Froch vs. Dirrell

Even the corrupt judges in the fight scored round 10 for Dirrell, since he had Froch clearly hurt in that round. Thus 9-9.

please tell me you didnt score 10, 11 or 12 for Froch. atsch

 

No idea. I just had 116-113 and it seemed fair. Dirrell didnt do enough in the end. You need to drop the bias. He wasn't robbed. He coulda edged a decision in a close fight.

 

Sorry using scoring criteria there is no way Froch could have won this fight sorry. Didnt do enough in the end? So hurting Froch, making him look like a bum swinging and missing wildly and outbattling him down the stretch in your first 12 round fight isnt doing enough? Ok.


Sorry bud, Froch landed maybe 3-4 power punches the entire fight. Maybe you were swayed by the English crowd everytime Froch swung and missed Dirrell by a mile, but there is no objective way you could score that fight for Froch.

Rounds 10-11-12 are clear Dirrell rounds. So are rounds 3-4-5-7. You'd literally have to give Froch the benefit of the doubt in every round, and you'd still wouldnt have enough to score it for him.

 

I had it 114-113 to Froch with the point deduction making all the difference. It ****ing bemuses me how people can say it was Froch who was fighting dirty, Dirrell pulled off every trick in the book; constantly ducking below the waist, holding and 'slipping'.

 

I think Andre won the fight on paper with a very very close decision, but i can completly understand the fight going to Froch, it was in Nottingham, Froch was the champ.

If Andre had of fought like he did against AA he would have won no doubt but he was scared of Carl and his rep and i reckon Andre would win a re-match convincingly ,I kind of hate to say it because im a fan of froch but i dont because im a fan of Dirrell as well.

 

So these writers were bias atsch. Now It seems you are being biased

You know The ~Ring scored for Froch . I dont know where you get every article from because Boxing News scored for Froch also

Dirrell conceded he lost round 12. Dont know if that was something he said straight after losing or not

They cant except the FACT that Froch beat Dirrell :smoke, which is made worse for them with the FACTS that Boxing News & The Ring scored for Froch and the Boxrec punch stats favour Froch :hi:

 

Dirrell beat Froch 8 rounds to 4.

 

I thought froch won by 1 point last time i watched it.

very close fight.

as for punches landed, the only stats i have seen favour froch, unless anyone has seen any more stats.

As for rankings, froch lost his last fight, dirrel won his.

 

Yes indeed, and because AA was at that time ranked as the no1 SMW (after Taylor), Dirrell beating AA propelled him to no2 and because Froch lost to Kessler, he fell to no7...

Boxrec only takes quantity in mind and no quality, that's the flaw of the system!!

 

It's a complete myth that Dirrell was robbed. None of the ringside journalists had Dirrell winning, and the only person crying robbery in the immediate aftermath was Gary Shaw. The same Gary Shaw who, towards the end of the fight raced around the ring from his seat to implore Dirrells corner to tell Dirrell 'he must do more'. That indicates Shaw thought Dirrell was behind, or the the very worst,that it was a close fight.

NB Froch scored a lot of body shots in the fight which presumably most people have ignored, and also ignore that Dirrell was very lucky not to get disqualified.

 

I find it strange that Dirrell is ranked higher yet Froch has the better resume and beat him! Although Id fancy Dirrell to come out on top if they met again.

 

All the people that thought dirrell wasn't acting should be rounded up and exterminated the world would be better off without such brainwashed braindead morons.

 

It was still an illegal shot so why does it matter if he was acting? I agree that his fight with Froch was really close so any close scorecard is fine with me. I hope they get to fight again because any close fight like that deserves a rematch.

 

Fantastic post :good