Look, I have no problem with the Dirrell result - the clown had more than enough talent to win, but decided to throw himself on the floor and cry about perceived slights. That, quite rightly, lead to the judges deeming him a non-fighter. Kessler I, however, he loses fairly. I understand that it was close, but it's tough for me to see beyond a tight but clear victory for the Dane. Out comes every excuse in the book. Then there's Ward - comprehensively and fairly outboxed, outfought and outfoxed, Froch claims that it was a close contest decided not by a vastly superior opponent, but by Steve Smoger, whose performance was almost exemplary. Yesterday is where the worm turned for me - I'm a fan of Carl Froch, but an objective one. He was losing by at least four points on any legitimate card and was continually hurt before a decidedly dubious intervention from a referee I'm going to very honourably (and some will say charitably) brand incompetent. Suddenly the ref can do no wrong! Suddenly the great warrior of British boxing must defer to The Accountant and delusional trainer McCracken before deciding whether or not Groves is worthy of a rematch. Should Carl retire, fair enough. In spite of it all, he's been a brave, courageous warrior in the ring. If, on the other hand, he fights Chavez Jr or the husk of Kessler, the malodorous whiff of cowardice will permeate his achievements for the rest of time.
All Froch needed to say was...I think it was stopped early, but I think I had turned the fight and the referee also robbed me of a legitimate stoppage.
Even... "it's not my job/decision...", is more digestible than what came out of his and Mccracken's mouths. Fast car, ever perceptible to the court of public opinion and as slippery as an eel, quickly changed his initial assessment to conform with it. And so begins the next transaction.
