Where is Froch's highlight reel in the fight against Dirrell?

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by conraddobler, Nov 29, 2010.


  1. qcolts

    qcolts Member Full Member

    214
    0
    Nov 10, 2007
    Fight was a clear robbery. Froch looked like he had never boxed a single round as a professional in this fight. Dirrel made him miss again and again and countered effectively. FRoch came forward and constantly missed widely. The people who scored the fight for froch scored it for him on ineffective aggression and a distaste for the mayweather-esque gameplan dirrel employed of hit and run.
     
  2. lastletter26

    lastletter26 Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,856
    1
    Nov 13, 2008
    If you are gonna respond then atleast respond to my point instead of repeating a point that is easily killed.:deal

    Dirrell didn't do enough while froch did nothing. Dirrell was the only one who did anything. Froch had ample time but not enough skill and footwork to hit dirrell.

    Now I'm whining and moaning? I back all my points up with logic and facts. You just can't go against them in a scoring criteria way so you say I'm moaning and bleating. Try getting past scoring criteria because I can discredit any reason that one feels froch won.
     
  3. Exactabox

    Exactabox Boxing Junkie Full Member

    14,059
    8
    Feb 13, 2010
    I agree. Clearly if the fight was not in Nottingham Dirrel wins by 2 points across the board.
     
  4. lastletter26

    lastletter26 Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,856
    1
    Nov 13, 2008
    Dirrell's Illegal tactics were cancelled out by froch's far more malicious tactics. Also, you are an idiot if you believe that illegal tactics is the only reason froch landed no more than 5 clean powershots upstairs. There was some real defense and reflexes shown that most people just aren't born with.

    After the Illegal tactics what do you have? You have dirrell landing pretty much the only clean powershots upstairs.
     
  5. lastletter26

    lastletter26 Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,856
    1
    Nov 13, 2008
    You've seen the fight and already know you can't make one for froch that goes past 20-40 seconds.
     
  6. lastletter26

    lastletter26 Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,856
    1
    Nov 13, 2008
    Yet froch was the only one hurt/stunned in the fight. Froch might have only landed 3 power punchers upstairs and they were nothing like the blatant shots dirrell was hitting froch with. You don't have to ask if a shot landed when dirrell hit froch. You know it landed by froch's head snapping back.
     
  7. conraddobler

    conraddobler Boxing Addict banned Full Member

    6,853
    148
    Mar 7, 2010
    Is there no you young whippersnapper in all of England who can provide us a Froch highlight reel?

    Do we ask for too much?

    I know for a fact Froch lands a left hook in the 8th round. You could start there and work backwards?

    I'm pretty sure there is a grazing jab in the 6th. And I know he gets a flurry of punches to the side of Dirrell's head in the 9th.
     
  8. Talivar

    Talivar Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,022
    52
    Jan 22, 2008
    Problem is most Froch Fans accept how things go with much less QQ than other fighters fans, he got W vs Dirrell so they moved on, he got L vs Kessler so they moved on ect ect. You wont find any reels of why froch should have beat kessler either.
     
  9. lastletter26

    lastletter26 Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,856
    1
    Nov 13, 2008
    No, It is IMPOSSIBLE to make a highlight of froch from this fight that last more than 30 seconds. (and impossible is not something I don't say lightly).
     
  10. conraddobler

    conraddobler Boxing Addict banned Full Member

    6,853
    148
    Mar 7, 2010
    Tons of highlights in that fight. Tons of them. Too much material to make a highlight reel. The whole thing was a slugfest.
     
  11. Broxi

    Broxi Stand With Ukraine Full Member

    5,431
    312
    Oct 14, 2007
    Dirrell threw his arms around Froch every time he even looked like he was going to throw a punch that might land. Nevermind being beaten on the scorecards ... the guy should have been DQ'd for wasting everyones time.

    But hey, if you want to support that kind of behaviour, go ahead.
     
  12. lastletter26

    lastletter26 Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,856
    1
    Nov 13, 2008
    We aren't talking about the Behavior. We are talking about who won the fight and why one feels that person won the fight. The only support that's supposed to be done is supporting what you believe with logical points to back that up in a boxing context.

    As far as the Dirrell holding. It went on alot. It didn't take up 100% of the time of the fight like some of you like to imply, to get away from the Clean Punch argument (which is stronger than any argument about this fight). Truth is more time was spent with them standing at distance to eachother than anything in close. Froch was scared to swing unless he got close to Dirrell and knew dirrell wasn't gonna swing. Nothing different from what Abraham was doing to froch when trying to jump in with an amatuer Airball Flurry. To imply that 100% of the fight time was spent holding is flat out false. I understand why froch got dirty with Dirrell out of fustration which had as much to do with Dirrell's Defense than his holding. Just like AA was fustrated with Dirrell's defense when he threw the Dirty Punch.

    He's what happened.
    Dirrell holding
    Froch Cheapshotting
    Jabs and body work were pretty equal for both (not to much but just enough).
    Froch not landing anything even when dirrell is cornered, standing still or being aggressive.

    Dirrell Landing atleast 40+ powershots upstairs while froch lands maybe five.

    Froch was not being held the whole fight so stop that. He was held too much definately but not 36 minutes. Froch not being able to hit him when he wasn't mobile and cornered happened farrrrrrrrrrrrrrr more than Dirrell holding when froch got close enough to try something lucky.
     
  13. conraddobler

    conraddobler Boxing Addict banned Full Member

    6,853
    148
    Mar 7, 2010

    in a nutshell!

    An absolute dead-on summary of what happened.

    40+ versus 5. That's what this thread is about.