOSE!

Why do so many people here think boxing fans keep their scorecards after a fight :? I did post it somewhere here a few months ago, look it up if you're curious enough. And yes! I say Dirrell didn't deserve to win, because imo you have to fight for that. Dirrell was a disgrace in that match, and Froch's fault is that he lacked the technical abilities to cope with it. But at least he tried to fight.

Yeah, yeah... that's the point! Like I said before, Dirrell f*cked it up himself! If you add the spoiling, running, complaining, falling down, ducking low from Dirrell between that you have a 10 minute compilation!

Like I said, I had it for Dirrell too! Imo it shows that the scoring method in boxing is flawed in some cases.... Dirrell tried to 'steal' the decision by avoiding the fight, and he didn't get away with it! If he fought like he did against Abraham he probably would have won a lopsided decision.

And why denying something, Dirrell admitted himself when interviewed for the Abraham fight?

 

Actually I have 4 websites/newspapers. I think all 3 of the 4 had Dirrell winning wide. 1 had it 115/113 Dirrell

So basically you're saying that even though Dirrell landed the cleaner harder punches, hurt Froch, had the better defense, and the fact you actually scored the fight for Froch, you think Froch deserved to win purely based on trying to fight.

Hmm interesting criteria for scoring a fight you have there. Defense and clean punching and rounds won be damned. As long as you try to fight, including body slams and rabbit punching you deserve to win. :rofl

Do you froch stans actually read the stuff you type?

Not allowing Froch to hit him i.e Defense.

Not allowing Froch to turn it into a street fight i.e Boxing.

Getting hit with rabbit punches and body slams i.e Wondering why the ref wasnt deducting points.

Only once did Dirrell fall on his own accord. The other 3 times he was either pulled down by the back of Froch's glove, put in the headlock, or body slammed?

Do you believe those are legal tactics?

Mostly Froch holding Dirrells head down so he could hit him behind the head, as shown above.

There is no such thing as "stealing" a decision.

Clean punching
Effective aggression
Defense
Ring generalship

Thats how you score a fight. There is no such thing as stealing a decision if you score a fight correctly. What is the scoring rules in Europe?

Correction. If the fight was on nuetral territory he wins a lopsided decision. If the fight is in America Froch is disqualified before the 9th bell sounds.

 

DQ like Wardw as for using head buts? or Maybe DQ like Hopkins for a whole range of cheating ? Maybe someone should go tell Lewis how in america the judges/refs always fair and he wasnt infact robbed.

 

You really look to Dirrell with pink glasses, don't you? If I read your comments on the spoiling technics from him, you actually see a 'masterclass' performance! Defence, not making it a streetfight, beïng fauled by no fault of his own, beïng manhandled, clean punching, effective aggression, ring generalship... That's what you're saying, so it must have been a beautiful fight with a few mishaps on the side of Froch... I guess I'm going to end this discussion now, cause you can't take any criticism about Dirrell even when Dirrell critisises himself!

 

Nope. Dirrell should have whipped Froch's ass from the getgo like he started to do in the championship rounds. Dirrell did not fight the perfect fight, he didnt even fight a great fight, but he fought a good one. One that should have got him the decision regardless.

If Froch hand landed punches, beat Dirrell up in the clinch, not looked so bad missing punches, then yeah I could see how you could give the fight to Froch.

But landing 2 punches a round at most isnt going to cut it for me.

 

Why do u ignore my point about american fighters who cheat and Lewis being robbed?

 

Hopkins is a dirty cheat. He must have European ancestory.

Ward is a southpaw, watch Calzaghe's fights and see how many times head clashes happen. I doubt they were intentional.

Lennox Lewis was robbed but then benefited from a slight gift in the rematch.

 

Well least you accept cheating/robberies is a universal thing then.

 

Because although some see Vegas or MSG as the mecca....the truth is....it was...in the past, but why fight in silence infront of 10-15k when you can fight in a real atmosphere infront of 50k?

 

And when was Sturm gifted anything? The fact was, Strum could have KO'd Oscar that night and he would have still lost as everyone was hell-bent on seeing Oscar V Nard.