Who do you think won that fight, Froch or Dirrell?

froch won imo,aggression was the key for me,everytime froch got close dirrell held,everytime froch landed on the face dirrell complained,the point deduction was right imho for a number of things,the holding,falling moaning,fair doos froch looked plodding at times,but how do you keep up with sumone with a rocket up his ass running all night,nobody would have looked good against dirrell lastnight.boring fight,right decision

 

Mayweather uses his defence to set up offence - he "runs" to give angles and create distance. He's relatively low output and not exciting, but he never looks completely negative.

 

Some of you Froch lovers are totally deluded.

 

on points, dirrell won the fight by 3 or 4 on my card

as a overrall fight, it was a draw because neither fighter truly beat the other guy. dirrell could have landed on froch all night if he'd wanted but he didn't

the only way i can see froch win was because dirrell shot himself in the foot with the manner he fought the fight and because he happened to be fighting a beltholder and had to go the extra mile to get the points win. i don't think froch deserves the win for it though, a draw is more than he deserved

 

It was a very close fight, no robbery like people were making out. Most of the press have it for Froch. Didn't score but I'm glad Froch won, fighters like Dirrell aren't going to get the sport back popular again. Anyway Kessler will kill Froch.

 

yes but we live in the real world my friend. :hi:

and things like hometown advantages and coming forward can sway ringside judges.

least hatton hasn't been tested positive for drugs on 2 occasions. unlike fatboy in your avatar. :yep

 

Dirrell won clearly, it doesn't matter what you think of his style his defense was far more effective than Froch's offense.

 

Technically speaking there's an argument for Dirrell but there's more to it than that. No way can you come over, fight like that and expect to WIN the title.

So in my opinion it was the correct result for a pretty dull fight.

 

Bollocks, forget the 'title' the fight should be scored round by round - AD did enough to win more rounds than Froch. Its that simple.

 

It's not that simple at all. We see time and again that judges score rounds that have no action for the guy who is at least trying to create some action

 

Greg, he ran, end of...please don't insult me and everyone else by trying to make out Dirrells performance was some sort of Mayweatheresque back foot masterclass, because it wasn't. The guy has doubts about his chin, thats why he completely and absolutely failed to engage.:deal

 

quite often wrongly. Froch was hitting nothing.

 

It pains me to say it but I thought Froch had lost it. I gave up scoring after round 8. Dirrell edged it for me. Yeah he was negative but when he did attack he was landing scoring punches. He needed to throw more combos, move out and then be elusive in cycles. I'm not complaining though Froch's O didnt go and looking forward to the next round of fights.

 

Maybe. It's difficult. Not sure where I stand on it. In the later rounds Dirrell did enough. In the early ones, arguably not.

Dirrell's style will always leave it open to interpretation.

 

I had it 6-6, meaning Froch won because of the point deduction. I was impressed with Dirrell, was very tricky and at times he made Froch look very ordinary. I just felt he did too much running to begin with and wasnt using the jab much which would have won him the early rounds.