Unbelievable scoring... Are you telling me Dirrell lost 7 rounds!?

Discussion in 'British Boxing Forum' started by PrideOfWales, Oct 17, 2009.


  1. Grant1

    Grant1 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    11,823
    1
    Jun 13, 2007
    I had Dirrell by at least 3.

    He didn't lose that fight. No way.
     
  2. mughalmirza786

    mughalmirza786 Boxing Addict Full Member

    4,774
    0
    Oct 19, 2008
    I can see why they call that kid the matrix. Froch was getting undressed in parts of the fight. Dirrell had carl stunned at many points in the fight (the legs usually give it away) and he showed incredible reflexes. When i was watching the fight i kept thinking, in the next round froch will catch him with something to make him slow down and then he can begin his fight but it never happended. When dirrell won rounds they were because of clean hard counter punching that you could replay in slowmo. That sequence in one of the latter rounds where dirrell sits on the ropes and just ducks multiple shots by froch and counters with two massive lefts hooks of his own staggering froch shows the kind of talent dirrell has.

    Dirrell was not active enough though in the earlier rounds and fought far too negatively considering the skills he possesed. Even considering that though, i though dirrell overall was the better fighter, and deserved the nod. I will however watch the fight again.
     
  3. threethirteen

    threethirteen Boxing Addict Full Member

    4,366
    1
    Jan 24, 2009
    It was a dire performance from both fighters. Dirrell wouldn't fight with pitty-pat amateur bull**** and clinching, Froch couldn't fight because he didn't seem to have a gameplan beyond "I WILL CATCH UP WITH HIM"

    He needs to listen to his trainer more. He should have had the hands up and bobbed and weaved to make Dirrell's speed and jab a non-issue. It would have also reduced his effectiveness from the southpaw stance.

    Either way, Dirrell didn't deserve to win and neither did Carl. I'd give both a loss.