Froch vs. Dirrel

:rofl:rofl:rofl Like he gives a **** what you think

 

froch beat him. im sure hugging the whole fight is not a score in boxing.. am i right?

 

Strictly Come Boxing :think

 

Apparently neither is landing hard accurate punches and completely outboxing your opponent ...not that night anyway...Dirrell should have won that fight,anyone saying any different is confused about how a fight should be scored.I say this as a fan of Froch but let's call a spade a spade here,he lost that fight.

 

You seem to have a lot of brave one-liners for a person whose avatar proudly displays the results of another 'hometown' fight that began with a headbutt and also ended in a dubious manner ala Froch vs. Dirrell.

If you want to wave the flag for the over-rated Froch and Khan might I suggest the British forum as a more welcoming venue for your comedic talents and seemingly veiled hatred of the sport of boxing.

Dirrell may not have won the fight on paper but make no mistake, he won the fight and in doing so made Froch look like a subpar come forward slugger with no defense and no great skill other than a solid chin.

 

I watched it twice, and the first time I went into it a big fan of Dirrell and hoped he'd clean Froch's Clock...but alas, his gheyness wore on me and I became a Froch fan that night. I scored it 115-113 Dirrell then, with two close rounds that could have been even or to Froch. Second time, i scored it the exact opposite. Depends what you go into the fight looking for, i guess.

Bottom line, Dirrell did not deserve to win. If Froch had fought like Dirrell, the fight would have been a no contest and purses would be withheld, so there's something to think about for the Dirrell fans...

 

Dirrell won the fight on my scorecard, I wouldnt go so far as to call it a robbery though. I couldnt watch that fight again even if you paid me, it was dire.

 

You don't win fights by making someone miss. I kept shouting at the screen for Dirrell to start trowing punches and stop running and clinching. Its pretty damn easy to make someone look bad, if thats all you intend to do (*ahem* B-Hop, Ruiz). Dirrell punched holes in the air as well, but people only remember Froch missing.

If Direll had thrown more than 5 punches per round, Sven Ottke style, then he would have won easily.

 

Uhh, they're not supposed to be!















Unless you're scoring a Ricky Hatton or B-Hop fight, that is....

 

Thanks for the advice...everyone on the Brit forum speaks so highly of this place :deal

 

:good

 

Get over this. It was in no way a robbery. It was close. I had it 114-113 with the deduction. Dirrell could have won if he engaged more but that is his own fault, not Froch's. That said I think he may have the tools to outbox Abraham.

 

At the end of the day, if you're fighting against a champion on his homeground, you're unlikely to convince the judges to give you enough rounds to win if you consistently give out the impression that you're opponent is overpowering you, which Dirrell did by his constant clinching, falling to the ground and whingeing to the referee.

Dirrell fought a stupid stupid fight for ten rounds, and that's largely why he lost.

If you're going to get a decision running backwards (especially on hostile territory) than you have to make it very clear that you are the one in control, you are toying with your opponent and can impose your will on him anytime you want. See Valuev v Haye for an example. If Haye had spent his time clinching, falling down and complaining, then he wouldn't have won either. Instead he just made it obvious that Valuev was hitting nothing but air and that he was the only one landing clean punches.

 

I had Froch winning by 1 point

nothing to do with him being champion. He just won more rounds

Dirrell's work was more flashy which i think skewed the view of many people, but thankfully not the judges.

 

I really think the match was there for Dirrell to take it but he didn't. He was too negative, that's his own fault.