Froch: "The Judge That Scored Hopkins Over Calzaghe Was Correct"

froch is right

 

You're probably right.

It's pretty clear who won the fight.

Some of these ****s are so dim they can't distinguish a fact from an opinion.


And it's likely a waste of time, considering the quality of their reasoning skills.

 

Froch would like to get a shot at Calzaghe.

His agenda is to try and get under his skin .

(Ali invented the technique with Liston)


He'd be willing to take a licking to get a good purse.

And if he was REALLY lucky, Joe has to get old sometime, and it could be his night.

 

froch to ko joe bout round 8 trust me on thiss ppl en u yanks c froch fight 4 those who never saw him ruin henry porras in te states b4 or saw him dismantle mark woolnough pscals canadian home boy buddy ul know wat im on about.

 

Says the ****wit who can't walk away, even when no one is talking to him.


Maybe your ass got ****ed so bad you can't walk at all !

 

You Poor deluded little mother****er, you got problems, don't you !


Problem # 1:
Don't know what a FACT is.

Problem # 2:
And don't know what OWNED is.


Problem # 3:
Everyone can see this whole thread.

(And you know how you look, don't you ?)




Now slip in a panty-liner to soak up the bleeding from the ass-****in' you just got, and **** off to bed.

You're starting to look like a really stupid, dumb ****.

 

I thought he took at least 3 rounds...there was one round in the middle of the fight where Calzaghe was busier but landed way less than Hopkins.

Either way, 8-4 or 9-3 or 10-2 (I highly disagree with 10-2)...Calzaghe won.

 

Pretty reasonable, I'll agree.

I'm just saying the score was between 10-2 and 8-4.

9-3 is fine with me.

 

Its widely known in Britain that Froch & Calzaghe have no time for each other so I would be suprised to hear Froch give anything other than a win to a Calzaghe opponent in a close fight.

 

Is Froch playing an angle because he's trying to hook in Calzaghe and mostly because he's trying to make a name for himself by associating his name with Calzaghe's?

Sure!

Does that give him an excuse to say stupid ****?

Of course not!

One thing's to say Calzaghe had a close fight and didn't look as good as in his previous fights and that this suggests he might be on the slide...

...and another to say: I was not impressed with Calzaghe last couple of fights and he was gifted a win against Hopkins!

...because that is just stupid. Not impressed with Calzaghe's performances against Lacy, Kessler and a crafty legend like Hopkins (last 5 performances)? Well, you can kiss Calzaghe's arse, Carl, because you're never going to give a performance half as good as any of these, ever!

What an annoying stupid twat!:-(

 

i scored the fight for b-hop but because of his inactivity i can understand if people scored for calzaghe. But what i cannot understand is when people like roy jones chris byrd carl froch kevin iole dan rafael associated press members setanta sports sports anchors (yes setanta sports, joe's own network)bbc, ring magazine and several daily newspapers, admit that it was a close fight that could have been scored either way (these guys are a lot more knowledgeable than you or I) yet calzaghe fans will immediately attack and ridicule anyone who scored it for hopkins claiming it wasn't close when clearly it was and this whole host of people i just stated proves it.
and for people claiming 9-3, 10-2 scorecards, get the **** outta here go watch any highlights clip no-one can find a single clip of calzaghe landing any clean shots until the 5th (even then his was rolled by hopkins). Rounds 1-4 were easily hopkins as was the 10th, 5-8 were pickems based on what you score for

 

Bloody fantastic.....one minute every american here is bashing Froch now all of a sudden he's the picture of logic for every american on this site!

Could your prejudices be any more apparent!?!?!? :-(