Was Andre Dirrell robbed against Carl Froch?

Andre's corner should've been imploring him to do more the entire fight, not just round 12. That's exactly what I mean about not taking into account the reality of the situation until it's too late. If he'd fought like he did in the championship rounds earlier on, he would've got the decision. But there was a greater chance of Froch catching him if he did that, and he decided it wasn't worth it. It's a damn shame because by the time he'd realized he could actually succeed in that kind of fight, three quarters of the fight was already done with.

I'm not arguing what the ideal is- I'm arguing that Dirrell and his team should've known the reality of the situation and what needed to be done. Hometown advantage isn't exactly breaking news here. As professionals, it's their job to know not just the way it ought to be, but the way it is in the real world and to prepare their man accordingly. They failed wildly in that regard- his corner should've been in his ear about turning it up from the early rounds on, and before that, stressing the point in training camp.

Every one of the examples I used rings true. A visiting fighter is not getting the decision against Ward in Oakland with that same performance. Or Dirrell in Michigan. Or Spinks or Alexander in St. Louis. Or Froch in England. Or Sturm in Germany. Or Canelo in Mexico. It's just not going to happen.

Is it fair? No. But any fan with a brain knows that's exactly how it is, there's no excuse for Dirrell and his team not to have realized it. You don't seem willing to admit that was even a mistake at all, let alone a glaring one; I wanted Andre to win, had the same score as the Spanish judge (114-113, 7-5 with the point deduction) , and it was still clear as day that they made a huge error here.

 

Despite me being the devil's advocate here, I did score it for Dirrell and voted as such. It's just an extremely frustrating fight for me to evaluate for Andre because of everything I explained in the thread.

The perfect environment, with no referee bias or crowd reaction affecting the judges whatsoever, and with perfect viewing angles and slow-motion for them see and to score the action properly would be fantastic for the sport. That's how it should be. But it's just not the way it is, and so the only way to prepare is for how things actually work.

That was the biggest failure for Team Dirrell in this fight. By the time they realized that the perfect world and the real world didn't mesh, there wasn't enough time to really capitalize on it. If he'd just turned the heat up from round 6 on as opposed to round 10, this wouldn't even be a discussion right now. And that's what irks me.

 

thought it would be more lopsided toward Froch considering this is ESB. interesting

 

The question is...will he ever fight again ?

 

His corner gave him the correct gameplan for a boxing match. He was comfortably outboxing Froch in the first 5 rounds before Froch turned it into wrestling match.

And instead of boxing intelligently, get involved in the rough stuff as Froch would love, get tired and get KO'd. Smart gameplan there.

If a fighter lands the cleaner blows, is the better boxer he should get the decision no matter where he's at.

Dirrells corner was telling him to be active the entire fight. you really dont know what you are talking about

There is no way Froch won 5 rounds.

 

I wouldn't call it a robbery.

Dirrel was holding and running, you can't fight like a ***** and expect to win a title in somebody else's backyard. Plain and simple.

Dirrel could of beat Froch if he was mentally stronger. And occasionally stepped up and made Froch look silly.

Think about it like Vegas rules, time and time again its proved that even if you just throw more and look to be the more active fighter, you get the nod. And even though the fight was close, the judges would of thought about Froch coming forward and Dirrel holding.

It wasn't a robbery as I said, but nobody can argue that Carl Froch was lucky, but every fighter has a couple of these sort of fights in their career.

 

He made Froch look silly the entire fight.

What 6 rounds could you give to Froch? You know if it wasnt a robbery.

 

Your record should be posts 0, vcash 0.
:roll:

 

I can't believe you're still hurt over this, you're the only person on these boards that has been going on about this for so long!

Come on, he lost!

It was a close fight, remember you're a fan, so you're automatically going to be biased and choose to see what you want to see!

I think DeGale beat Groves, but I have got over it and I don't care any more.

 

I havent started the last 3 threads on the subject. Infact I try to ignore them. But then some idiot like you comes along and I lose my patience.

You say the same thing. What Dirrell didnt do. Instead of saying what exactly froch did to win the fight. :-(

Post your scorecard

You post your scorecard and Ill post mine. I'll show you what rounds you got wrong.

Degale actually landed more then 5 clean punches on Groves. :rofl

 

You're in denial dude. You can't even accept that there were errors made (and this is coming from someone who voted the same as you) and that any reasonable fan could see. If you're defending the corner work, you have to hold the passiveness against Andre. Otherwise, you're suggesting that the fight, from planning to execution, was perfect from Dirrell's standpoint and there was nothing that could've been done better.

If that's your case, just say so. But believing that doesn't say much about Andre's peak ability if that's the best he and his corner had to offer.

The last thing I'll post on it is that if Dirrell fights that exact fight 10 times, in 10 other fighters' back yards, he's losing 10 times. That kind of fight is not going to get the job done for any road fighter, end of story. If Andre or his team didn't realize it before due to being naive or incompetent, they know it now.

 

Dirrell dominated .

 

I'm surprised it's stacked in Froch's favour. Dirrell was robbed in that fight, it was an easy fight to score. What did Froch actually do in the fight?

 

I never said Dirrell didnt make errors. But you got the errors wrong.


Dirrell got taken out of his gameplan from rounds 6-10 by Froch's rough house and illegal tactics.

From rounds 1-5 and 11-12 he fought the perfect fight for a young fighter who's never been 12 rounds before against a champion on his home turf. He boxed excellently and flustered Froch to the point where he had no recourse but to foul.

His error were allowing Froch to make the fight dirty. Your assessment of him meeting Froch at his own game would have gotten him knocked out.


As for the fight itself. Sorry there is no way Froch won 5 rounds. It was not "close".

If the fights at a nuetral venue, with competant judging, Dirrell wins a clear decision, with Froch possibly deducted a point or disqualified.