BoxRec

stujones wrote:It was a robbery IMO. As bad as McDermott vs Fury on my card. I think those that think it was close are being bias for the British fighter. Had this been in the states or germany and Froch fought like dirrell and dirrell fought like Froch... then we would have been crying out.

Think it is out of order saying "we are due a hometown decisions". This is not football refereeing in which mistakes even itself out over the course of the season. Dirrells' 0 has gone, along that comes some of the marquee value he has.... and it shouldn't have.

I agree.

I wanted Froch to win for a start, but after the result i feel aggrieved by what's happened. One, i feel sorry for Dirrell, and two, i've seen alot of the British crowd on Boxrec act like you see in the Current Scene.

Anyone can see that Froch didn't do anything to warrant even a draw, and as a boxing fan first and foremost, it pains me to see how things have panned out.

I thought Dirrell won but it was NO Lewis Vs Holyfield I that's for sure...

To be totally honest everyone is saying Dirrell ran?? I don't think the kid ran I just think he used his boxing skills, He moved well for the first 4 but then slowed the feet down and was simply beating Froch to the punch. Judges like pressure for some reaso though??

Although Froch was bringing the pressure at times he was like a headless chicken trying to nail down Dirrell.He should of been able to deal with Dirrell a bit better after preparing fr him for almost 3 months!!. I said it when this tournament was annonced that it woukd be the end of Froch and I stand by that statement.. When Kessler and Abraham get hold of him he's had it!! Abraham will happily stand and trade with him all night and that'll be Froch's undoing.Kessler may start slow but he'll also get to Froch in the end..

Wonder if he still feels he'd beat Calzaghe on that performance last night..

Bomber 1 wrote:I thought Dirrell won but it was NO Lewis Vs Holyfield I that's for sure...

To be totally honest everyone is saying Dirrell ran?? I don't think the kid ran I just think he used his boxing skills, He moved well for the first 4 but then slowed the feet down and was simply beating Froch to the punch. Judges like pressure for some reaso though??

Although Froch was bringing the pressure at times he was like a headless chicken trying to nail down Dirrell.He should of been able to deal with Dirrell a bit better after preparing fr him for almost 3 months!!. I said it when this tournament was annonced that it woukd be the end of Froch and I stand by that statement.. When Kessler and Abraham get hold of him he's had it!! Abraham will happily stand and trade with him all night and that'll be Froch's undoing.Kessler may start slow but he'll also get to Froch in the end..

Wonder if he still feels he'd beat Calzaghe on that performance last night..

calzaghe has had some absolute shocking performances in his career.i still think he would beat calzaghe. the only way froch could get close to dirrell was being a headless chicken bomber.kessler is nothing like dirrell.froch will ko kessler and outpoint abraham

gemmell wrote:

Bomber 1 wrote:I thought Dirrell won but it was NO Lewis Vs Holyfield I that's for sure...

To be totally honest everyone is saying Dirrell ran?? I don't think the kid ran I just think he used his boxing skills, He moved well for the first 4 but then slowed the feet down and was simply beating Froch to the punch. Judges like pressure for some reaso though??

Although Froch was bringing the pressure at times he was like a headless chicken trying to nail down Dirrell.He should of been able to deal with Dirrell a bit better after preparing fr him for almost 3 months!!. I said it when this tournament was annonced that it woukd be the end of Froch and I stand by that statement.. When Kessler and Abraham get hold of him he's had it!! Abraham will happily stand and trade with him all night and that'll be Froch's undoing.Kessler may start slow but he'll also get to Froch in the end..

Wonder if he still feels he'd beat Calzaghe on that performance last night..

calzaghe has had some absolute shocking performances in his career.i still think he would beat calzaghe. the only way froch could get close to dirrell was being a headless chicken bomber.kessler is nothing like dirrell.froch will ko kessler and outpoint abraham

Ouch mate... lay off the hard stuff.

gemmell wrote:
calzaghe has had some absolute shocking performances in his career.i still think he would beat calzaghe. the only way froch could get close to dirrell was being a headless chicken bomber.kessler is nothing like dirrell.froch will ko kessler and outpoint abraham

Your spot on about Calzaghe pal. I just think he'd have worked too much for Froch. When you put it like that though the Calzaghe that fought Kabary Salam would have lost to Froch but the Calzaghe that beat Kessler and Hopkins would have worked too much for Froch IMO but we'll never know mate. :(

As for the tactics against Dirrell he got it wrong mate, He didn't throw anywhere near enough right hands and his feet were all wrong.. :( Im in a way happy Froch won cos he's british and it keeps the british media interested in boxing for a bit longer BUT if im honest I really thought he lost the fight, He simply lost more rounds than he won for me.. :(

I don't see anyway he beats Abraham at all, I think he has a chance with Kessler if get's the tactics right cos for me Kessler starts a bit slow BUT I personally believe he'd catch up in the end.. As for Abraham I think he'll jump on Froch and stop him brutally..JMHO..

Professional boxing is about entertainment, it's about characters, skills and that will to win at any costs - and on paper this looked like it had all the perfect ingredients to be the 'main event'.

How wrong I was.

I've said this elsewhere, but i'm surprised that when the final bell rung at the end of the 12th round that everyone, including the judges, put their coats on, turned off the lights and just left the building without bothering scoring the fight.

I've read people dissecting whom they believe should have won and I've also read some people say 'no way Dirrell should have won a title on that type of performance' then others saying 'Dirrell was robbed'.

It was like a Cat & Mouse and not boxing. You knew the Cat could kill the mouse if it caught it, but the Cat ended up with scratches.

For me Dirrell, despite having all these incredible natural attributes just didn't 'bring it' for me. He was far too interested in not getting hit (than actually doing any hitting) which is a shame because for the brief spells that he did let his hands go he looked terrific. But a couple of action scenes in an otherwise shit movie does not win anyone any oscars - or world titles.

Froch was made to miss, look slow and generally frustrated - but the handful of shots he did pull off bust up Dirrell's nose and cut his eye. That said, Dirrell seemed to buzz Carl a couple of times too.

At the end of day, if you thought Dirrell won - i can see where your coming from. Dirrell used all means necessary to score rounds.

If you thought Froch shaded it due to point deduction, aggressiveness and generally being the one trying to actually make a bloody fight of it then I side with you on that.

Personally i feel most sorry for Ken Hershman at Showtime. The evening kicked off really well with Taylor and Abraham actually trying to fight each other and it resulted in a great knockout. Then we had Dirrell who had zero intention of asserting himself or going for the kill against Froch and was intent of running and holding.

Despite having what seemed like an advantage in every natural department in the fight, Dirrell blew it and only has himself to blame.

He never came to win, he came to run, hold and steal.

quality post....but abraham v taylor was just as bad. AA just plodded around with his hands glued to the side of his face.

froch did what he had to do last night against a man who didnt want to fight. i am honestly surprised that people actually thought dirrell won.

Would agree with you entirely Gomez had the fight continued as it did from the 8th round, but it didn't.

What I couldn't understand was the Jon Thaxton card... how could he have it level at 8, and then only by Dirrell by 1 at the end.

Datsue wrote:Don't really like the poll -- horribly biased, 'cos all the "Froch won" votes are concentrated in one option, whereas the opposing opinion gets spread out over several options. It looks dodgy.

Not saying that you did this deliberately Ian, but it just looks off for me.

Certainly didn't do anything dodgy deliberately mate and have absolutely zero agenda. It was just a reflection of the forum output last night and this morning.

I did realise after setting it that I should have had an option for a draw.

However, at the moment almost 3 out of 10 people think Froch won, so make of that what you will. Presumably the rest think he didn't.

Datsue wrote:

Asterix wrote:The fans were robbed by Dirrell.

How can you say that?

That is taking partisanship to a cretinous extreme. Weren't the fans robbed by Froch's flailing off-balance into the ropes? Or by the way he was shut down in the eleventh & twelfth? Or his general inability to land any clean punches?

Actually, what got your back up before the fight? You've been defensive & petulant all weekend. Even before the fight started you sounded like that (with your "Graham Houston" comments) & your whining has neared a crescendo.

I notice though that even you have given up trying to defend the decision.

I don't know what your problem is. DD

G0mez wrote:Professional boxing is about entertainment, it's about characters, skills and that will to win at any costs - and on paper this looked like it had all the perfect ingredients to be the 'main event'.

How wrong I was.

I've said this elsewhere, but i'm surprised that when the final bell rung at the end of the 12th round that everyone, including the judges, put their coats on, turned off the lights and just left the building without bothering scoring the fight.

I've read people dissecting whom they believe should have won and I've also read some people say 'no way Dirrell should have won a title on that type of performance' then others saying 'Dirrell was robbed'.

It was like a Cat & Mouse and not boxing. You knew the Cat could kill the mouse if it caught it, but the Cat ended up with scratches.

For me Dirrell, despite having all these incredible natural attributes just didn't 'bring it' for me. He was far too interested in not getting hit (than actually doing any hitting) which is a shame because for the brief spells that he did let his hands go he looked terrific. But a couple of action scenes in an otherwise poop movie does not win anyone any oscars - or world titles.

Froch was made to miss, look slow and generally frustrated - but the handful of shots he did pull off bust up Dirrell's nose and cut his eye. That said, Dirrell seemed to buzz Carl a couple of times too.

At the end of day, if you thought Dirrell won - i can see where your coming from. Dirrell used all means necessary to score rounds.

If you thought Froch shaded it due to point deduction, aggressiveness and generally being the one trying to actually make a bloody fight of it then I side with you on that.

Personally i feel most sorry for Ken Hershman at Showtime. The evening kicked off really well with Taylor and Abraham actually trying to fight each other and it resulted in a great knockout. Then we had Dirrell who had zero intention of asserting himself or going for the kill against Froch and was intent of running and holding.

Despite having what seemed like an advantage in every natural department in the fight, Dirrell blew it and only has himself to blame.

He never came to win, he came to run, hold and steal.

Why does every fighter have to be Arturo Gatti to win a deserved decision?

Dirrell went out there and did what Andre Dirrell does. He was slick, fast and negative at times. He does the same thing in every fight. What's he supposed to so? Raise his gloves to his chin and march forwards wailing left hooks to the body? At least then he'll deserve the decision, right? Who cares if he gets busted up and punched in the head 1000 times.

Dirrell fought smart and he looked great at times (especially late on). He made Froch look silly and should have won the decision. Everything else is just an excuse on Froch's part.

The sport is boxing, not brawling. However negative it may have been, Dirrell was boxing Froch's ears off most of the way.

The whole point of boxing is to hit your opponent and not get hit, Dirrell did that and now he's getting slagged off.

banjo wrote:The whole point of boxing is to hit your opponent and not get hit, Dirrell did that and now he's getting slagged off.

Summed it up in one.

Managed to miss this, sadly.

Is it worth tracking down online, or was it really that much of a snoozefest?

Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:So, what does everyone think?

there were a lot of close rounds, where not much happened, but in those rounds, froch threw little and landed nothing.

i believe the judges got it wrong, possibly influence by the boos of the crowd, and they penalised dirrell for running and holding.

the thing is, its the refs job to issue those pentalites, not the judges.

froch should have had a point deducted for fouling, the best shots he landed all night were the shots to the back of his head.

Reading the News of the World this morning and I came across this from Froch .....

Froch added: "The great thing about the Super Six is that you can lose a fight and still get through to the final, where I believe I'll meet Kessler again.

"You've still got the security of additional big money fights.

"The only thing I will not do is face Abraham in Germany for political reasons.

"There has been some strange judging there and that fight will take place in Britain.

"If I ever got blatantly robbed, I guarantee I'll beat up the judges, get arrested and be banned from boxing. But I don't think it will happen. Boxing has moved on from that."


http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/sport/5 ... -ring.html


Slightly ironic one thinks !!!!!

"The only thing I will not do is face Abraham in Germany for political reasons."

What a effing pillock!

I guarantee he'd be the first person to slag off an opponent who refused to face him in Britain for "political reasons"

Khaosai-Galaxy wrote:Managed to miss this, sadly.

Is it worth tracking down online, or was it really that much of a snoozefest?

Complete snoozefest. I think the crowd fell asleep. At least, that's how quiet they were.

Khaosai-Galaxy wrote:Managed to miss this, sadly.

Is it worth tracking down online, or was it really that much of a snoozefest?

Watch it fella' so you can form your views in what's proving to be a controversial topic.

Funny thing I read this morning, is that Froch says he won`t fight Arthur in Germany.
Adding "There has been some strange judging there.."

Who thinks `King Arthur` will now be saying the same?

one thing i will say, dirrell should probably have been given a count as he appeared to take voluntary knee at one point to avoid punishment. The ref merely pulled him up, but really if you are going to the canvas to avoid being hit, you should be given a count.

jamesmcdonnell wrote:one thing i will say, dirrell should probably have been given a count as he appeared to take voluntary knee at one point to avoid punishment. The ref merely pulled him up, but really if you are going to the canvas to avoid being hit, you should be given a count.

I was wondering if that would happen. Dirrell slipped a couple of times, I think, but the last time looked very strange. Dirrell stayed on his feet after that, though, and I think giving a count on any of them would have been harsh.

banjo wrote:The whole point of boxing is to hit your opponent and not get hit, Dirrell did that and now he's getting slagged off.

That is not the whole point of boxing.

Also, Dirrell did get hit.

Horse wrote:

banjo wrote:The whole point of boxing is to hit your opponent and not get hit, Dirrell did that and now he's getting slagged off.

That is not the whole point of boxing.

Also, Dirrell did get hit.

he got hit a lot less than froch did.
carl barely landed a single flush shot, apart from rounds 7 to 9 when he landed a few jabs and body shots.

dirrell made him miss virtually all night, and while i was angry with the way dirrell was fighting as it was so negative, he showed in the last three that he really was the boss of the fight.

i agree dirrell did himself no favours by running so much in the middle rounds, but the fact is that carl did nothing of note for the entire fight except chase dirrell and swing at thing air.