Stop saying that Carl "So easy a caveman could do it" Froch beat Andre Dirrell

come off it man! I'm a Kiwi, but the US s by FAR the most nationalistic boxng country out there. Most of the fans there are not even aware they have the sport in other countries. Anyone who isn't from there or doesn't fight there can't be any good and every other country's fighters get panned for wanting to fight at home while theirs get a free pass! When it comes to any fight between an Amercan and a non American, the other guy is a fraud and will lose easily. When one of their fighters travels abroad they are the first to try and dredge up silly excuses and conspiracy theories (this thread being a case and point) but the numerous robberies on their own doorstp are ignored as though they never happened. The Brits and Aussies can be bad for patriotism towards their fighters but they are nothing compared to the Americans who redefine the word nationalism!

 

They dont have to. Your points are worthless.

Yet you dont seem to be willing to address the points of others i.e. compubox showing Froch's higher punch stats and Dirrells tendancy to hold every 10 seconds (which he was lucky not to be deducted more points for).
You simply dismiss these as "bull****" and then complain that others wont address your points.

It was a close fight, but if all you're going to do is run, hold and complain, you cant expect to take the champions belt away from him on his home turf.
Froch didn't win that fight, Dirrell lost it.

 

This has nothing to do with boxing does it. The reason you're so upset is that the white Englishman beat the black American...It happened, get over it.

 

and dont pretend the same **** doesnt happen everywhere else in the world.

 

A) Unreliable because anyone can post? What, anyone like you?!!!

B) Dirrells holding was ****ing absurd. There's a video floating around here somewhere that shows a round where Dirrell is literally holding every 10 seconds. Ive seen fighters get disqualified for that level of holding.

C) If you know how to score a fight Dirrell should have won a clear decision????
So you're better at scoring fights than the professional judges who actually did it?
My scorecard is long thrown in the bin. I dont keep them. Im not that anal. You'll struggle to show me where im wrong as scoring is subjective and open to opinion.
And you have a real problem accepting the opinions of others, believing that your own is clearly better rather than just different.

 

I've told you. 120-107, Froch. That's my card.

 

If the referee was consistent, would Dirrell have been disqualified for holding?

 

Close fight, he lost, get over it. No robbery, no dodgy judges, no dodgy ref.

The fact that most people here are on your case.... doesn't that make you question yourself for a moment, you know, "maybe I'm too strong with my views on this, maybe it's MY perspective thats gone to **** because of my man love for my homeboy??"

Take a step back, breath, look at how many people are telling you you're going waaaay overboard, re-evaluate your place on here, you're becoming (and in a lot of peoples eyes already have) a laughing stock.

 

It doesn't mean it's right though and, just because he does have the hometown advantage and is the champion, he shouldn't be allowed to get away with it. If something is in the rulebook, you can't adjust those rules for individual fighters of circumstances. In Wlad's case, the fact he's the champion is the reason and in Dirrell's case, the circumstances were the reason.

As I said, if the referee had been consistent with his own refereeing, Dirrell would have been disqualified. There is far too much of a taboo about taking points, which is why so many fights turn into an abysmal, scrappy mess. Dirrell should have had another 2 points taken and, if he carried on, disqualification. There's no argument against this, I don't think. If a fighter was elbowing or throwing low blows, the referee would have no issue taking severe action, but holding is also in the rule book, yet it got ignored.

And yes, there are many cases of a fighter holding excessively. Even though I'm a "Brit" (), I did think Hatton should have been deducted points in the latter stages of his career, against Collazo and Urango, especially. Holding has become far too prevalent in boxing and in blatant cases, such as Dirrell and Wlad, more should be done to make it a clean fight.

Froch did do too many rabbit punches but you could argue he was trying to break the clinch. If Dirrell wasn't clinching, there would have been no rabbit punches, so if Froch was going to be punished, Dirrell would also have to be.

But if it happens once, it could be an accident. I don't think Cotto was intentional with Clottey either. It just happens in boxing, especially when you're trying to stop a guy holding onto you.

 

Read what I said - If the referee had been consistent, would he have been disqualified?