BoxRec

I've no problem with the result but I feel that Scott Quigg beat himself tonight. Those first six rounds, he did nothing.
I had it 115-113 Frampton.

Anybody know who Joe Gallaghers barber is............want to avoid him at all costs

Loftgroov wrote:I think Ring Magazine might be phoning up and asking for their award back.

Not even sure why he won it?

A unification fight that looked like a sparring session

tigermoth87 wrote:

uk_boxer wrote:Frampton won without hitting his opponent?

It's more Quigg lost than Frampton won.

Quigg did nothing at all for the first 6. Frampton did nothing either but did at least throw a few jabs and punches to nick the rounds. It's not like Frampton won them by outboxing Quigg, he won because Quigg didn't throw a punch.

Hopefully Quigg reads this. He lost the fighter rather than Frampton won it.

Pretty poor night overall could have been better with Frampton and Quigg after all that build up bollox

Horse wrote:

keithmoonhangover wrote:Justice is served. No way in the world Quigg won that fight. 116-112 by anyone who knows how to score a boxing contest.

You are clueless.

And you are an autistic lunatic. Come on. Enlighten me. How did you score the fight?

Gallagher is full of the smelly stuff.

Despite what he said himself, I think Frampton is done at the weight - no power, pop and very questionable stamina. The problem if he does move up to featherweight is his size - he is tiny even up against some of the super bantams. He will be dwarfed by some of the top boys at featherweight.

milpool wrote:I've no problem with the result but I feel that Scott Quigg beat himself tonight. Those first six rounds, he did nothing.
I had it 115-113 Frampton.

Agreed. Why do fighters start so slow? Frampton didn't look like he liked the pace in the last few, although he rallied well in the 12th, if he'd have started earlier he may have gassed or got him, he looked to have him going in the 11th.

SNG wrote:

milpool wrote:I've no problem with the result but I feel that Scott Quigg beat himself tonight. Those first six rounds, he did nothing.
I had it 115-113 Frampton.

Agreed. Why do fighters start so slow? Frampton didn't look like he liked the pace in the last few, although he rallied well in the 12th, if he'd have started earlier he may have gassed or got him, he looked to have him going in the 11th.

It's baffling. Surely they must realise leaving it to the 7th to start throwing punches has basically handed the first 6 rounds to the opponent.

I get starting a bit cautious early on, but for me, you need to kick it into gear by the 4th round to avoid throwing it away.

crusader wrote:

tigermoth87 wrote:

uk_boxer wrote:Frampton won without hitting his opponent?

It's more Quigg lost than Frampton won.

Quigg did nothing at all for the first 6. Frampton did nothing either but did at least throw a few jabs and punches to nick the rounds.

Yep....you just have to do more than your opponent to win a round, even if it's not a lot.

Totally agree with this. Gallagher completely fvcked Quigg.

Horse wrote:

stevedoc wrote:No he's not that's what I had

Read his post.

He said no way Frampton won

quiggs face when Gallagher finally told him he was losing why did he not get into his ear earlier.

SNG wrote:

milpool wrote:I've no problem with the result but I feel that Scott Quigg beat himself tonight. Those first six rounds, he did nothing.
I had it 115-113 Frampton.

Agreed. Why do fighters start so slow?

Good question. Adhering too strictly to poor instructions from the trainer? Nervous? Worried about stamina?

That may well be the 2nd time it's costed SQ a win.

keithmoonhangover wrote:And you are an autistic lunatic. Come on. Enlighten me. How did you score the fight?

You are vile.

I'd rather not talk to you.

stevedoc wrote:He said no way Frampton won

No, he didn't.

to be fair it was very close at the end i had frampton one point up going into the final round.I could see a draw

Tarquin Tarpaulin IV wrote:Anybody know who Joe Gallaghers barber is............want to avoid him at all costs

Sweeney Todd

Horse wrote:

keithmoonhangover wrote:And you are an autistic lunatic. Come on. Enlighten me. How did you score the fight?

You are vile.

I'd rather not talk to you.

You called me out. You engaged me. What do expect me to do? Say thanks for the insult Horse? Get a grip man.

crusader wrote:

SNG wrote:
Good question. Adhering too strictly to poor instructions from the trainer? Nervous? Worried about stamina?

That may well be the 2nd time it's costed SQ a win.

I blame this on the trainer. Quigg seemed to be following instructions and looked shocked when he was told he was behind.

Horse wrote:

stevedoc wrote:He said no way Frampton won

No, he didn't.

That's how I read it

keithmoonhangover wrote:You called me out. You engaged me. What do expect me to do? Say thanks for the insult Horse? Get a grip man.

You started the rudeness.

You lack class.

stevedoc wrote:That's how I read it

Try reading it again.

Effing hell, hope Gallagher watches this reaction tomorrow morning. When even Amir Khan can pick huge holes in your tactics, it's time to rethink your career.

I had it 117-112 Frampton and while I have sympathy for the view that he did little in the first 4 rounds, I can't give a round to a guy throwing nothing in return. At least CF tried to force the fight, SQ reminded me of the trial horse coming in to give 4 rounds and go home unmarked to fight again next week, hugely disappointing approach, he proved what might have been possible 8 thru 11.

A couple of observations via Steve Farhood on Showtime:

"Quigg either had the worst fightplan in history or he froze for 7 rounds."

"Any debate over who won the fight was settled when Frampton won the 12th."

"No idea how you score that fight to Quigg"

Wants to see Santa Cruz vs Frampton down the line.