Froch vs Dirrell controversy thread

If a champion is really worthy of being a champion, he wouldn't need a stupid unwritten rule to help him retain his belt. Dirrell outPUNCHED Froch AND outboxed him. He deserves the belt.

 

Dirrell Clearly WON tonight!!

 

LOL, Froch is getting anally raped in this poll.

 

Dude, no you don't.

You judge a fight on what happens in the ring.

Froch won a paper belt and defended it once. That's not a champion.

Hopkins was a champion. Calzaghe was a champion. Wladimir is a champion.

Froch is a paper alphabet belt holder who got a hometown decision. Accept the fact and move on.

 

He did take it to the champion rounds in the last 2 where he won it clearly. In the 11th he stunned Froch badly but the reason Dirrell didn't continue is cause Froch hit him behind the head repeatly in which it hurt Dirrell.

 

:good:bbb

 

Dirrell himself said he gave the 12th round away...

 

You're entitled to your opinion & I'm entitled to mine :thumbsup

I don't make the rules, that's just the way it is. If Dirrell had won the belt I wouldn't have been surprised in the slightest, in fact I was expecting him to win. Many of the rounds were very close, the first round was a good example. Myself I had a hard time giving it to either fighter. Maybe the judges didn't approve of the running & holding? There was more than a little bit of that you realize..............still, Froch & Dirrell aren't going far in this tourney anyway.

 

Or at least was more throughout the fight.:deal

 

Dirrel did nothing but run, hold, fall down on canvas, complain to referee. I dare anyone to claim Klitschkos are boring fighters. Dirrel is a total disappointment.

You have to fight to win a fight. Froch won fair and square.

 

I gave Dirrell the 11th and the 12th was close, edge to Froch.

 

It was a tough fight to score and it could have gone either way. You had Froch pressing the fight, and seemed to be getting to Dirrell in the middle rounds. Dirrell was flashier, but he could have done a lot better considering his handspeed was four to five notches above Froch's. I don't know what these U.S. coaches are teaching these kids in the gym nowadays, but Dirrell has NO inside game whatsoever. If Hatton and Cintron ever had a baby, Dirrell would be the perfect example of how he would act in the ring. He held like Hatton and complained like Cintron. Bottom line is that at the very minimum this fight should have been scored a draw.

 

In between hitting Froch in the face and not getting hit in return, you mean? For everything that Dirrell didn't do, Froch did even less. Some champion. I like the guy's personality, but he looks slow, sloppy, confused, frustrated and amateurish. He gets mauled in the next round.

 

While I was watching that fight I was thinking the same about how some ESB posters that claim the Klitschkos are boring & defensive minded fighters would rave on about Dirrell's skills & defense. :rofl

Gotta disagree with you on the fight though, it was a pretty clear Dirrell win. Maybe not enough to take the belt but IMO Andre did enough & Froch looked real slow, sloppy & one dimensional. Both fighters used ridiculous tactics including holding & holding & hitting, hitting on the break, elbows, etc. Real bad fight that I wouldn't recommend.

 

dirrel landed some beautiful straight punches all night and in the sixth or seventh round dirrell clearly stuned froch. froch landed 3 meaningful punches all night, looked slow and slugish and fought an extremely dirty fight, dirrel won on my card by a good 3 points.

oh and any one whos saying the guy who wanted to "fight" won the fight why cant the guy who wants to "box" win the fight, after all its called boxing not fighting