Hearn "Froch Not Motivated for Ward Rematch"

Not true... At all.

 

How about rematching Andre Direll after winning a closely disputed bout? Just saying....

 

How did he duck the rematch with Dirrell? Both were tied up in the Super 6 so couldn't just stop the entire tournament to just have a rematch.

Then after Dirrell was fouled by AA he basically retired for a while. He came back a month after the Super 6 ended with Ward beating Froch then didn't fight for 14 months and was then inactive for 18 months. Dirrell only became active again last year and Froch has been off for almost a year.

To say Froch ducked Dirrell is idiotic and a blatant lie.

Froch doesn't want to fight Ward though. He's said it himself, he only thinks he has a punchers chance and will likely lose on points so why rematch a guy he knows he will lose to. The only thing that would motivate him is a big payday and with everything stacked on his side as he knows he'll need every advantage to even have a slimmest chance of winning.

 

Dirrell has asked for a rematch for at least 2 years! So LIES! Dude you're pathetic...

http://ringtv.craveonline.com/news/365245-andre-dirrell-wants-a-rematch-with-carl-froch

Quote: By facing Edwards (27-3-1, 14 knockouts), Dirrell (23-1, 16 KOs) is returning to Showtime for the first time since appearing in the “Super Six World Boxing Classic” super middleweight tournament in 2010. It was at that time when Dirrell suffered his lone defeat in his opening tournament bout to then-WBC titleholder Froch by split decision in October 2009.

“I know I won that fight against Froch. I think everyone knows I won that fight. He’s the one opponent I want,” said Dirrell, 31, who will be after his sixth straight victory against Edwards.

“The fact that he’s a world champion again is just icing on the cake. I don’t think I’ve ever been defeated and I want that title shot.* Hopefully, he doesn’t retire because I know the world wants to see that rematch. I want to fight the best at 168.”

 

I personally believe Ward's saying Wembley is his way of pricing himself out of a fight he doesn't want

 

Here's another one spin doctor.... stop lying or claiming that you know anything factual. you lying bias hypocrites kill me. Double standards... I see your prejudices it clear.

http://www.boxingnews24.com/2015/02/andre-dirrell-carl-froch-is-my-no-1-target/*

Scott Gilfoid:*It’s been six years since Andre Dirrell (24-1, 16 KOs) lost a highly controversial fight against Carl Froch in October of 2009 in Froch’s home city of Nottingham, UK. Despite losing that fight, Dirrell is still very much interested in getting the 37-year-old Froch back into the ring to show who the better fighter is.

To Dirrell, if Froch retires now, he’ll have to live with his questionable victory over him for the remainder of his life. Dirrell thinks it is better that Froch faces him to try and erase the taint of his controversial win. Dirrell notes that Froch gave his fellow British fighter George Groves a rematch in order to clear the controversy up surrounding their first fight in November of 2013.

 

The article is dated 7 months ago, 7 months equals 2 years to you? 2 years ago Dirrell was inactive probably sitting on his couch watching Froch beat Kessler in a rematch.

Did Dirrell win the fight. Yes I think he did, I was rooting for Dirrell in the Super 6 but I'm not going to twist the facts and say he was ever available for a rematch and a viable opponent until very recently.

 

That link leads to a non-existent article it's as empty as your argument.

 

If you Google son you'll find many more... I'm not going to do the work for you.

I've posted the first TWO I saw.. just to prove you to be a liar. Because you said he wasn't DUCKING the rematch requested by Andre Dirrell.

Carry on with your lies...... I only deal with the facts son.

FACT he has always asked for a rematch... LIES you said there's no request out there.

 

You proved me a liar by posting an article that doesn't support anything you claimed and an article that didn't exist. What kind of argument is that?

Fine if we are debating in the realm of surreal I counter your arguments with the power of...

http://memestorage.com/_nw/53/22406674.jpg

This link is irrefutable evidence that I am right and you are wrong. :deal

 

seems pretty true to me, care to explain why it's not?

we'd watch it but we're boxing fans, i just don't see it doing huge numbers on uk ppv or filling wembley. i'm not saying it'd be small, just not huge, there is no promotional buildup and the first fight was neither controversial or particularly exciting.

 

I don't know. I think a match between Ward and Froch would do very well at Wembley stadium. I know Groves is a popular fighter and having a Brit vs brit clash really helped them sell out that stadium.

Froch is a big time draw in the UK and I think it would sell well in the UK. I just don't think Ward would adhere to taking a lower split of the purse, which he'd pretty much have to.

 

:deal

 

your previous post deserved no better, full of schoolgirl arguments.

and i've repeatedly dealt with your selective use of quotes, and am frankly bored of it.

froch made ward an offer, was refused and was stripped while waiting on purse bids. ward made no offer while negotiating a return at a catchweight in oakland against a much lower tier fighter. if that were the other way round you'd be all over it.

 

you can't duck inactive fighters.