Bunce let himself down tonight

[steve689]

Eraser and Bomber are right IMO. This crap of taking the title away and all that only surfaces to justify these controversies.

If you win more rounds, regardless of when or where the fight is, and score more points than your opponent then you win the fight, plain and simple. Having to take the title away makes things wholly unfair and is an inbalanced argument.

[Buncey]

It was a tight and competitive fight and Froch won. Promoters do their best to get their boxer the home advantage - it's the way the business works. This was not a fix or a robbery or a disgrace. Carl found it hard to get at Dirrell and young Dirrell, as predicted in yesterday's Independent, fought the fight of his life to push it close, and it was close. Also, think back to my prediction before the first bell - I said, I think, cagey fight, not a slugfest with Froch winning on points - a lot of experts last night picked Froch in 7 or 8 or 9 rounds. I think that a lot of people had dismissed Dirrell - he deserved respect before the fight and he earned it during the fight!
Froch and Kessler next. Abraham and Dirrell next. This is a great tournament and let's not forget that.

Adios - it's time for lunch.

[jamesmcdonnell]

It was a tight and competitive fight and Froch won. Promoters do their best to get their boxer the home advantage - it's the way the business works. This was not a fix or a robbery or a disgrace. Carl found it hard to get at Dirrell and young Dirrell, as predicted in yesterday's Independent, fought the fight of his life to push it close, and it was close. Also, think back to my prediction before the first bell - I said, I think, cagey fight, not a slugfest with Froch winning on points - a lot of experts last night picked Froch in 7 or 8 or 9 rounds. I think that a lot of people had dismissed Dirrell - he deserved respect before the fight and he earned it during the fight!
Froch and Kessler next. Abraham and Dirrell next. This is a great tournament and let's not forget that.

Adios - it's time for lunch.

my god, i am completely disgusted by this statement.

You are in a position of power within the industry, you have a voice which represents boxing to the public, and you are cynical enouvgh to make this statement - i think you should be ashamed of yourself quite honestly.

before the fight you went on a long rant about how fair and above board us brits are, not likle those dodgy germans with their home town officiating.

if the fight had been in germany and it was froch wh9o got jobbewd, no doubt you would have ranted about how bent the kraut refs were.
your statement perfectly espouses one of many reasons why this event has ended up on some obscure ppv channel which doesn't even work properly.

boxing's reputation for snidery and underhand shennanigans is perpetuated once more.

dont you think it indicative that a boxing forum with former journalists, fighters and knowledgable people are outraged by this decision, given that most on here wanted froch to win.

one minute your saying how fair we are, then after the event it's @yeah but that's life innit, hometown advantage, is the way of the world mate."

well no actually it isnt, i don't think that pete sampras got given an extra service game each set when he played at the us open.

and for the record, i thought both initial fights were shite, taylor is mentally shot, i don't know how you figure he will 'come back a strongr man' he didnt seem to come back stronger from being batteredf by pavlik twice, or from the beating froch gave him, so how is another brutal ko going to improve his lot.

froch didnt perform at all, and dirrell was largely negative, but still \clearly outlanded carl and even had him hhurt, the last two rounds were virtually target practice.

i hope for you sake this tournament imoproves because thus far it has suckedfd.

[Phenomenal-Nutrition]

It was a tight and competitive fight and Froch won. Promoters do their best to get their boxer the home advantage - it's the way the business works. This was not a fix or a robbery or a disgrace. Carl found it hard to get at Dirrell and young Dirrell, as predicted in yesterday's Independent, fought the fight of his life to push it close, and it was close. Also, think back to my prediction before the first bell - I said, I think, cagey fight, not a slugfest with Froch winning on points - a lot of experts last night picked Froch in 7 or 8 or 9 rounds. I think that a lot of people had dismissed Dirrell - he deserved respect before the fight and he earned it during the fight!
Froch and Kessler next. Abraham and Dirrell next. This is a great tournament and let's not forget that.

Adios - it's time for lunch.

Buncey your either towing the party line, completely biased, didnt get a good view, got caught up by the crowd you dont know how to score a fight. That was 1 of the worst robberies in British ring history, if a man lands significantly more punches in a round or hurts the other man. Can you tell me which 6 rounds Froch landed more in or hurt Dirrell in? I think not

I respect you have to earn a living and sometimes that means towing the party line, at least if thats the case say to the fans I have a job to do with a wink and dont expand on it.

To the real boxing fans (ie not Notts Forrest fans) your comments were an insult to the sport!!!

[davidas]

Easy now boys. The judges only agreed on four rounds - I had it 7 rounds to 5 and with the extra point that makes it a three point win.
Do you think that Dirrell would have got the decision in Thailand or Germany.
"Dirrell beat up Froch"...'beat up' ?...now that has to be one of the craziest things I've read in a long, long time. Dirrell fought the right fight to nick the title, but it was not enough. Carl had to adjust and he did.
It was a fine start to a great tournament.

Adios.

'Do you think Dirrell would have got the decision in Thailand or Germany'...what the fook has that got to do with anything? If you think Froch won that fight, you can't score fights. Simple as that. Doesn't matter whether you're English, German, Thai or on the payroll.

Froch was embarassingly beaten last night. Not beaten up. Just taken to school.

YOUR TELLING STEVE BUNCE HE CANT SCORE FIGHTS???? STOP EMBARASSING YOURSELF YOU FOOL. I have no problem in the aggressor getting the nod in the close rounds. If thats how the judges saw it then fair enough Froch won - If the judges on the day wanted to score the round because of one or two accurate shots then dirrell would have gotten it. Boxing has different styles, differing likes and dislikes, and differing ways of seeing a fight. I sway towards an aggresive boxer who wants to fight but thats a personal opinion and why Froch would have gotten alot of the rounds in my opinion.But to say some of the things you idiots come out with its just pathetic.

[slapbangwhallop]

Easy now boys. The judges only agreed on four rounds - I had it 7 rounds to 5 and with the extra point that makes it a three point win.
Do you think that Dirrell would have got the decision in Thailand or Germany.
"Dirrell beat up Froch"...'beat up' ?...now that has to be one of the craziest things I've read in a long, long time. Dirrell fought the right fight to nick the title, but it was not enough. Carl had to adjust and he did.
It was a fine start to a great tournament.

Adios.

'Do you think Dirrell would have got the decision in Thailand or Germany'...what the fook has that got to do with anything? If you think Froch won that fight, you can't score fights. Simple as that. Doesn't matter whether you're English, German, Thai or on the payroll.

Froch was embarassingly beaten last night. Not beaten up. Just taken to school.

YOUR TELLING STEVE BUNCE HE CANT SCORE FIGHTS???? STOP EMBARASSING YOURSELF YOU FOOL. I have no problem in the aggressor getting the nod in the close rounds. If thats how the judges saw it then fair enough Froch won - If the judges on the day wanted to score the round because of one or two accurate shots then dirrell would have gotten it. Boxing has different styles, differing likes and dislikes, and differing ways of seeing a fight. I sway towards an aggresive boxer who wants to fight but thats a personal opinion and why Froch would have gotten alot of the rounds in my opinion.But to say some of the things you idiots come out with its just pathetic.

David - he said that that was one possibility.

Can you please let us know what criteria you take into consideration when scoring a round? and maybe even let us know your detailed scoring of the fight?

Buncey - maybe you could give us your scorecard and reasoning for each round. I am happy to do the same!

[davidas]

Id have to have a copy of the fight to do that properly.

i'll tell you what I dont take into consideration though.....hit hit, hold, throw my head under an armpit, slump to my knees, cry, moan, get up, do it again. Id have taken a point away much earlier.
Like I said previously, Dirrell showed glimpses of class, but ruined it for himself by spending too much time spoiling and running (and I dont mean his evasive skills when backed up on the ropes which is again - class). I was disapponted by Froch but at least he tried to fight for gods sake!!!! The close rounds Id have given 10-9 to Froch purely for coming forward, attempting to engage, being the aggressor. Those who favour Dirrell would have scored them even or Dirrell for one or two punches. I cant give someone a round for 1 or 2 clean hits when they spent 3/4 of the time clinching and spoiling.

[Shero1985]

It was a tight and competitive fight and Froch won.

No matter how often you say it, you can't make yourself believe that. Froch did not win that fight. Anyone with a pair of eyes could tell you that. There are opinions and there are facts- the fact is, for any sane person watching, Froch LOST!

[nobby_nobbins]

Hometown decisions should be condemned wherever they happen, not excused. Having said that, whilst I have Dirrell as the winner, it seemed a closer fight to me than some are suggesting. So a minor injustice perhaps, but not a robbery.

[stujones]

Watching the fight again, I still cannot understand Thaxton card. He says at the START of the 11th - Froch needs a KO to win. Surely Dirrell wins both the 11th and 12th..... then only gives the fight to Dirrell by a round.

I fail to see the fight as close, I really don't. The last 5 rounds were not close... okay one of them was level cause of the point deduction. It was very close before that. I wouldn't complain if you had Froch a round, maybe 2 up at that point.... but Dirrell by 2 overall I think is the closest you can score it.

As the Brits getting a raw deal abroad.... look at our three most celebrated and successful fighters in modern time. Joe Calzaghe (vs Hopkins), Ricky Hatton (vs Collazo), Lennox Lewis (Holyfield rematch and vs Mercer) all given the benefit in razor tight fights.... Calzaghe and Hatton with the "added disadvantage" of being the challenger.

Okay, Robin Reid and Lennox Lewis (vs Holyfield 1) got a raw deal..... but are we really better than the states or germany.

[banjo]

but are we really better than the states or germany.

Where money is to be made there will always be dodgy shenanigans.

[stujones]

but are we really better than the states or germany.

Where money is to be made there will always be dodgy shenanigans.

Exactly, so why don't people say it as it is.... or not slag off the other countries. We are as bad.

[slapbangwhallop]

but are we really better than the states or germany.

Where money is to be made there will always be dodgy shenanigans.

yes without doubt there will be - but that is when we would expect the "experts" to step up to the plate and call it as it is - not brush it under the carpet.

[mickey1975]

froch says in the news of the world today "i will go anywhere,except germany,there are some strange decisions there"!

[whicker]

I think that a lot of people had dismissed Dirrell - he deserved respect before the fight and he earned it during the fight!

Such as?

In betting terms (and these guys are usually close to the mark) it was a tight one- I think Andre was 8/5 - which is just shy of a 40% chance of winning.

[whicker]

It was a fine start to a great tournament.

It was boring.

[ArtOfWar]

Watching the fight again, I still cannot understand Thaxton card. He says at the START of the 11th - Froch needs a KO to win. Surely Dirrell wins both the 11th and 12th..... then only gives the fight to Dirrell by a round.

I fail to see the fight as close, I really don't. The last 5 rounds were not close... okay one of them was level cause of the point deduction. It was very close before that. I wouldn't complain if you had Froch a round, maybe 2 up at that point.... but Dirrell by 2 overall I think is the closest you can score it.

As the Brits getting a raw deal abroad.... look at our three most celebrated and successful fighters in modern time. Joe Calzaghe (vs Hopkins), Ricky Hatton (vs Collazo), Lennox Lewis (Holyfield rematch and vs Mercer) all given the benefit in razor tight fights.... Calzaghe and Hatton with the "added disadvantage" of being the challenger.

Okay, Robin Reid and Lennox Lewis (vs Holyfield 1) got a raw deal..... but are we really better than the states or germany.

Got to agree with you about the last five rounds. That's where Dirrell pulled away from Froch. It was a closely fought fight, but Dirrell was simply landing the clean shots, where as Froch was missing with wild punches that lacked technique.

[Khaosai-Galaxy]

when i read the title "Bunce let himself down tonight" i'd wondered if he had turned up drunk and went into a rant live on ITV about the Jew's being responsible for 9/11.



Thats just how KG's mind works, alas

[jamesmcdonnell]

Easy now boys. The judges only agreed on four rounds - I had it 7 rounds to 5 and with the extra point that makes it a three point win.
Do you think that Dirrell would have got the decision in Thailand or Germany.
"Dirrell beat up Froch"...'beat up' ?...now that has to be one of the craziest things I've read in a long, long time. Dirrell fought the right fight to nick the title, but it was not enough. Carl had to adjust and he did.
It was a fine start to a great tournament.

Adios.

'Do you think Dirrell would have got the decision in Thailand or Germany'...what the fook has that got to do with anything? If you think Froch won that fight, you can't score fights. Simple as that. Doesn't matter whether you're English, German, Thai or on the payroll.

Froch was embarassingly beaten last night. Not beaten up. Just taken to school.

YOUR TELLING STEVE BUNCE HE CANT SCORE FIGHTS???? STOP EMBARASSING YOURSELF YOU FOOL. I have no problem in the aggressor getting the nod in the close rounds. If thats how the judges saw it then fair enough Froch won - If the judges on the day wanted to score the round because of one or two accurate shots then dirrell would have gotten it. Boxing has different styles, differing likes and dislikes, and differing ways of seeing a fight. I sway towards an aggresive boxer who wants to fight but thats a personal opinion and why Froch would have gotten alot of the rounds in my opinion.But to say some of the things you idiots come out with its just pathetic.

You simply don't know what you are talking about then. The main criteria for judging a round is 'effective aggression' which means just that. You aren't meant to get Kudos for coming forward if you aren't having any success - that's the bottom line.

Also, a fighter who is making their opponent miss, is supposed to be given credit for doing so.

It's not meant to be based on what the judges prefer, it's mean to be based on realtively objective criteria, which clearly weren't applied by two of the judges here.

I am willing to believe that two of the judges may have been swayed by the boos of the crowd, and the cheers when Froch threw but missed, I'm not saying it is 'bent' but the judging, and the refereeing were poor.

Why was froch not docked a point for hip-tossing his opponent, and repeatedly punching him behind the head whilst holding him?

[opticald]

I could never feel sorry for Dirrell though after the tactics he used. So negative.

[jamesmcdonnell]

It was a fine start to a great tournament.

It was boring.

It sucked.

It blew chunks.

[Maelstrom]

I could never feel sorry for Dirrell though after the tactics he used. So negative.

I don't get this outlook at all - even though you are not the only one of this opinion.

Dirrel hit and didn't get hit. Simple as that.

[jamesmcdonnell]

Me either, I was cussing Dirrell mid rounds, and calling him a pansy, and he looked troubled by the roughhouse tactics from Froch, bleating all the time to the ref.

However, the truth is, Carl was fouling him a lot, and over the last quarter of the fight Dirrell put his foot on the gas, and nailed Froch with some big hard clean shots, Dirrell was just ahead on my card going into the last three, as I thought he did very little for the three rounds previous, but then he pulled away by putting three good rounds in the bag.

[StokeBloke]

As a new poster pon this forum (recommended to me by James A at the venue last night) I'm surprised so many people thought Dirrell won last night. OK, I was in the audience and you do get some influence from the home fighters fans, no doubt. Dirrell was just too negative for large parts of the fight though. Granted, when he opened up his work was good, accurate and far classier than Froch but at least he was bringing the fight. Froch looked like he was just looking for the one big shot the whole way through and loaded up far too often. I thought Froch was lucky not to get deducted a point in the earlier rounds for some of his tactics but ulimately I think he still won by two rounds.

[stujones]

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