Froch groves scorecards

Thats nonsense. The crowd were clearly in favour of Carl until the stoppage. There was much much much more noise when Froch had his bursts and the burst were not landing clean allot of the time.

 

It's almost as if...

 

Froch was at least 4 rounds behind, if the rematch happens, get rid of the 2 blind judges, and no Howard Foster, the guy is well known for stopping fights early.

 

Agreed ..this makes a whole lot of sense. Also while froch wasn't landing all that much, most of what he did land was to Groves body which contributed to groves getting into trouble...

 

I rewatched it earlier and 78-73 was what I came up with, possibly a case for one round even but thats as fairas I could be to froch as much as I despise him as a person

 

I have rewatched it twice and at most can give Froch 3 rounds. 77-74

 

10/8 Groves
10/9 Groves
10/9 Groves
10/9 Groves
10/9 Froch
10/9 Groves
10/9 Groves
10/9 Groves

So Groves 79/72.

I feel that people too often gives a round or two to the lesser fighter to make it look less onesided, but sometimes that is the reality. Later the same night I scored every single round for Pacquiao.

I have rewatched the fight and scored it the same way. I can see how one more round might go to Froch (3rd I guess, don't have my notes), when scoring real-time, but when rewatched the work was less effective and Groves remained in control for most of the round and delivered the best boxing overall. Even when taking more control than in prior rounds Froch never really made the ring his. When under pressure he also have a tendency to only hit with his arms and even though he swings widely he doesn't generate a lot of power.

Groves landed the cleaner shots in this fight - and (way) more of them. In general he looked like the champion and he controlled the ring and the pace for the majority of the fight. When Froch woke up sporadically he wasn't as effective and in control as Groves was.
Groves also had superior defense throughtout the scoring rounds and never got as passive and/or hurt as Froch did when exchanging.

I don't think Groves looked too hurt in the last round either, but he should probably have clinched instead of continueing to trade punches as he was out of balance at times and Froch was getting the upper hand. He remained active both offensively and defensively though. Im sure he regret how he handled the last few minutes of the fight, because up until that point he was clearly in the lead. When stepping sideways Froch was never able to set up his punches and couldn't do anything to hurt him, he should have utilized that more in the later rounds. Froch's legs looked even more stiff than usual and despite his shorter reach Groves won the fight of the jabs by a wide margin.

Carl had a lot of late blows (Groves had a few as well) and I think the referee did a poor job of putting an end to it. In general I think Howard Foster's performance was abysmal and he was pooly placed a lot of times.
He was extremely poor at breaking up the fighters and multiple times he simply stood behind the fighters mumbling "break" while 20.000 people screamed. When ignored he didn't even bother sticking an arm between the fighers most of the time (If I remember correctly this was especially bad in the 7th and first half of the 8th). He had very little control of the fight at times and never really showed any authority - except for when he abruptly put Groves in a headlock and dragged him away and ended the fight.

This fight was really good for the first 8 rounds, but sometimes stuff like this makes it really hard to love boxing.

 

I had it 3,5 & 8 to Froch, the remainder to Groves with 1st obviously being 10-8. That equates to 77-74.
People seem to be ignoring the fact that Froch was the defending champ too, this nearly always carrys weight with the judges, whether it should or not is an entirely different discussion.