I can't see this interferring with the Super 6 format.
As for a rematch, no thanks, Dirrell was terrible
. That said, if result go a certain way, they they might have to meet again later in the competition.Froch - Dirrell II anyone.
Re: Froch - Dirrell II anyone.
All the promoters supposedly covered all the angles before everyone signed on the dotted line.
I can't see this interferring with the Super 6 format.
As for a rematch, no thanks, Dirrell was terrible . That said, if result go a certain way, they they might have to meet again later in the competition.
I can't see this interferring with the Super 6 format.
As for a rematch, no thanks, Dirrell was terrible
. That said, if result go a certain way, they they might have to meet again later in the competition.-
jamesmcdonnell
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 45235
- Joined: 12 Nov 2003, 06:11
Re: Froch - Dirrell II anyone.
Agreed, the fight was stultifyingly boring, partly because of Dirrell's negativity - partly due to Froch's lack of ability to cut off the ring.Terry D wrote:You'd have to be absolutely plastered to sit through that fight. Dirrell seems a nice guy, but his boxing career is incredibly annoying.
I think Dirrell would do a lot better in a rematch, I can see him even stopping Froch because towards the end he demonstrated that he could hurt him, and that gives a fighter a lot of confidence.
Re: Froch - Dirrell II anyone.
I read a lot of people saying that they think that Dirrell would be better in a rematch and would probably beat Froch.
Does no one think Froch would be better in a rematch and that he would beat Dirrell more easily?
Does no one think Froch would be better in a rematch and that he would beat Dirrell more easily?
-
jamesmcdonnell
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 45235
- Joined: 12 Nov 2003, 06:11
Re: Froch - Dirrell II anyone.
To be honest no. I've seen nothing in Froch's fights that suggests to me he is able to adapt or has any plan B. The format is the same in every fight, stalk the opponent, and try and break them down.
That has worked (just) against everyone so far. Against Taylor, he was fortunate that Jermaine is a known front runner with stamina issues - but Dirrell was still totally fresh at the end of the fight - and had he fought with just a tiny bit more positivity would have gotten the decision.
That has worked (just) against everyone so far. Against Taylor, he was fortunate that Jermaine is a known front runner with stamina issues - but Dirrell was still totally fresh at the end of the fight - and had he fought with just a tiny bit more positivity would have gotten the decision.
Re: Froch - Dirrell II anyone.
If Dirrell had fought more positively then he would have got hit more by Froch.
I think that he was fighting negatively for a reason and he may have paid if he put more into it.
I think that he was fighting negatively for a reason and he may have paid if he put more into it.
Re: Froch - Dirrell II anyone.
Dirrell was positive enough to win last time. I've sit through it again and the round in which nearly all though Froch won... Round 7. For 90% of the round, Dirrell was throwing more punches and hard ones at that.
Dirrell instigated more attacks that Froch..... watch the round again.
John Rawling and Jon THaxton seemed like they were getting the kleenex out cause Dirrell complained to the ref - does a complaint to the ref win a round.... seems like it does (e.g. Calzaghe vs Hopkins also).
Dirrell deserves to be still installed number 1 by the WBC - unless Froch loses the title controvesially, and then he should be moved down to #2.
Dirrell instigated more attacks that Froch..... watch the round again.
John Rawling and Jon THaxton seemed like they were getting the kleenex out cause Dirrell complained to the ref - does a complaint to the ref win a round.... seems like it does (e.g. Calzaghe vs Hopkins also).
Dirrell deserves to be still installed number 1 by the WBC - unless Froch loses the title controvesially, and then he should be moved down to #2.
Re: Froch - Dirrell II anyone.
Looks like this is just the WBC trying to throw a spanner in the works of the Super6.
This series isn`t really promoting any of the belts. And if anything proving its the fights that matter not the belts.
This series isn`t really promoting any of the belts. And if anything proving its the fights that matter not the belts.
Re: Froch - Dirrell II anyone.
No, the WBC are saying they are behind the Super Six. They said Dirrell will fight for the WBC title aslong as it doesn't affect the Super Six series. So in the unlikely event that the WBC champion is eliminated - thats when Dirrell will get his shot. It might even be at the end of the tournament.tonyevs wrote:Looks like this is just the WBC trying to throw a spanner in the works of the Super6.
This series isn`t really promoting any of the belts. And if anything proving its the fights that matter not the belts.
Re: Froch - Dirrell II anyone.
Spot in Horse! 
I think Dirrell going into a 2nd fight against Froch with more confidence, will actually suit Froch better in terms of getting a more conclusive win.
Whilst he may dish out more punishment, like Jermain Taylor did, this is where Carl is very clever at wearing his man out and taking him out.
I think Dirrell going into a 2nd fight against Froch with more confidence, will actually suit Froch better in terms of getting a more conclusive win.
Whilst he may dish out more punishment, like Jermain Taylor did, this is where Carl is very clever at wearing his man out and taking him out.
Re: Froch - Dirrell II anyone.
I couldnt give a toss who anyone picks in a rematch.
The first fight was absolutely awful - and the gushing commentating made it worse.
Froch comes off 2 x FOTY's against Pascal & Taylor.
Meanwhile Dirrell comes off HBO's blacklist (yep, he was dumped from their Boxing After Dark shows) for his stinker against Stevens, a fight were the crowd's boo's were deafening.
Then declares "Froch's mother will be crying at ringside when I knock him out" and then clinched for 10+ times a round, ran from any type exchange.
If he'd have put more effort into actually trying to fight Froch, instead of complaining to the referee, falling on the floor and hugging his opponent he would have faired better.
Whilst a fighter like Mayweather would use his speed and skills to make an opponent miss, then hit them back with hard accurate shots.... Dirrell would literally stand there waiting for Froch to throw something before zooming off grinning.
Grinning dont win fights.
If Dirrell had more guts, he would have turned Froch, backed him up into the corner and threw some bombs.
Sure Froch didn't land a great deal, but Dirrell's nose and mouth were bust open with the few shots he did land.
Dirrell only has himself to blame for not winning.
The first fight was absolutely awful - and the gushing commentating made it worse.
Froch comes off 2 x FOTY's against Pascal & Taylor.
Meanwhile Dirrell comes off HBO's blacklist (yep, he was dumped from their Boxing After Dark shows) for his stinker against Stevens, a fight were the crowd's boo's were deafening.
Then declares "Froch's mother will be crying at ringside when I knock him out" and then clinched for 10+ times a round, ran from any type exchange.
If he'd have put more effort into actually trying to fight Froch, instead of complaining to the referee, falling on the floor and hugging his opponent he would have faired better.
Whilst a fighter like Mayweather would use his speed and skills to make an opponent miss, then hit them back with hard accurate shots.... Dirrell would literally stand there waiting for Froch to throw something before zooming off grinning.
Grinning dont win fights.
If Dirrell had more guts, he would have turned Froch, backed him up into the corner and threw some bombs.
Sure Froch didn't land a great deal, but Dirrell's nose and mouth were bust open with the few shots he did land.
Dirrell only has himself to blame for not winning.