Carl Froch is FINISHED!

15829 · Post by **15829** » 17 Oct 2009, 22:52

just got out the arena now I think dirrel sneaked it but a lot of the rounds where close so don't think froch is a fraud abraham will win this

On the plus I did call froch getting a home town descion

Spud · Post by **Spud** » 17 Oct 2009, 22:53

ALI wrote:Froch's limitations were there for all to see, but to call him a fraud is brainless

I usually hate to see someone get robbed, but not tonight. Dirrell won on my card, but he stank the joint out, he did not come to fight, he came to spoil and grab and sneak the rounds. Thats never been what boxings about and i for one am happy he lost. He should take up another sport, i dont ever want to see him fight again!

Do you know what - good summing up!!!

I thought Dirrell won the fight but glad at last we got a home decision it happens against us often enough!!!

THE PRINTER · Post by **THE PRINTER** » 17 Oct 2009, 22:54

froch couldnt handle hes speed tonight.

stevieb_8006 · Post by **stevieb_8006** » 17 Oct 2009, 22:55

frochy won cos he pressed the fight. He MADE the fight. U cant win a world title in the manner dirrell fought.

it was a pish match up and I wouldnt have grumbled either way, but dirrell didnt DESERVE to win fighting like that.

jBacca · Post by **jBacca** » 17 Oct 2009, 22:55

Was Dirrell so negative?

First 6 or so rounds he was running about, and was holding a fair bit... but after then he hit the front foot against Froch plenty of times, and looked like he'd hurt the Cobra.

After getting over the early frustrations (i wanted Froch to win), i thoroughly enjoyed Dirrell.

Phenomenal-Nutrition · Post by **Phenomenal-Nutrition** » 17 Oct 2009, 22:55

And as for 'not fighting' he fought the last 3 rounds and gave Froch a bit of pasting in those 3

Cannibal · Post by **Cannibal** » 17 Oct 2009, 22:56

I scored it 115-113 to Direll but I was thinking to myself "I hope he gets robbed" cause he was such a bitch in that ring.

When he had that point deducted you saw Direll step in a bit and you could see that he had power as well as speed cause he hurt Froch once. I was thinking to myself, if Direll stepped on Froch from the first round he would have beat him bloody but no, he went with this Usain Bolt sprint tactic and he only has himself to blame for throwing away the fight.

Direll probably won the fight but he won't be developing a fan base with that style. It will be interesting how Abraham handles that speed however and if Direll be able to run from him all night or even if he'll want to and adapt his style. Cause if he thinks UK decisions are bad, he'll have to knock Abraham out in Germany just to get a draw.

Kessler should beat Froch but I'm looking forward to a good scrap in that one as I think Kessler will engage him by following in on his ram rod jab.

Calzaghe indeed would have beaten Froch black and blue.

SteveDow · Post by **SteveDow** » 17 Oct 2009, 22:56

I thought it was an absolutely dreadful fight actually. The styles gelled really badly and to be fair Dirrell was very very negative. I thought it was a very difficult fight to score but I do agree that a challenger needs to do more than Dirrell did if he wants to win the title. If the fight had been for a vacant title I would probably have given Dirrell a very marginal decision but imo he did not do enough to take the title away from home.

crusader · Post by **crusader** » 17 Oct 2009, 22:58

stevieb_8006 wrote:frochy won cos he pressed the fight. He MADE the fight. U cant win a world title in the manner dirrell fought.

it was a pish match up and I wouldnt have grumbled either way, but dirrell didnt DESERVE to win fighting like that.

And Froch didn't deserve to win for hitting the air with 90% of his punches. Dirrell, as negative as he was, landed the clean shots, displayed better defence and ring generalship, and had Froch hurt a few times. I thought it was close, had Dirrell by 2, but I gave Froch the benefit of the doubt it some close rounds. Bad decision imo, but not terrible.

mikewl · Post by **mikewl** » 17 Oct 2009, 22:59

Froch is no longer a champ in my eyes at this point, he knows he lost, the crowd thought he lost, it was a robbery.

I reckon this is all about keeping the PPV's coming, the fix was in.

Will Froch fight in Nottingham again or will the next fight be elsewhere, I'd imagine none of the other guys would wanna come here after that.

hitman_hatton1 · Post by **hitman_hatton1** » 17 Oct 2009, 22:59

Cannibal wrote:Calzaghe indeed would have beaten Froch black and blue.

say what u want about calzaghe.

but he would have walked dirrell down and thrown a lot more punches.

froch was so reluctant to let go himself.

when u talk it like froch does and then fight like that u can't win any friends.

calzaghe would have walloped him.

crusader · Post by **crusader** » 17 Oct 2009, 22:59

SteveDow wrote:I thought it was an absolutely dreadful fight actually. The styles gelled really badly and to be fair Dirrell was very very negative. I thought it was a very difficult fight to score but I do agree that a challenger needs to do more than Dirrell did if he wants to win the title. If the fight had been for a vacant title I would probably have given Dirrell a very marginal decision but imo he did not do enough to take the title away from home.

So you just create your own rules for judging now? Wether you are the champion or the challenger, you deserve to win if you do more than your opponent. That is ludicrous. Every fighter deserves equal treatment when it comes to scoring. The whole you have to dominate the champ crap, is ridiculous and not found in any rule book. Might give Froch a 10-7 round if you think hes trunks looked nicer that round.

SteveDow · Post by **SteveDow** » 17 Oct 2009, 23:00

Also, I don't actually think this performance has any real bearing on how Froch will do against Kessler or for that matter Abraham given that Kessler and Abraham will be happy to engage Froch in a war and are not fighters whose main strengths are speed and elusiveness.

What this fight, and the Taylor fight, shows for me is that Froch is not very effective against fighters with fast hands and sharp reflexes. I don't want to turn this into a Froch v Calzaghe thread but I think if they had ever have fought Froch would have lost a very wide points decision purely on this basis.

jBacca · Post by **jBacca** » 17 Oct 2009, 23:01

crusader wrote:
SteveDow wrote:I thought it was an absolutely dreadful fight actually. The styles gelled really badly and to be fair Dirrell was very very negative. I thought it was a very difficult fight to score but I do agree that a challenger needs to do more than Dirrell did if he wants to win the title. If the fight had been for a vacant title I would probably have given Dirrell a very marginal decision but imo he did not do enough to take the title away from home.
So you just create your own rules for judging now? Wether you are the champion or the challenger, you deserve to win if you do more than your opponent. That is ludicrous. Every fighter deserves equal treatment when it comes to scoring.

Once again.. completely agree with you. Best arguing the case tommorow when everything has settled down..

hitman_hatton1 · Post by **hitman_hatton1** » 17 Oct 2009, 23:01

Eraserhead wrote:Bunce, Rosenthal and Rawling should be ashamed. We're all Brits and we all wanted Froch to win, but Jesus on a bike...what the hell are these guys lying for? We all watched the fooking fight, Buncey! You're talking rubbish. It's cringe-worthy.

yeah at least show some nuts and admit dirrell should have got it. :>

SteveDow · Post by **SteveDow** » 17 Oct 2009, 23:02

Crusader: Of course this is how is should be but this is boxing. How many times have we seen a champion get the benefit of the doubt in a close fight, particularly when they are at home?? Everybody knows that this is an unwritten rule in boxing and challengers have to be prepared to go beyond just doing enough to circumvent this judging tendency.

Phenomenal-Nutrition · Post by **Phenomenal-Nutrition** » 17 Oct 2009, 23:03

mikewl wrote: Will Froch fight in Nottingham again or will the next fight be elsewhere, I'd imagine none of the other guys would wanna come here after that.

Indeed, although if I was Froch I would have similar reservations about Germany, Denmark I don't have a clue about

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 17 Oct 2009, 23:03

As annoying as the decision was, I am cheesed off it the first home town decision in the Super 6 happend here... and the British commentatory team applauded it... well sort of!.

116-112 Dirrel - not even close. I think it could have been wider, I gave Froch some rounds just cause Dirrell was being negative (no other reason). I had it level going into the 8th (as I think did Rawling/Thaxton) - how did they only have Dirrell up by 1 in the end is amazing.

Phenomenal-Nutrition · Post by **Phenomenal-Nutrition** » 17 Oct 2009, 23:06

SteveDow wrote:Crusader: Of course this is how is should be but this is boxing. How many times have we seen a champion get the benefit of the doubt in a close fight, particularly when they are at home?? Everybody knows that this is an unwritten rule in boxing and challengers have to be prepared to go beyond just doing enough to circumvent this judging tendency.

Steve its not 'a challenger has to do more' its 'a fighter fighting another promoters fighter has to do more'. Its corruption plain and simple, nearly every fan had it to Dirrell, which makes it a massive robbery, there isnt even a case for Froch winning 6 rounds which he needed to do. Dirrell edged most of the first 6 (if not all), fought some close middle rounds (Froch won some here) and outfought/boxed Froch down the stretch. It was as clear as day

davidas · Post by **davidas** » 17 Oct 2009, 23:06

Here we go again slagging off another British fighter it's you people who should be ashamed. How the hell should you be expected to win the WBC belt by acting up like Dirrell did for 12 rounds? In flashes he was great, for the majority of the time he spent the fight holding, play acting and trying to con the ref. That's not how a belt should be won so it's his own tough sh** for ruining it for himself. He didn't want to box. Froch may get beat of kessler but for gods sake calling him a fraud and slagging him off already you lot are pathetic. I personally want my WBC champions to want to box, want to fight and be warriors. Not behaving like little scorned schoolboys like dirrell did. He has the ability to be a champion but he rightly did not win tonight by the way he ran and spoiled and hopefully learnt his lesson. But hey, don't let that stop you jumping on the slag a British fighter bangwagon eh? Zzzzzzzz

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 17 Oct 2009, 23:07

direll is very negative, but tellingly the only person who was hurt during the fight was carl, his legs blatantly went after eating a huge left hook.

dirrell has some power, he needs to sit down on his shots more

DIRT SUGAR · Post by **DIRT SUGAR** » 17 Oct 2009, 23:08

Dirrell's speed was always going to cause Froch trouble. More orthodox fighters like Abraham and Kessler will make for a better fight for Froch although by no means easy.

Every fighter has his kryptonite and I think quick hands are the key against Froch. What annoys me is how Froch leaves that left hand so low which means it takes longer to reach the target and then he does it against a much faster guy like Dirrell.. I mean.. duh!!!

Still, neither fighter really comes out of it badly and Froch has the all-important points int the bag and Dirrell gets his first 12 rounds under his belt which will serve him well in his next fight.

Froch showed doggedness but little variety and I won't begrudge him a win in a fight that could have gone either way IMHO.

Datsue · Post by **Datsue** » 17 Oct 2009, 23:09

davidas wrote:Here we go again slagging off another British fighter it's you people who should be ashamed. How the hell should you be expected to win the WBC belt by acting up like Dirrell did for 12 rounds? In flashes he was great, for the majority of the time he spent the fight holding, play acting and trying to con the ref. That's not how a belt should be won so it's his own tough sh** for ruining it for himself. He didn't want to box. Froch may get beat of kessler but for gods sake calling him a fraud and slagging him off already you lot are pathetic. I personally want my WBC champions to want to box, want to fight and be warriors. Not behaving like little scorned schoolboys like dirrell did. He has the ability to be a champion but he rightly did not win tonight by the way he ran and spoiled and hopefully learnt his lesson. But hey, don't let that stop you jumping on the slag a British fighter bangwagon eh? Zzzzzzzz

Ah well. I tend to put it down to people's passions running high in the aftermath, mate.

I'm sure he did learn his lesson. I'd back him to stop Froch in a rematch. As James said, the only guy who was hurt by a punch (not a bodyslam) was Froch.

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 17 Oct 2009, 23:11

I'm sure his lesson will be learned, Datsue... Fight Froch in the States next time!

hitman_hatton1 · Post by **hitman_hatton1** » 17 Oct 2009, 23:11

jamesmcdonnell wrote:direll is very negative, but tellingly the only person who was hurt during the fight was carl, his legs blatantly went after eating a huge left hook.

dirrell has some power, he needs to sit down on his shots more

i thought dirrell was hurt briefly in one of the middle rds.

forget what shot it was now.

definitely troubled him anyway.

froch was more hurt in the 10th no doubt.

Carl Froch is FINISHED!

Re: Froch = Fraud

Re: Froch = Fraud

Re: Froch = Fraud

Re: Froch = Fraud

Re: Froch = Fraud

Re: Froch = Fraud

Re: Carl Froch is FINISHED!

Re: Froch = Fraud

Re: Froch = Fraud

Re: Froch = Fraud

Re: Carl Froch is FINISHED!

Re: Froch = Fraud

Re: Froch = Fraud

Re: Froch = Fraud

Re: Froch = Fraud

Re: Froch = Fraud

Re: Froch = Fraud

Re: Froch = Fraud

Re: Froch = Fraud

Re: Froch = Fraud

Re: Froch = Fraud

Re: Carl Froch is FINISHED!

Re: Froch = Fraud

Re: Froch = Fraud

Re: Froch = Fraud