Jim Watt AS MUCH to thank as Foster for Froch Groves 2

With his appalling commentary.

I just got tickets to the fight on the resale, and just over 2 weeks out, I'm f*cking stoked about the fight, so I watched the first one again.

Watt made close rounds sound so 1 sided because he was using a mantra of 'Groves has answered everything' if Groves landed 1 punch after a 3/4 punch combo from Froch. I might be wrong, and don't pretend to be an expert at scoring fights, but I'm fairly sure that landing one punch after you've been hit with 3 doesn't count as winning an exchange because you landed yours last?

If you turn the volume off, the fight was a lot closer (I've said this before), so Watt's commentary set up such huge outroar at the actual cards, even though can easily make a case for Froch winning rounds 2,3,5 and 8...which gives you the 76-75 cards. Watt and Sky - despite everyone thinking they're up Froch's arse - made the whole thing sound so one sided and outrageous that there was no way Froch could have won if Foster hadn't stopped it. In fact, if you look at round 8, Watt says Froch should be deducted a point for landing 3 punches when Groves was on the ropes...COMPLETELY ignoring the fact that Groves only ended up there getting smashed because he kept trying to run BEHIND Froch (3 times) to land a rabbit punch. And FROCH should have been deducted a point? And calling Froch for hitting on the break, which he ONLY did when Groves rubbed his head in Froch's face in clinches. Again, Watt never mentioned this once. In Round 2 (or 3, can't remember now), Froch spun Groves onto the ropes, and was immediately spun back, no punches were thrown and the fight carried on. Instead of describing the tit for tat that occured, it was Groves who was 'class' and 'pure cheek'. I know people moan about Watt a lot, but I think his commentary really ramped the bad feeling up because so many people weren't seeing what was in front of them a lot of the time. Hence why the judges scores were so close.

And as for Foster...I think Two Shakes mentioned this a while back, but up until the 9th round, he stopped the fight - sometimes with no reason (round 8 is a perfect example) every time Froch got Groves into any kind of trouble. The kind of trouble where Froch is usually allowed to work. Watch it again, and see how many times they're broken up when Froch is in the ascendency. He saved Groves taking shots on the ropes numerous times in that fight.

I also think I understand what Froch meant by 'taking Groves lightly' in this fight. It's not that he didn't train hard enough, or not prepare professionally as people are making out he's implying, but I think it's more in the actual fight itself... What I mean is, he believed himself to be so much better, that just before the knockdown - despite all his preparation and experience - he forgot his basics due to lack of respect. He landed his uppercut off the ropes (the one that some people refuse to acknowledge led to this situation) and walk in, crossing his feet, and gets caught with both feet in front of him, and gets planted on his arse. Now against fighters who he respected (Abraham, Kessler, Johnson, Ward), he never made SUCH basic mistakes because he knows how costly they can be. The fact he landed his Shoryuken uppercut for the first time since 2007 led him to think he could finish the fight there and then, and it was THAT lack of respect in that instant that led him to get planted. Now he respects Groves that won't happen again, I'm fairly certain. Why couldn't Abraham get past Froch's jab? Because Froch was so intent on keeping him at the end of it...he really didn't want a tear up that night with Abraham having 1 punch KO'd Taylor and sent Dirrell to gaga land in their fight. Froch believed the hype about Abraham's power and wanted nothing to do with being macho on that occasion, I'm fairly certain. Why did it take Kessler 4 rounds to land a meaningful shot in their second fight? Because Froch knew he had to be busy because he probably wasn't stopping Kessler, and had to build a lead on the cards. He simply wasn't concerned about a) being hurt or b) needing a points victory at all against Groves, so his approach in the ring was one of taking an opponent lightly.

Add to that what Catley said on Ringside last Thursday: It would have taken up to 5 rounds to shake that punch off... I think that this time without the knock down, Groves does not have a 75% Froch to work on like he did after 2:40 of fight one.

Even with the knockdown, Groves was starting to wilt when he was getting tagged, and at no point did Froch look like going down a second time.

People will say I'm a Froch nuthugger - I'm not, he was definitely losing at the point of the stoppage, the stoppage was definitely early, and he definitely got hurt. I'm a fan, as I always say, but I'm not stupid and don't 'DKSAB'. I'm sure a bunch of alts will start arguments with this thread, but hey, I thought I'd try to start a reasonable debate anyways.

As much as I'm stoked about this rematch and glad I'm actually going to be there, I really think people will be shocked by the way Froch approaches this fight.