BoxRec

Here is the Froch vs Groves fight in full :

The moment that Foster stops the fight is at around 37mins 47 seconds of the video..................

At that point, look at Groves, though the angle is from behind and not in front. He is leaning forward with his hands completely down. This is the crucial moment for me. Yes, he should have been given a standing eight count, but watch that piece of footage a few times and you can see why Foster decided to stop the fight in a split second decision.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F8qon7UC_A0

Anyone remember this premature stoppage from Foster? This was appalling ..... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gz8lPVBR-d8

Quix wrote:Here is the Froch vs Groves fight in full :

The moment that Foster stops the fight is at around 37mins 37 seconds of the video..................

At that point, look at Groves, though the angle is from behind and not in front. He is leaning forward with his hands completely down. This is the crucial moment for me. Yes, he should have been given a standing eight count, but watch that piece of footage a few times and you can see why Foster decided to stop the fight in a split second decision.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F8qon7UC_A0

Standing eight not possible unless Groves put a knee down, either Groves knew he was ok and could battle through or he was not savy enough to take a knee, he should have took a knee but why would he if he was fully cohearent, he said in an interview he knew exactly what was going on and he would have weathered it no problem therefore no knee, no eight count, we will never know

columbo wrote:Anyone remember this premature stoppage from Foster? This was appalling ..... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gz8lPVBR-d8

I think that was a little different. The guy was clerly getting busted up and nothing was coming back at all. It was the first round of a non event fight and Foster knew that the kid was just a punch bag for DeGale.

macaca wrote:

Quix wrote:Here is the Froch vs Groves fight in full :

The moment that Foster stops the fight is at around 37mins 37 seconds of the video..................

At that point, look at Groves, though the angle is from behind and not in front. He is leaning forward with his hands completely down. This is the crucial moment for me. Yes, he should have been given a standing eight count, but watch that piece of footage a few times and you can see why Foster decided to stop the fight in a split second decision.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F8qon7UC_A0

Standing eight not possible unless Groves put a knee down, either Groves knew he was ok and could battle through or he was not savy enough to take a knee, he should have took a knee but why would he if he was fully cohearent, he said in an interview he knew exactly what was going on and he would have weathered it no problem therefore no knee, no eight count, we will never know

Cheers for the pointer mate. I was going on what Adam Booth said......................
In all fairness to Groves, he would say that wouldn't he. I thought at the moment he dropped his hands, he looked in desperate trouble. I think Froch would have finished it, perhaps not with a clean knock out, but an eventual intervention by Foster.

Groove Armada wrote:He lost composure for a split second. It's a world title fight. Fosters WWE move was not needed.

Think Lennox vs Shannon Briggs when Lennox was all over the place.

Froch was given warrior points. Groves was labelled chinny.

Stoppage was not good.

Depends on who you supported for the fight as to the way you will see the outcome. Lost composure or has enough experience to stop something awful happenning ? Like i say, if your a Froch fan you can see the sense of it, if you are a Groves fan then it's a robbery. All i am satying is that when you look at the video from around 37.47 and watch it a few times, you can see why Foster perhaps made the judgement he did. Groves was bent forward, moving in a direction he wasn't in control of and his hands were completely down. I am not trying to justify the decision, but i think it's possibly a tad more understanding when you see the footage in the cold light of day.

Appalling stuff.

Aside from the fact that Groves was actually doing fairly well in the round prior to being in trouble, he probably took only 3-4 good shots in the entire final sequence, and he doesn't lean forward with his hands down until Foster grabs him. Cannot believe anyone would try to defend that.

Quix wrote:

Groove Armada wrote:He lost composure for a split second. It's a world title fight. Fosters WWE move was not needed.

Think Lennox vs Shannon Briggs when Lennox was all over the place.

Froch was given warrior points. Groves was labelled chinny.

Stoppage was not good.

Depends on who you supported for the fight as to the way you will see the outcome. Lost composure or has enough experience to stop something awful happenning ? Like i say, if your a Froch fan you can see the sense of it, if you are a Groves fan then it's a robbery. All i am satying is that when you look at the video from around 37.47 and watch it a few times, you can see why Foster perhaps made the judgement he did. Groves was bent forward, moving in a direction he wasn't in control of and his hands were completely down. I am not trying to justify the decision, but i think it's possibly a tad more understanding when you see the footage in the cold light of day.

His hands aren't completely down until the referee stopped it.

columbo wrote:Anyone remember this premature stoppage from Foster? This was appalling ..... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gz8lPVBR-d8

Why even let them fight if he's going to stop it like that? Degale lands a few good shots over a period of 2 minutes or so and that's it?

Groove Armada wrote:

Quix wrote:

columbo wrote:Anyone remember this premature stoppage from Foster? This was appalling ..... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gz8lPVBR-d8

I think that was a little different. The guy was clerly getting busted up and nothing was coming back at all. It was the first round of a non event fight and Foster knew that the kid was just a punch bag for DeGale.

Not different. That was dilks world title fight!
He took eff all of note. Howard foster has done that before. A favourite was being batters and he let it go. As soon as the other guy was in a bit of trouble he stopped it. Was the opponent Max Maxwell?

It wasn't a world title fight, it was for an international title. The Dilks kid was clearly out of his depth, taking some big shots. He was only ever going to ship more punishment.

It was the first round. Plenty of guys have shaky starts but rebound to do well. Maybe that wouldn't have been the case with Dilks, but he shouldn't have been stopped just because he took a few.

I dont think his hands are down. He appears to be trying to maul forward and tie Froch up. Common sense tells you he probably would have been stopped in the next 10-15 seconds anyway but he didnt get his chance to prove otherwise.

Common sense doesn't tell me that. Plenty of guys get hurt like that but survive.

crusader wrote:

Quix wrote:

Groove Armada wrote:He lost composure for a split second. It's a world title fight. Fosters WWE move was not needed.

Think Lennox vs Shannon Briggs when Lennox was all over the place.

Froch was given warrior points. Groves was labelled chinny.

Stoppage was not good.

Depends on who you supported for the fight as to the way you will see the outcome. Lost composure or has enough experience to stop something awful happenning ? Like i say, if your a Froch fan you can see the sense of it, if you are a Groves fan then it's a robbery. All i am satying is that when you look at the video from around 37.47 and watch it a few times, you can see why Foster perhaps made the judgement he did. Groves was bent forward, moving in a direction he wasn't in control of and his hands were completely down. I am not trying to justify the decision, but i think it's possibly a tad more understanding when you see the footage in the cold light of day.

His hands aren't completely down until the referee stopped it.

That is like counting how many revolutions on a fly's wing. You can do it because it's in slow motion. At normal speed, you can't really tell. All i am saying if anyone is prepared to listen, which i doubt, is that it doesn't justify the stoppage in may respects, but it does make it more understandable if you view it back a few times.

I've viewed it many times, listened to your points, and I still think it was a horrible stoppage. At what time in the video do you first see Groves bent over with his hands totally down?

It strikes me the argument is this :

1. Can't fornicating stand Froch, the loudmouth twat = I don't agree with Foster

Or

2. I quite like Froch = Foster did what he had to do for the safety of the fighter.

lol.................Goodnight gentlemen

Maybe the "free shot" Froch was talking about was the one at 37.35 of the video. Heard Foster shout break, had a look at GG and landed a nice left.

Quix wrote:It strikes me the argument is this :

1. Can't effing stand Froch, the loudmouth twat = I don't agree with Foster

Or

2. I quite like Froch = Foster did what he had to do for the safety of the fighter.

lol.................Goodnight gentlemen

Or it was a bad stoppage for reasons independent of who one supports........

Goodnight!

crusader wrote:I've viewed it many times, listened to your points, and I still think it was a horrible stoppage. At what time in the video do you first see Groves bent over with his hands totally down?

For me it happens at the same time. Groves leans forward and his hands drop and Foster's arms go around him........

My point, AGAIN, is that it doesn't excuse the decision, it just perhaps makes it more undertandable when you watch the video a few times and see it from Foster's viewpoint. Only more undertandable, that's all. It's only a boxing match to me, i won't argue my points over and over again lol. Just thought it would add to the chat that's all. I could be wrong, who gives a shit

crusader wrote:

Quix wrote:It strikes me the argument is this :

1. Can't effing stand Froch, the loudmouth twat = I don't agree with Foster

Or

2. I quite like Froch = Foster did what he had to do for the safety of the fighter.

lol.................Goodnight gentlemen

Or it was a bad stoppage for reasons independent of who one supports........

Goodnight!

Boxing doesn't work like that and you know it lol...................

I am sorry your man didn't win lol

I'm not even close to being a Groves fan. It's totally inane for you to suggest that people's opinions on the stoppage are dictated only by which fighter they prefer.

crusader wrote:Appalling stuff.

Aside from the fact that Groves was actually doing fairly well in the round prior to being in trouble, he probably took only 3-4 good shots in the entire final sequence, and he doesn't lean forward with his hands down until Foster grabs him. Cannot believe anyone would try to defend that.

You must be Groves fan to get so worked up about it lol..............Calm down

I am not trying to defend it !!!!!!!!!!! How many more times do i have to say that it DOESN'T EXCUSE THE DECISION !!! lol

I said that it PERHAPS made the decision more understandable........................That's all

crusader wrote:I'm not even close to being a Groves fan. It's totally inane for you to suggest that people's opinions on the stoppage are dictated only by which fighter they prefer.

Oh, your a Groves fan alright lol.........

Put it this way, you are certainly not a Froch fan !!!

Saying that something makes the decision more understandable is a way of partially rationalizing the stoppage. I've continually see people do this by saying, 'well it shouldn't have been stopped, but (insert reason to stop it).'

I don't have to be a fan of any boxer to be disgusted with horrible stoppages, and it's not like I'm brooding over it night and day.

Quix wrote:

crusader wrote:I'm not even close to being a Groves fan. It's totally inane for you to suggest that people's opinions on the stoppage are dictated only by which fighter they prefer.

Oh, your a Groves fan alright lol.........

Put it this way, you are certainly not a Froch fan !!!

Not a fan of either.

Nice trolling; I thought you were going to bed