BoxRec

I think I had given Froch round 4 and was giving him round 9 which looked like was going to be a 10-8 round.

columbo wrote:I thought the commetary was incredibly biased towards Groves to be honest. Groves was very good but they didnt seem to acknowledge the success Froch was having aswell.

From a very early stage it was clear to me that the commentators had a predetermined result in mind and that they were only going to present one side of the action. Time and again Froch landed as many big shots as Groves but if you closed your eyes you'd imagine that this was a beat down of WWF proportions.

95gerog wrote:I think I had given Froch round 4 and was giving him round 9 which looked like was going to be a 10-8 round.

That round wasn't a 10-8 round yet. Groves hurt froch 20 seconds before.

Jim called the fight spot on. Yes he did go on about Froch scared jab...but that's because it was the case throughout the fight. The negativity towards froch was just.....he looked and old man in there. He didn't looked warmed up or motivated.

Watt called about groves carelessness also which ultimately, unjustly, cost him the fight.

stujones wrote:Jim called the fight spot on.

No, he didn't. There were several exchanges where both landed and the only mention was Groves' work - even when it appeared that Froch was hurting him badly. Hell, even my wife (who hates boxing) asked where Groves' opponent was from because she assumed that he was someone shipped in to face the house fighter because of Watt's bias.

I'm actually a fan of Watt's normally but he was bugging me last night. Another thing that was bugging me was that he kept talking about Froch's jab and how Carl was "Pawing" with it. Well Jim as an ex fighter should of recognised that the reason Froch wasnt fully committing to it was because he was very wary of the counter right hand coming over the top!

columbo wrote:I'm actually a fan of Watt's normally but he was bugging me last night. Another thing that was bugging me was that he kept talking about Froch's jab and how Carl was "Pawing" with it. Well Jim as an ex fighter should of recognised that the reason Froch wasnt fully committing to it was because he was very wary of the counter right hand coming over the top!

Which is what he said...."it's as if Carl is more weary of the punches that might come back than throwing"

Groves did great but alot of u are talking like watt...ther were two people in the fight and it would of been nice for him to even recognise when carl landed and not just go on about groves, and Carl did land punches look at groves face

stujones wrote:

columbo wrote:I'm actually a fan of Watt's normally but he was bugging me last night. Another thing that was bugging me was that he kept talking about Froch's jab and how Carl was "Pawing" with it. Well Jim as an ex fighter should of recognised that the reason Froch wasnt fully committing to it was because he was very wary of the counter right hand coming over the top!

Which is what he said...."it's as if Carl is more weary of the punches that might come back than throwing"

Yeah but the point was Jim kept complaining about it! If you've just been put down heavily on your ass you're going to be tentative! That's normal. Jim says some very good stuff but he ruins it by saying some silly things. I'm not even just talking about last night. Ive noticed he says the same thing about the jab quite often.

amirah wrote:Groves did great but alot of u are talking like watt...ther were two people in the fight and it would of been nice for him to even recognise when carl landed and not just go on about groves, and Carl did land punches look at groves face

Watt did say it.....he said a least 10 times...better from froch.

columbo wrote:

stujones wrote:

columbo wrote:I'm actually a fan of Watt's normally but he was bugging me last night. Another thing that was bugging me was that he kept talking about Froch's jab and how Carl was "Pawing" with it. Well Jim as an ex fighter should of recognised that the reason Froch wasnt fully committing to it was because he was very wary of the counter right hand coming over the top!

Which is what he said...."it's as if Carl is more weary of the punches that might come back than throwing"

Yeah but the point was Jim kept complaining about it! If you've just been put down heavily on your ass you're going to be tentative! That's normal. Jim says some very good stuff but he ruins it by saying some silly things. I'm not even just talking about last night. Ive noticed he says the same thing about the jab quite often.

Jim was complaining cause it was costing froch rounds....I'm not sure how saying "understandably now froch looks weary and a bit scared" would have made a difference. Jim jobs is to call the action, froch fought unusually tentadive looked slow and old...watt called it.

Anyway, we'll agree to disagree on this on.

The commentary was awful. Jim Watt was so far up George Groves' bum hole it was a joke. All Groves had to do was take a step towards Froch and Watt would go into bouts of ecstasy.

I canny stand Jim Watt's commentary.

He's terrible at it. Becomes bias and blinded all too easily in nearly every fight he calls.

Indeed the commentators were an absolute disgrace and seem to have convinced a lot of people to disregard what their eyes were seeing.

I remember Watt and Froch were not exactly great pals a few years back. Watt criticised him a little and we all know how Carl takes criticism!

Perhaps he was in 'Team Groves' camp?

Jim Watt & the Sky Team pick there man after a round, then we have to endure horribly bias commentary for the rest of the fight, once they have made there pick. Bradley-Marquez was a good example, it was a very close fight, but they threw there weight behind Bradley after a round. If you only had an audio feed, you'd think Marquez was due a trip to the hospital after a career ending beatdown.

WATCH this video, especially when it gets to 3.45 and listen to Jim Watt after Froch has been deliberately hit in the back of the head. The guy needs to retire.

Then Haling jumping around in round 9 saying "He's gone ! his legs have gone ! Froch can smell blood !" and then "That might be controversial" - make your sodding mind up. Has he gone ? yes ? no? make your mind up you fool and stick to it.

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x17jzn ... oves_sport

Sorry guys, I'm a neutral

I thought the commentary was spot on

Glenn was actually spot on as well and I was glad he was angry about the end

rossij8 wrote:Sorry guys, I'm a neutral

I thought the commentary was spot on

Glenn was actually spot on as well and I was glad he was angry about the end

That's a bloody miracle in itself.

Listen to a young Watt and he was enjoyable and intriguing to listen to.

He's a shot commentator

Groves was sensational and Watt and Halling reflected what was happening in there.

Groves was the victim of a poor referee on the night. He had dominated most the fight IMO, smashed Froch to the canvas, and looked well on his way to winning until Foster's blunder.

Watt and Halling were reacting to seeing a big upset unfold. Full marks to Glen McCrory for being real about the stoppage which was farcical.

THEBUTCH wrote:Groves was sensational and Watt and Halling reflected what was happening in there.

Groves was the victim of a poor referee on the night. He had dominated most the fight IMO, smashed Froch to the canvas, and looked well on his way to winning until Foster's blunder.

Watt and Halling were reacting to seeing a big upset unfold. Full marks to Glen McCrory for being real about the stoppage which was farcical.

x2

THEBUTCH wrote:Groves was sensational and Watt and Halling reflected what was happening in there.

Groves was the victim of a poor referee on the night. He had dominated most the fight IMO, smashed Froch to the canvas, and looked well on his way to winning until Foster's blunder.

Watt and Halling were reacting to seeing a big upset unfold. Full marks to Glen McCrory for being real about the stoppage which was farcical.

x3. Jim Watt is a really good commentator. He is leagues above most of the others. If you don't agree, just bear this in mind next time you watch Bo x N a tion (which I am a big fan of, by the way but their commentary is poor) - anyone can sit there and say "good left hook" after a fighter has thrown a good left hook. B o x N ation can have several hours of this plodding, one dimensional sort of commentary. A professional commentator will tell us WHY the guy is throwing it and WHY it is being effective, or not. Jim Watt has been streets ahead of this amateur hour commentary for literally decades.

I think halling sucks, full stop, terrible commentator.

Watt can be ok, a bit of a tedious man and too many times as per this fight, he will just pick his side and then just bang the drum all night for that person. Halling usually just falls into line.

They were barely acknowledging when Froch landed, which he did.

I had it 3 rounds to Groves but you'd think Froch hadn't done a thing by the commentary.

THEBUTCH wrote:Groves was sensational and Watt and Halling reflected what was happening in there.

Groves was the victim of a poor referee on the night. He had dominated most the fight IMO, smashed Froch to the canvas, and looked well on his way to winning until Foster's blunder.

Watt and Halling were reacting to seeing a big upset unfold. Full marks to Glen McCrory for being real about the stoppage which was farcical.

That's not strictly true. They set the tone *very pro groves* from the opening bell in the first round before anything had even happened. At times, I thought Watt and Halling were going to simultaneously blow a nut!