The commentary for Kessler-Froch was

Duke's a dreadful commentator. He just wibbles on, sometimes ignoring how the action's developing and giving absolutely no technical explanation of the tactics or approach of each fighter. ESPN get Teddy Atlas, we get that muppet.

 

Out of interest, what round was scored 10-8?

 

What I heard from Radio Five after the fight was ridiculous. I feel Woodhall is too influenced by Bunce's personality (maybe Costello is as well). How did they all have it 6-6? You'd do well to find three fanboys on here who had it that way.

 

6-6 draw is pure fantasy. It was a clear Kessler win.

 

Kessler was missing alot on occassion but he was outworking Froch. There was one moment Kessler let rip with about 10 or 12 punches and the commentators said good right hand when he didn't land. After blocking those punches, Froch landed a punch. In effect he won that exchange but I know 99% of people wouldn't see that.

Froch got outworked. He was winning rounds on big punches but that is never how you should approach the 12 battles or the war!

 

I'm glad you asked that.

 

Smart kids.:good

I agree with Thirteen above. Duke just whitters on, al lot of the time getting so wrapped up in some point he's trying to make that the action or events get ignored.

Rawlings made me laugh last night, before the start of one round he said something like "Interesting words from Frochs corner there". I hadn't heard a word of it because Duke hadn't stopped talking during the 1 minute break!!

 

The commentators were bad, once again I found myself not really listening to them after about round 6. I don't want to hear Duke scoring rounds differently to how see's them, simply because the fight is in Denmark! What's the point?

Did anybody else think Barker was completely out of his depth in the studio? He was like an MP, never answering questions and just giving very vague answers. He comes across as a decent bloke, but I did'nt think much of him last night.

 

I watched it in Danish(which I dont understand) and had it even 114-114 or Kessler winning by a round. Very hard to score though. So the result was probably just about right. I think the italian ref had the most accurate card.

No way froch won, at best a draw for him so its understandable that kessler got the decision..

I dont however see it as a wide UD as some people had it. I had froch winning rd 1,3,5,10,11,12 but a lot of them were close!

 

Next time I see Duke Mackenzie is on a fight I'm going to tally up how many times he says on or other of the fighters is 'gambling'....

 

You have got to be kidding. I have never seen anyone miss as many shots as Froh did. Kessler won 12 - even the British commentators,(who were biased as hell) said that.

 

I just saw that on youtube and d***! I totally agree. Kessler clearly won the rounds and yet they still made up thouse bad excuses. Every time Froch touched Kessler they were like: "Froch is landing the significant punches"¨. Bullsh**.

 

This has been a busy thread. I've been following on my phone. Just a couple of things...Mick Costello had it two rounds to Froch. Richie and I had it even, but we disagreed on about five rounds. On Five Live we don't necessarily share the scores at the end of each round. We give totals as we go and then, very importantly, before the result. We all said that Kessler deserved the decsion five minutes before it was announced.
There were, in my opinion, three or four rounds that were close and they make up the debate. The right man won because Froch fought a bad fight. It's that simple. Froch will win five rematches out of five.
It was a great, great night.


Adios.

 

Well if you had Froch winning six rounds and 'a lot' of them were close, then it only takes three to be scored the other way to get to the widest score of 117-111.

 

Totally agree Buncey. :good