Wow. People still think Froch beat Andre Dirrell? I thought it was Consensus

I had Froch well ahead.

 

Direll won the fight. No question.

But he didn't win over home town advantage. Big mistake. It was there to be taken emphatically, but he didn't do so. What grates for me is that the Dirrell camp knew this - that the home town crowd would sway the judging, which is what happened.

Dirrell should have turned it on a little earlier to be sure. He didn't.

The better fighter on the night? Who should have won based on that? Dirrell. No question. But his own fault for not being absolute in his work and silencing the crowd so that only an idiot would think Froch won. Next time, Andre...you had it in the bag, but didn't close it.

Froch, to me, is the epitome of a fighter whose meagre boxing skills is an embarrassment and contradiction to the boxing prowess and greatest he so often proclaims of himself. A classic example of running one's mouth off and writing checks his ass can't cash. And like the kid who manages to steal a few sweets from the sweetie shop, must know deep inside that soon the day will come when he finally gets caught. But until then, keeps swinging...hoping the luck and chin holds out.

 

Dirrell was robbed, thats all there is too it.

Im convinced that anyone who had Froch winning that fight is a complete and utter moron and should refrain from voicing their opinion on any fight what so ever.

 

How anyone can say Dirrell was ROBBED is beyond me.

 

Im convinced you have your head so far up your ass, you think that anyone who dosent agree with you is a moron

 

edit

 

I totally agree.

 

You've now admitted that he is 'your' fighter, and that you've rewatched the fight a number of times (which is madness as it was a crap fight, but there you go). I'm guessing when you first watched it your gut feeling was that Dirrell had nicked it and you were disappointed when 'your' boy didn't get the nod. Every time you've watched it since, consciously or not you will be looking for reasons to give rounds to Dirrell. That's just how it is. The reason you're now calling it a robbery is because each time you've watched it you've selectively gathered evidence to back up your view that Dirrell won, and ignored any evidence to the contrary. I am happy to not rewatch a fight that i really didn't enjoy and go with my gut instinct, which is that Dirrell edged it by a round or two but didn't do enough to win it clearly and on that basis it was not a robbery. This opinion is based on watching the fight in real time as a fan of neither boxer, so to be honest it is probably more valid than your opinion which is based on watching the fight repeatedly as a fan of one fighter and convincing yourself that your fighter got jobbed.

 

The reason nobody can give you a round by round debate is because nobody has bothered watching what was by all accounts a poor fight over and over again, as you have done. Let it go. It was a million miles away from being the worst decision of last year, and the really poor decisions came over in the US so you should probably lay off all the xenophobic nonsense you've been posting on this thread.

 

You need a champion worthy performance to take the champions belt

Dirrell's performance wasn't that.

Yes it was a sloppy fight but neither fighter deserved it, so was it a robbery or was it they couldn't score the fight a draw in such a big tournament.

 

As somebody else said, the first 5 could have gone either way. they were close, tentative and disputable rounds that could have gone to either man.

I had 6 and 7 (i think) as certain Froch rounds.

8, 9 and 11 were certain dirrell rounds. he started to take over and froch got more careless.

10 was a little closer. could have been scored possibly either way. with his momentum, and ascendancy, lets say dirrell gets the nod here.

12 was a froch round - and dirrell said that HIMSELF.

if you give froch maybe 3 of the first 5 rounds, that gives him a total of 6. + a point deduction for dirrell.

Therefore, your winner, AND STILL etc etc...


It could obviosuly of gone either way. any cry of robbery is from self-interested americans, or people who just love to argue for arguements sake.

 

Dirrell won and a robbery was expected in England anyway. Didn't Froch intentionally body slam him and got nothing for it?, the wrestling tactics applied there all score points it seems for the local boys.

 

Did Cotto get a point deducted for body slamming clottey in the "Good old US of A"? Nope.