Bunce let himself down tonight

[Coco]

Both Bunce and Froch have proved to be very popular on theses boards, and I think it is a cheap shot that we are now accused of jealousy.
Again I think it is an indication that he has regressesed to his Audley BBC days

[jizzle]

I'm also an expert on Chaucer, but who cares.

How's the tour going?

[StokeBloke]

One of the reasons i dont post on this site very often is that their is a certain 'hard-core' element of posters who form an opinion and then rather than discussing issues flat out insult and ridicule anyone who disagrees with them. I think to tell people 'you can't score a fight' etc when most people I know who went to the actual fight scored it for Froch is a little ridiculous? I had Froch winning just, but he was bloody terrible, saved only by the fact that Dirrell was even worse. Froch's footwork was shocking, moved back in straight lines, had no right hand and no defence (as usual) but for me Dirrell ran, held, moaned, fell over, ran some more, threw a couple of taps and then repeat. The fight changed when Dirrell wobbled Carl with a left and he realised he could go for it but it was far too late. Dirrell will get smashed by Abraham and Kessler must be laughing his Danish nuts off about this tournament.

Agreed. I was in the arena and there's no way I saw a Dirrell win and yes, Froch was bad but Dirrell was worse. Dirrell clearly had the tools but was wary of Froch's power until he realised he could hurt him too.

Abraham will draw what little sting Dirrell has and take him out if he employs similar tactics against him.

[opticald]

Both Bunce and Froch have proved to be very popular on theses boards, and I think it is a cheap shot that we are now accused of jealousy.
Again I think it is an indication that he has regressesed to his Audley BBC days

Who could forget that,
" I guarantee that Audley will be the heavyweight champion of the world by 2005!".

[Counter-puncher]

Stoke Bloke... did you think Froch won all of the rounds from 1-8.

Certainly thought he dominated the earlier rounds, Dirrell went for it far too late, seemed reluctant to open up, only showed his class in flashes.

Welcome to forum... but you clearly don't know how to score a fight buddy.

are you still here? and still a patronising pudendum it seems

stokie, ignore him. he's a tool.

[Wales]

I'm also an expert on Chaucer, but who cares.

How's the tour going?

Persaonlly I dont think it matters a badgers chuff that he's an expert on chaucer.

[stujones]

Nice post James M.... your second to last one.

I did think your original couple of posts concerns Bunce were a bit OTT. I honestly don't feel Bunce delibrately "sold out" etc. Having said that, I do think Steve's post in which he seemed to "call people out" was a bit much. I found it a little childish, sure taking criticism isn't nice.... we've all had it on here. But as a forum, I am sure most signed the "bring back bunce" petition, I have, and I also paid for the PPV, so continue to support him.

Sure, you have every right to respond to the criticms, and I am glad you have.... but I cannot help the feeling that when "up against it" all of these famous through boxing will resort to the "oh f off you anoraks" remarks that Frank Maloney and Dean Powell have given in the past. I don't think much of the posts have been personal against Bunce or Froch, but about this one fight and how it was scored. I aint saying that you should never stand your ground cause of your status as a boxing personality.... but lets debate the fight rationally, without insults (and this works both ways).

I think some of my posts have been confused.

Do I think Bunce "sold out" or said that to please his paymasters...... NO.

Do I think Bunce geniunally thought (ringside) he saw the fight to froch.... YES, seems to be too many at ringside with this view.

Do I think he'll score the fight to Froch if/when he reviews on TV...... NO (well hope not).

I said the words "shafted" that could imply something sinsiter, do I think this happend...... NO.

Should Dirrell be WBC Champion.... Yes by 4 points..... a CLEAR winner. Not even close.... from TV.

So just to clarify, I didn't intend for Steve or Carl to think I've gone a bit personal or disrespectful to them. I respect Steve's opinion, and respect Carl's ability.... I think he lost, and I think Steve has it wrong this time... but thats not personal, just my opinion. I don't mind if I am in the minority.

Hell I think I am the only person who scored Kessler vs Calzaghe a draw. Am I a corrupt, bias sell out for scoring a fight that way... people might think yes (selling what I don't know)... just the way I scored it. We can all be wrong.

I love to read a more considered opinion on the fight from Bunce on second viewing from TV.

[Counter-puncher]

I love to read a more considered opinion on the fight from Bunce on second viewing from TV.

haha 'considered'. you're optimistic. you'd have a better chance of considered opinion from Froch's girlfriend, on recent evidence.

'audley harrison world champ by 2005' etc

[NazNaci1]

Shafted, robbery, disgrace, sold-out, failed to pipe up. You all need to get out more.
The reason that I never piped up and sold out by refusing to talk about the robbery, shafting disgrace is because I didn't think it was a robbery, shafting disgrace.
There is no scandal: Dirrell gets it by a round, Carl by two or a draw. Where is the fix, the robbery, the scandal?
Or, is there something else at work here? The old jealous of the bald, fat, cockanee geezer? Do I see that old chesnut in this thread? I think I do.
Now if you brave warriors want to have a go at me, let me know and I will have ticket - a freebie - for you to attend one of my live shows and you can get up and we can all get a look at the size of your nuts. Don't worry, I will bring a magnifying glass.
This thread is starting to be very disrespectful of Carl Froch, when really it is an attack on me.
For one free ticket per set of tiny gonads: [email protected]

Adios.

Well said and spot on

[jim wright1]

Just for clarification the rules for judging a fight are quite clear, Rule 3.31 of the BBBof C rules of boxing states -

3.31 Points will be awarded:-

For “attack” – direct clean hits with the knuckle part of the glove of either hand to any part of the front or side of the head or body above the belt.

The “belt” is defined as an imaginary line drawn across the body from the top of the hip bones.

For “defence” – guarding, slipping, ducking or getting away from an attack. Where contestants are otherwise equal the majority of points will be given to the one who does most leading off or displays the better style.

[Counter-puncher]

are you still here? and still a patronising pudendum it seems

stokie, ignore him. he's a tool.

Stokie, pay close attention: mine is the view from top of Mt Olympus.[/quote]

i imagine the view from wherever you are is generally obscured by the fact that your head is lodged firmly up your own rectum

[jamesmcdonnell]

Just for clarification the rules for judging a fight are quite clear, Rule 3.31 of the BBBof C rules of boxing states -

3.31 Points will be awarded:-

For “attack” – direct clean hits with the knuckle part of the glove of either hand to any part of the front or side of the head or body above the belt.

The “belt” is defined as an imaginary line drawn across the body from the top of the hip bones.

For “defence” – guarding, slipping, ducking or getting away from an attack. Where contestants are otherwise equal the majority of points will be given to the one who does most leading off or displays the better style.

Yes, but during a title fight (which this was), it would be the title commisions judges appointed, and therefore they would follow whatever is mandated in their guidebook.

The BBBofC won't have set the judging criteria.

[J]

rightly or wrongly Buncey is doing his job, the part that doesnt sit that well with me is the inference that other countries dont do things properly and yet after a close fight then referring to hometown advantage etc Im sure in retrospect if Steve had known the outcome of the fight he many have not made the comment .. either way its a double sided coin imo. But can understand contingency plan having to be put in place.

So I agree with jimmy on some aspects. Not an attack Steve, just doing things proper mate as I see it

However I am also cognisent that you cant really expect Steve to sit there on tv and say froch lost by a country mile irrespective of his own view.

He is paid to generate interest and to ensure people buy the next legs of the super six and any other primetime shows. And thats what he did.

Unfortuantley on this one I think he has put in a no win situation.

Blame frochy for that one....

Just my take but really Dirrell won this fight as did Big Jon Mc over Fury and Evander over Valuev...this isnt anything new and is in part the reason why boxing is going down the plughole.

Much as I love the sport one week she is a fit 20 year old giving the best blow job of your life the next and old hag using too many teeth ..we should all know this by now

[jBacca]

Too many of those hags about these days J...

[J]

married mate witha baby daughter dont even kno what blow job is really these days....

[junior pepa seed]

Gotta say i as a fight it was edge of the seat stuff could have gone either way not that it was exolosive just didnt see what was gonna happen..i thought dirrel had snagged it but could see the argument for giving it to Froche..i found the taylor fight with abraham the same early on it was hard to score till about the eighth when Abraham took charge for good...From what i did see i dont get why so many people are on bunces back? The mcdermott v fury is the most blatant mugging in boxing i have seen in years and the froche fight is no where near that. The cobra is still champ ..Dirrel played a smart game untill he lost his way late on and he never put the cherry on the cake to take it and he can still win the super six.
Just my opinion...if you leave it to the judges shit happens you dont know what judges like what style.

@Buncey love the tickets and call out to disgruntled folks..grown man business.

[J]

be funnier if it werent true

[Phenomenal-Nutrition]

Shafted, robbery, disgrace, sold-out, failed to pipe up. You all need to get out more.
The reason that I never piped up and sold out by refusing to talk about the robbery, shafting disgrace is because I didn't think it was a robbery, shafting disgrace.
There is no scandal: Dirrell gets it by a round, Carl by two or a draw. Where is the fix, the robbery, the scandal?
Or, is there something else at work here? The old jealous of the bald, fat, cockanee geezer? Do I see that old chesnut in this thread? I think I do.
Now if you brave warriors want to have a go at me, let me know and I will have ticket - a freebie - for you to attend one of my live shows and you can get up and we can all get a look at the size of your nuts. Don't worry, I will bring a magnifying glass.
This thread is starting to be very disrespectful of Carl Froch, when really it is an attack on me.
For one free ticket per set of tiny gonads: [email protected]

Adios.

Out of interest have you watched the replay of it Bunce? Without the 10,000 Nottingham fans screaming for Froch every time he threw punches that may or may not have landed? If you only watched in the arena without a great view and having your perception challenged by the crowd noise I can understand you scoring it to Froch, but I flat out don't see how he could win on a 10 points must system

No offense but you come across a bit egotistical in this thread, accusing the same people who backed you for a long time of being jealous because they disagree with your view. I welcome the sound of a live debate though about the fight though. Running my own business and being a family man I'm busy but would be pretty interest in voicing the thoughts of the forum on the fight, I'm sure the boxing journos on here would do a more eloquent job but if you need someone to pull his big balls out on stage and say Froch lost, I'm your man.

Now just because you work on TV doesn't make you any more of a boxing expert than the fight fans who watch boxing week in week out. The polls of fans on ESB and Boxrec show 70% plus having Dirrell winning, many calling it a robbery

[Croydon1]

Interesting to see on the flip-side, American Dan Rafael obviously see's fights objectively as he has the same point of view as Bunce, but as an American. I like reporters who can see beyond patriotism. Not that I'm necessarily agreeing with it all, but it's nice to see.



Here's a copy of the article:

In losing to Carl Froch, Andre Dirrell did what he's been doing best as of late: Fight ugly, hold tight and complain often.

Rafael's remark: Froch isn't the smoothest or most skilled boxer, but he makes up for it with a physical, relentless style. It served him well when he outslugged Jean Pascal (who would go on to win a light heavyweight belt) to win a vacant super middleweight title in December. It served him well when he rallied to starch Jermain Taylor with 14 seconds left in the fight in his first defense in April. And it served him well again as he eked out a split decision against Flint, Mich., native and 2004 U.S. Olympic bronze medalist Dirrell to retain his title in a Group Stage 1 match of Showtime's Super Six World Boxing Classic six-man super middleweight tournament. Froch had the luxury of fighting in his hometown, but had to enter the ring in the wee hours of the morning to accommodate Showtime's live telecast to the East Coast of the United States while Dirrell had simply stayed on his normal body schedule for the fight. Dirrell also fought in his normal negative, agonizing style. He ran, he cried to the referee about just about everything and he held. And grabbed. And wrestled. At times, it was like watching a smaller, faster, more skilled version of John Ruiz. It was ugly. When Dirrell, who has all the talent in the world but still fights like an amateur, would stand and fight, he landed some nice counter right hands. But he didn't do it nearly enough. The first half of the fight was an abomination because of Dirrell's unwillingness to do anything but run and grab. All the while, Froch was making the fight, coming forward and firing in what degenerated into a somewhat dirty fight. But in the eighth round, Froch nailed Dirrell with a left hook late in the round that definitely rattled him. Both fighters fouled each other often with low blows, elbows, blows to the back of the head and punches on the break. Referee Hector Afu did his best, but had a very hard time maintaining control. Both guys could have had points deducted at various times but Afu did not pull the trigger until finally docking a point from Dirrell for holding and hitting in the 10th round, during which Dirrell hurt Froch with two hard left hands. In the end, two judges gave it to Froch, which was the right call. How can you give Dirrell the fight when, for the most part, he fought scared, complained to the referee about everything and barely threw any punches in the first half or two-thirds of the fight? He finished very strong, but it wasn't enough to warrant or deserve the decision. At best, he could have had a draw, which would have still not given him the title.

Froch, 32, picked up two points for the victory and will move on to face Mikkel Kessler in a Group Stage 2 bout to be scheduled for sometime around March. If Kessler defeats Andre Ward in their Group Stage 1 bout on Nov. 21, Kessler-Froch would be a title unification bout. Dirrell, who along with Ward is the most inexperienced fighter in the field, didn't hurt himself too badly with the loss. He gained valuable experience and showed he can compete with the top dogs in the division. But he needs to do more fighting and less running. He has a very tough Group Stage 2 bout. Arthur Abraham is supposed to come to the United States from Germany to face Dirrell, 26, in late January. That's a very, very tough fight.

http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/boxing ... id=4575349

[Maelstrom]

I am with some of the other posters on this one, you have a lost me a bit Steve. The posters on here are not jealous of you, they have supported you.

I respect your opinions no end.... and you have forgotten more than I will ever know, but that does not make you infallible.

Personally, I think Dirrel won handily - and I do not understand your logic. In an earlier thread you said Froch adapted, but it was Dirrel who came on strong.

I was also a bit confused by another piece of logic.... You scored the fight to Froch, but then started talking about home advantage. Why is the last point relevant, if you thought he won anyway. Why not just state that?

[Hagler2002]

I've seen some robbery's in my time as a boxing fan over the last 25yrs, this was not one of them! I was at the fight and thought Froch as champion done enough to retain the belt in what was overall was a very poor fight, I'm yet to watch it on TV but in all honesty I'm with Bunce on this one, the challenger did not do enough to win the belt in the champions backyard.

[jamesmcdonnell]

I've seen some robbery's in my time as a boxing fan over the last 25yrs, this was not one of them! I was at the fight and thought Froch as champion done enough to retain the belt in what was overall was a very poor fight, I'm yet to watch it on TV but in all honesty I'm with Bunce on this one, the challenger did not do enough to win the belt in the champions backyard.

Can you explain to me please where it states in the rules of the sport, that the challenger has to do 'extra' to win. If they do more than the champion, then they should win the fight.

Froch did absolutely diddly squat - Dirrell did not much, but Froch did less, simple as. That should have been enough to earn him the decision.

Now I agree, it was a lousy fight, Dirrell was negative in spells, and was being evasive, but he still managed to outland Froch at least two to one.

Just because I don't like Dirrell's style, does not mean I don't respect his right to walk away with a decision if he earned it, no matter how narrow the margin, or how ugly it might have been to watch.

Christ, even Rawling and Thaxton who were commentating on the fight and in the employ of the broadcaster gave it to Dirrell, doesn't that tell you something?



Christ, I'm a Carl Froch fan, there's plenty of comments on here from me saying I think he's the mustard, but the guy simply didn't perform on any level.

[jamesmcdonnell]

Interesting to see on the flip-side, American Dan Rafael obviously see's fights objectively as he has the same point of view as Bunce, but as an American. I like reporters who can see beyond patriotism. Not that I'm necessarily agreeing with it all, but it's nice to see.



Here's a copy of the article:

In losing to Carl Froch, Andre Dirrell did what he's been doing best as of late: Fight ugly, hold tight and complain often.

Rafael's remark: Froch isn't the smoothest or most skilled boxer, but he makes up for it with a physical, relentless style. It served him well when he outslugged Jean Pascal (who would go on to win a light heavyweight belt) to win a vacant super middleweight title in December. It served him well when he rallied to starch Jermain Taylor with 14 seconds left in the fight in his first defense in April. And it served him well again as he eked out a split decision against Flint, Mich., native and 2004 U.S. Olympic bronze medalist Dirrell to retain his title in a Group Stage 1 match of Showtime's Super Six World Boxing Classic six-man super middleweight tournament. Froch had the luxury of fighting in his hometown, but had to enter the ring in the wee hours of the morning to accommodate Showtime's live telecast to the East Coast of the United States while Dirrell had simply stayed on his normal body schedule for the fight. Dirrell also fought in his normal negative, agonizing style. He ran, he cried to the referee about just about everything and he held. And grabbed. And wrestled. At times, it was like watching a smaller, faster, more skilled version of John Ruiz. It was ugly. When Dirrell, who has all the talent in the world but still fights like an amateur, would stand and fight, he landed some nice counter right hands. But he didn't do it nearly enough. The first half of the fight was an abomination because of Dirrell's unwillingness to do anything but run and grab. All the while, Froch was making the fight, coming forward and firing in what degenerated into a somewhat dirty fight. But in the eighth round, Froch nailed Dirrell with a left hook late in the round that definitely rattled him. Both fighters fouled each other often with low blows, elbows, blows to the back of the head and punches on the break. Referee Hector Afu did his best, but had a very hard time maintaining control. Both guys could have had points deducted at various times but Afu did not pull the trigger until finally docking a point from Dirrell for holding and hitting in the 10th round, during which Dirrell hurt Froch with two hard left hands. In the end, two judges gave it to Froch, which was the right call. How can you give Dirrell the fight when, for the most part, he fought scared, complained to the referee about everything and barely threw any punches in the first half or two-thirds of the fight? He finished very strong, but it wasn't enough to warrant or deserve the decision. At best, he could have had a draw, which would have still not given him the title.

Froch, 32, picked up two points for the victory and will move on to face Mikkel Kessler in a Group Stage 2 bout to be scheduled for sometime around March. If Kessler defeats Andre Ward in their Group Stage 1 bout on Nov. 21, Kessler-Froch would be a title unification bout. Dirrell, who along with Ward is the most inexperienced fighter in the field, didn't hurt himself too badly with the loss. He gained valuable experience and showed he can compete with the top dogs in the division. But he needs to do more fighting and less running. He has a very tough Group Stage 2 bout. Arthur Abraham is supposed to come to the United States from Germany to face Dirrell, 26, in late January. That's a very, very tough fight.

http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/boxing ... id=4575349

That left hook that Rafael is commenting on didn't even land. On the replay it was clear it barely even glanced him.

[Hagler2002]

I've seen some robbery's in my time as a boxing fan over the last 25yrs, this was not one of them! I was at the fight and thought Froch as champion done enough to retain the belt in what was overall was a very poor fight, I'm yet to watch it on TV but in all honesty I'm with Bunce on this one, the challenger did not do enough to win the belt in the champions backyard.

Can you explain to me please where it states in the rules of the sport, that the challenger has to do 'extra' to win.

There isn't any rule as you fine well know but you should also know that its common knowledge within the sport that the challenger has to go and win the belt quite convincingly when fighting in the champions backyard bottom line is Dirrell didn't achieve this with his negativity and constant spoiling.

[jamesmcdonnell]

I've seen some robbery's in my time as a boxing fan over the last 25yrs, this was not one of them! I was at the fight and thought Froch as champion done enough to retain the belt in what was overall was a very poor fight, I'm yet to watch it on TV but in all honesty I'm with Bunce on this one, the challenger did not do enough to win the belt in the champions backyard.

Can you explain to me please where it states in the rules of the sport, that the challenger has to do 'extra' to win.

There isn't any rule as you fine well know but you should also know that its common knowledge within the sport that the challenger has to go and win the belt quite convincingly when fighting in the champions backyard bottom line is Dirrell didn't achieve this with his negativity and constant spoiling.

and that prevailing attitude my friend is precisely what I am railing against, it really should be so. Dirrell was only realling spoiling during rounds 6-8, and during that period Froch was definitely guilty of excessive fouling. Christ he even Judo threw him to the canvas.

i was calling for Dirrell to be docked a point for holding, and was glad when he was, but I think Froch probably earned a point deduction for his fouling. What's sauce for the goose, is sauce for the gander.