What has George Groves said to rile Carl Froch so much?

[DMA1987]

There is no need because the venue sold out in 10 minutes due to the international celebrity megastar that is Carl Froch? He said so himself so it must be true.

Well Groves didn't sell out the fight did he. There is no debating who the star between the two is.

Groves had at least 12,000 behind him at the DeGale fight. It could be argued Fielding, Quigg, Cardle, Smith and co have sold it out judging by the thousands they are currently selling on Twitter.

Could it really be argued Mickey? Or are you just looking for reactions? Its not like Froch has been struggling to pack them in lately.

As for the Groves v DeGale fight, 12,000 people wanted DeGale to lose (if it is that many) - he did all the selling of that fight.

I like Groves, but not to the point where I'm in a George Groves dreamland and forgetting actual realities.

[mickey1975]

Of course it could. Al fighters have been selling them all week. I got some for friends via Scott Cardle. No booking fees either. Go on Rocky Fieldings website now and take your pick...,

[DMA1987]

Of course it could. Al fighters have been selling them all week. I got some for friends via Scott Cardle. No booking fees either. Go on Rocky Fieldings website now and take your pick...,

I know the undercard fighters have got tickets, as it should be. But, did you buy the tickets because Scott Cardle was fighting? Or because Froch and Groves were fighting? So who really sold the fight? They will probably be doing more numbers than they ever have.

[mickey1975]

Of course it could. Al fighters have been selling them all week. I got some for friends via Scott Cardle. No booking fees either. Go on Rocky Fieldings website now and take your pick...,

I know the undercard fighters have got tickets, as it should be. But, did you buy the tickets because Scott Cardle was fighting? Or because Froch and Groves were fighting? So who really sold the fight? They will probably be doing more numbers than they ever have.

I like the match, and bought tickets when they went on sale but will be supporting Groves. Not sure who my mates are supporting.

[stujones]

People's memories seem to forget certain things.

Its like when you hear people talk about Barrera schooling Naz in a complete shut out, which is absolute bollocks. Dirrell getting robbed blind in Nottingham is the same. I thought Dirrell had an argument in a very close fight which could have gone either way.

Barrera did dominate Naz, not in a complete shut out no - but Naz never dominated a round and Barrera was very cautious - I thought it was 116-112 (but a 116-112 that wasn't a reflection of the manner of the win).

Dirrell vs Froch was one of the worst decisions I have seen IMO (and this fight took place in the days of round by rounds - so it aint a memory thing). Even the incredibly bias commentary team at it Dirrell by 3.

Having said that I will say that watching fights live and watching fights on TV are two different scenario's - and I do remember everyone who went to the fight live failed to see the controversy, whereas most who saw it on TV thought Dirrell clear.

I've watched this fight a few times and come with the same conclusion - Dirrell clear. He wins the fight far bigger than Kessler won the first one. I have since watched the Froch vs Kessler 2 fight again and scored it very different to my live (on TV) Round by round card - Froch was a clear winner.

[Wrists]

People's memories seem to forget certain things.

Its like when you hear people talk about Barrera schooling Naz in a complete shut out, which is absolute bollocks. Dirrell getting robbed blind in Nottingham is the same. I thought Dirrell had an argument in a very close fight which could have gone either way.

Barrera did dominate Naz, not in a complete shut out no - but Naz never dominated a round and Barrera was very cautious - I thought it was 116-112 (but a 116-112 that wasn't a reflection of the manner of the win).

Dirrell vs Froch was one of the worst decisions I have seen IMO (and this fight took place in the days of round by rounds - so it aint a memory thing). Even the incredibly bias commentary team at it Dirrell by 3.

Having said that I will say that watching fights live and watching fights on TV are two different scenario's - and I do remember everyone who went to the fight live failed to see the controversy, whereas most who saw it on TV thought Dirrell clear.



I've watched this fight a few times and come with the same conclusion - Dirrell clear. He wins the fight far bigger than Kessler won the first one. I have since watched the Froch vs Kessler 2 fight again and scored it very different to my live (on TV) Round by round card - Froch was a clear winner.

Yes and I appreciate I bring this up quite a lot, but you scored Calzaghe V Kessler a draw.................... so on that basis 'Dirrell clear' should be taken with a pinch of salt.

Apologies.........

[hurlock]

Froch has really fought the hard way to get where he's at & in someways it's made him the fighter he is, but it also could of ruined him & has deffo clocked the miles up on his career.
He only has a couple of fights & camps in him & the thought of losing to groves who it's been easy pickings for in terms of comparisons & oppurtunitys.groves has only best degale who isn't recognised at world level.so to give up all that hard work to somebody domestic adds pressure to froch who riding on a crest but past his peak & groves attitude towards him has been disrespectfull there's lots of goading & mind games fans don't see & froch has fallen hook line & sinker groves needs for froch to charge him & play into his hands & it's looking likely!!
I think froch respects groves ability a but believes he will get him down the stretch & knows he could be made to look bad if George boxes

[Cyclops]

Amazing how Froch, our best fighter, gets bashed so much now. Such a shame. People start hating on a fighter the first chance they get. Depressing. And bashing his record? Who has had a better run of opponents? Sometimes people on Boxrec get me down. Ward is on PEDs and boring, can't wait for him to lose. Groves was alright now he's arrogant and wants to be David Haye can't wait for him to lose. Haye is twat can't wait for him to lose. Fury is a twat can't wait for him to lose. Wladamir is boring and a cheat can't wait for him to lose. Mayweather is boring and cherry picks can't wait for him to lose. On and on it goes. GGG and Provodnikov, current darlings, wonder how long it takes before everyone starts to hate them too?

At least everyone still loves Maidana. That makes me happy.

[crusader]

People's memories seem to forget certain things.

Its like when you hear people talk about Barrera schooling Naz in a complete shut out, which is absolute bollocks. Dirrell getting robbed blind in Nottingham is the same. I thought Dirrell had an argument in a very close fight which could have gone either way.

Many people said immediately after the fight that it was a bad decision; I don't think it's gradually shifted into a blind robbery. I do think, however, that after Froch's recent success Froch-Kessler 1 shifted from a consensus close but clear win for Kessler to a roughly 50-50 split on who won.

And 9-3 MAB. I thought he dominated given that he won at least twice as many rounds and won his rounds very convincingly (he certainly schooled him within a few rounds, even if it would be inappropriate to say he schooled him over the entire fight), which Nas didn't.

[Cyclops]

Amazing how Froch, our best fighter, gets bashed so much now. Such a shame. People start hating on a fighter the first chance they get. Depressing. And bashing his record? Who has had a better run of opponents? Sometimes people on Boxrec get me down. Ward is on PEDs and boring, can't wait for him to lose. Groves was alright now he's arrogant and wants to be David Haye can't wait for him to lose. Haye is twat can't wait for him to lose. Fury is a twat can't wait for him to lose. Wladamir is boring and a cheat can't wait for him to lose. Mayweather is boring and cherry picks can't wait for him to lose. On and on it goes. GGG and Provodnikov, current darlings, wonder how long it takes before everyone starts to hate them too?

At least everyone still loves Maidana. That makes me happy.

Froch is not being bashed by me.

To be fair, I wasn't accusing you or saying that literally everyone was doing it, it's just a turn of phrase. But I've noticed there has been a lot of anti Froch sentiment on the board recently when we should be celebrating him while we have him.

[mickey1975]

I've been slating Froch since I joined the forum. I begrudgingly admire his achievements, but can't do with him. I will love it if Groves beats him, LOVE IT!

[hurlock]

I've been slating Froch since I joined the forum. I begrudgingly admire his achievements, but can't do with him. I will love it if Groves beats him, LOVE IT!

Allright king kev!

[lillywhite14]

People's memories seem to forget certain things.

Its like when you hear people talk about Barrera schooling Naz in a complete shut out, which is absolute bollocks. Dirrell getting robbed blind in Nottingham is the same. I thought Dirrell had an argument in a very close fight which could have gone either way.

Many people said immediately after the fight that it was a bad decision; I don't think it's gradually shifted into a blind robbery. I do think, however, that after Froch's recent success Froch-Kessler 1 shifted from a consensus close but clear win for Kessler to a roughly 50-50 split on who won.

And 9-3 MAB. I thought he dominated given that he won at least twice as many rounds and won his rounds very convincingly (he certainly schooled him within a few rounds, even if it would be inappropriate to say he schooled him over the entire fight), which Nas didn't.

My point is people often talk about Barrera utterly destroying Naz and winning every second of every round when that wasn't the case. Its just how some people choose to remember it rather than how it happened. In my opinion its the same with Froch-Dirrell. Gradually its becoming some kind of 'worst decision ever seen' kind of result in some people's eyes.

[stujones]

People's memories seem to forget certain things.

Its like when you hear people talk about Barrera schooling Naz in a complete shut out, which is absolute bollocks. Dirrell getting robbed blind in Nottingham is the same. I thought Dirrell had an argument in a very close fight which could have gone either way.

Barrera did dominate Naz, not in a complete shut out no - but Naz never dominated a round and Barrera was very cautious - I thought it was 116-112 (but a 116-112 that wasn't a reflection of the manner of the win).

Dirrell vs Froch was one of the worst decisions I have seen IMO (and this fight took place in the days of round by rounds - so it aint a memory thing). Even the incredibly bias commentary team at it Dirrell by 3.

Having said that I will say that watching fights live and watching fights on TV are two different scenario's - and I do remember everyone who went to the fight live failed to see the controversy, whereas most who saw it on TV thought Dirrell clear.



I've watched this fight a few times and come with the same conclusion - Dirrell clear. He wins the fight far bigger than Kessler won the first one. I have since watched the Froch vs Kessler 2 fight again and scored it very different to my live (on TV) Round by round card - Froch was a clear winner.

Yes and I appreciate I bring this up quite a lot, but you scored Calzaghe V Kessler a draw.................... so on that basis 'Dirrell clear' should be taken with a pinch of salt.

Apologies.........

Yep, as should the commentary team also (who had it Dirrell by three untill the score cards were announced and then called it a "just" decision) - all because of one card you disagree with one card many many moons ago that you bring up continually.

And again - how many people scored Kessler vs Calzaghe 7-5 to Joe and even 6-5-1 Joe.... just check the old posts here. I've said time and time again on a round by round basis I scored it 6 a piece - but that doesn't give justification of the fight on a whole - similar to the 116-112 card I have for MAB vs Naz.

If all my posts should be taken with a pinch of salt based on one call in which I didn't go with the majority, then what about those who say Dirrell did nothing for 12 rounds!!!

[stujones]

People's memories seem to forget certain things.

Its like when you hear people talk about Barrera schooling Naz in a complete shut out, which is absolute bollocks. Dirrell getting robbed blind in Nottingham is the same. I thought Dirrell had an argument in a very close fight which could have gone either way.

Many people said immediately after the fight that it was a bad decision; I don't think it's gradually shifted into a blind robbery. I do think, however, that after Froch's recent success Froch-Kessler 1 shifted from a consensus close but clear win for Kessler to a roughly 50-50 split on who won.

And 9-3 MAB. I thought he dominated given that he won at least twice as many rounds and won his rounds very convincingly (he certainly schooled him within a few rounds, even if it would be inappropriate to say he schooled him over the entire fight), which Nas didn't.

My point is people often talk about Barrera utterly destroying Naz and winning every second of every round when that wasn't the case. Its just how some people choose to remember it rather than how it happened. In my opinion its the same with Froch-Dirrell. Gradually its becoming some kind of 'worst decision ever seen' kind of result in some people's eyes.

Naturally I agree with Crusader here - all you need to do is check the posts here in the immediate aftermath of the fight. For me it was poor decision. Don't like Dirrel's style, think he has true P4P talent but something isn't there in his mindset, but poor mindset or not - he gave Froch a boxing lesson.

However, as I said those in Nottingham - good posters, viewed the fight differently.

[hurlock]

Barrera did shut naz out!!!
One of the only rounds Barrera lost was when he fouled naz smashing his head into a turnbuckle asking him who's the daddy ha !!

[crusader]

People's memories seem to forget certain things.

Its like when you hear people talk about Barrera schooling Naz in a complete shut out, which is absolute bollocks. Dirrell getting robbed blind in Nottingham is the same. I thought Dirrell had an argument in a very close fight which could have gone either way.

Many people said immediately after the fight that it was a bad decision; I don't think it's gradually shifted into a blind robbery. I do think, however, that after Froch's recent success Froch-Kessler 1 shifted from a consensus close but clear win for Kessler to a roughly 50-50 split on who won.

And 9-3 MAB. I thought he dominated given that he won at least twice as many rounds and won his rounds very convincingly (he certainly schooled him within a few rounds, even if it would be inappropriate to say he schooled him over the entire fight), which Nas didn't.

My point is people often talk about Barrera utterly destroying Naz and winning every second of every round when that wasn't the case. Its just how some people choose to remember it rather than how it happened. In my opinion its the same with Froch-Dirrell. Gradually its becoming some kind of 'worst decision ever seen' kind of result in some people's eyes.

I'll have to disagree on Froch-Dirrell. I think the general opinion on the decision has stayed the same for the most part.

[CheckHook]

Froch should be glad Calzaghe did not fight him, he would have been slapped silly.

Groves is more Mario Veit than Joe Calzaghe though, isn't he?

Veit is bloody harsh haha. Groves is a talented fighter. Good enough to beat Froch im not sure. Probably has enough boxing ability but whether his chin holds up is a different matter altogether.

I was being a bit of a dick with the comparison to be honest, but I think the point is still valid.... In terms of achievement, Groves still has it all to do and all to prove. Froch has proven himself time and time again against world level opposition and has only been convincingly beaten once, against one of the best in the business. Knowing how to beat someone and going out and executing that game plan are two very different things.

[Finch]

Apparently Groves and Booth are not on speaking terms.

Haven't heard anything to dispell the notion of the split so after being convinced it was a prank, and with Booth filling a slot with David Price, now I am not so sure....

If true, this is bad news for Groves.

[Bard of Boxrec]

Guys, Froch has been great over the years, but let not act as though he is SRL and Hagler rolled into one.This is a good fight

Groves is way out of his depth here. Different levels.

[palooka]

Guys, Froch has been great over the years, but let not act as though he is SRL and Hagler rolled into one.This is a good fight

Groves is way out of his depth here. Different levels.

The same has been said for many fighters who have more than proved they belong at a higher level.

[Ricky_]

Not only is Froch grossly overrated he's complete ass piece. I think his personality (sorry, lack of it) is much down to having a huge Italian/Welsh chip on his shoulder, he's never been able to step out of the shadow.

[Deserter]

Not only is Froch grossly overrated

How on earth is that true? Pretty much everyone on this board views him as the second best in the world at super-middle behind Ward and his fight resume supports that view.

[Ricky_]

Not only is Froch grossly overrated

How on earth is that true? Pretty much everyone on this board views him as the second best in the world at super-middle behind Ward and his fight resume supports that view.

Because i regulary see his name crop up in top 10 P4P lists. I mean seriously, guys have Froch ahead of Manny Pacquiao, an 8-weight world title holder, meanwhile Froch has never even been #1 in his own division.

Froch is horrible overrated because he chin checked glass face Bute. Andrade already done it, just nobody knew about it.

[baron_otto]

Froch has been banging on about the 'disrespect' thing far to much. That aside, I see this as being an entertaining fight with Froch winning by TKO towards the end (say round 8 onwards).