answert these questions for the froch dirrell fight..

poor excuse since tinothy bradley beat junior witter by decision and a split one at that...nextttttt thats because he whooped witters ass. if u win a split decision in ur hometown u know u lost the fight.

b/c they knew the deal.....dirrell would never get a fair decision under the circumstances. the only way he could've won, was not leave it up to the judges..... poor excuse since tinothy bradley beat junior witter by decision and a split one at that...nextttttt

Just answer these simple questions... Why did hbo not say it was dodgy decision??? Why did the non english referees all score it to froch... whyt did the press have froch winning apart from one who had it a draw.. Why did dirrells corner say "you got kncok him out to win this" in thje final round... Why did allan green have froch winning by 3 rounds... Why did *ea5t5ide boxing have froch winning.. Why did dirrell only box for 20 percent of the fight, land about 0.1 percent of those punches and not leave one mark on froch.. Why was dirrells face bloody and swollen with bleding nose and lips...?? Good lukc in answering these questions.. b/c they knew the deal.....dirrell would never get a fair decision under the circumstances. the only way he could've won, was not leave it up to the judges.....

Froch won with the smallest margin possible. some statements are legit. Answer my questions though: Why does Froch look like an amateur? Why did he struggle so much against a inexperienced Fighter like Dirrell? What was that funny walk he made at the end of round 10? Why the low connect ratio for Froch? Etc.. Why does Froch look like an amateur? He won the fight, hes beaten pascal the world light heavyweight, jermaine taylor the middle weight king and now dirrell , pretty good for a amature... Why did he struggle so much against a inexperienced Fighter like Dirrell? That was dirrells 19th fight, hea avery skillful fighter, and came with negative tactics..he didnt want to stand toe to toe with froch as he would have been flattered. As froch said if you have someone whos very slick and add his negativity you have a spoiler... What was that funny walk he made at the end of round 10? dirrells only attack of the match...whats those picture in my sig, oh froch landing jabs all night with got him the deserved victory.. Why the low connect ratio for Froch? Why the low connect ratio for dirrell, as i say dirrells face was a bloody mess froch didnt have a mark..look at my sig, says it all really... As i say froch will go down as a great not one poster on here as pout debated me...

Just answer these simple questions... Why did hbo not say it was dodgy decision??? showtime knows that if they call it a robbery it will ruin the tourney. Why did the non english referees all score it to froch... the non-english judges are paid by the english promoters whyt did the press have froch winning apart from one who had it a draw.. which press are you talking about? the UK press? Why did dirrells corner say "you got kncok him out to win this" in thje final round... cause they knew he was gonna get robbed Why did allan green have froch winning by 3 rounds... cause dirrell is green's rival in he USA. its the same as when witter was shitting all over hatton to steal some shine. Why did *ea5t5ide boxing have froch winning.. cause they love euros over there... they are biased. Why did dirrell only box for 20 percent of the fight, land about 0.1 percent of those punches and not leave one mark on froch.. dirrell outboxed froch. he landed more punches than froch. froch barely landed more than 15 punches the whole fight. Why was dirrells face bloody and swollen with bleding nose and lips...?? cause froch has decent power and maybe dirrell is a bleeder... Good lukc in answering these questions.. good luck justifying a robbery

Froch won with the smallest margin possible. some statements are legit. Answer my questions though: Why does Froch look like an amateur? Why did he struggle so much against a inexperienced Fighter like Dirrell? What was that funny walk he made at the end of round 10? Why the low connect ratio for Froch? Etc.. Why is it Froch wants the rest of his fights to be at home?

Froch can have this one. He fought like a professional and applied enough pressure to win enough rounds to get a split decision in his home town. That being said, Andre Dirrell looked a bit inexperienced. I'd bet anything that in a rematch, Dirrell would dominate Froch. Too quick, too precise, and too smart. You can say Froch won, okay maybe he did. But don't act like Froch put on a clinic or anything. For the majority of the fight, he looked flustered and frustrated. As was clearly seen when he threw Dirrell to the ground, Froch was baffled by Dirrell's speed, and couldn't connect like he wanted. Credit to Froch for his determination, but to reference another post in this thread, "Sorry Carl, he's just the better fighter". And for those that say Dirrell just ran the whole night, how does that explain the fact that not only did Dirrell land the more powerful, meaningful shots, but he landed more and at a much higher percentage. I remember exchanges where Froch would whiff or graze Dirrell 5-6 times, and the crowd would go nuts. Dirrell would usually counter and land a solid hook or two and win the exchange. So again, do I think Dirrell won? Maybe, but he didn't win convincingly, and to beat a defending champ in his backyard, you need to. But there's one thing that I don't have doubts about. Dirrell is the better athlete and the better fighter. With more seasoning he would've beaten Froch easily, and if they fight again I expect an easy night for Dirrell. good post and i was wondering why the referee wasn't pistol whipped for all the non calls on froch...last thing we need is another gman/benn situation...

Just answer these simple questions... Why did hbo not say it was dodgy decision??? Why did the non english referees all score it to froch... whyt did the press have froch winning apart from one who had it a draw.. Why did dirrells corner say "you got kncok him out to win this" in thje final round... Why did allan green have froch winning by 3 rounds... Why did *ea5t5ide boxing have froch winning.. Why did dirrell only box for 20 percent of the fight, land about 0.1 percent of those punches and not leave one mark on froch.. Why was dirrells face bloody and swollen with bleding nose and lips...?? Good lukc in answering these questions.. Froch won with the smallest margin possible. some statements are legit. Answer my questions though: Why does Froch look like an amateur? Why did he struggle so much against a inexperienced Fighter like Dirrell? What was that funny walk he made at the end of round 10? Why the low connect ratio for Froch? Etc..

Just answer these simple questions... Why did hbo not say it was dodgy decision??? Why did the non english referees all score it to froch... whyt did the press have froch winning apart from one who had it a draw.. Why did dirrells corner say "you got kncok him out to win this" in thje final round... Why did allan green have froch winning by 3 rounds... Why did *ea5t5ide boxing have froch winning.. Why did dirrell only box for 20 percent of the fight, land about 0.1 percent of those punches and not leave one mark on froch.. Why was dirrells face bloody and swollen with bleding nose and lips...?? Good lukc in answering these questions.. The answer to those questions was Tarver's comments at the end of the fight. I think that basically told the story.

dirrell clearly won the fight you can tell from carls face at the end he knew he had lost he got a lucky decision he just isnt that good,he got outboxed by a green prospect and frochs carer will be over after his next 2 fights,thank god

Froch can have this one. He fought like a professional and applied enough pressure to win enough rounds to get a split decision in his home town. That being said, Andre Dirrell looked a bit inexperienced. I'd bet anything that in a rematch, Dirrell would dominate Froch. Too quick, too precise, and too smart. You can say Froch won, okay maybe he did. But don't act like Froch put on a clinic or anything. For the majority of the fight, he looked flustered and frustrated. As was clearly seen when he threw Dirrell to the ground, Froch was baffled by Dirrell's speed, and couldn't connect like he wanted. Credit to Froch for his determination, but to reference another post in this thread, "Sorry Carl, he's just the better fighter". And for those that say Dirrell just ran the whole night, how does that explain the fact that not only did Dirrell land the more powerful, meaningful shots, but he landed more and at a much higher percentage. I remember exchanges where Froch would whiff or graze Dirrell 5-6 times, and the crowd would go nuts. Dirrell would usually counter and land a solid hook or two and win the exchange. So again, do I think Dirrell won? Maybe, but he didn't win convincingly, and to beat a defending champ in his backyard, you need to. But there's one thing that I don't have doubts about. Dirrell is the better athlete and the better fighter. With more seasoning he would've beaten Froch easily, and if they fight again I expect an easy night for Dirrell.

Why did hbo not say it was dodgy decision??? I think you mean Showtime, and I assume they don't want to take the shine off the tournament - although the interviewer (I forget his name) clearly thought it was a dodgy result. They did all have Dirrell winning I believe. The British punditry team all looked very sheepish and alluded to it being a robbery, apart from Buncey too. Although even Buncey was reduced to effectively justifying the robbery ("Froch is the champion in his hometown you have to do extra to take the belt yadda yadda). Why did the non english referees all score it to froch... I have no idea. whyt did the press have froch winning apart from one who had it a draw.. They were all British and our boxing media is notoriously home-centric in their views. Why did dirrells corner say "you got kncok him out to win this" in thje final round... They rightly assumed they wouldn't get a fair shake. "They won't give you a decision here". Why did allan green have froch winning by 3 rounds... I have no idea. Why did Berto, Dawson, Cunningham and Ward have Dirrell winning comfortably? Why did *ea5t5ide boxing have froch winning.. I have no idea. Why did dirrell only box for 20 percent of the fight, land about 0.1 percent of those punches and not leave one mark on froch.. Dirrell landed more than Froch in every single round. Froch only landed about 4 non-jabs throughout the twelve rounds. Dirrell may not have done a lot but he did way more than Froch. Why did Froch not seem marked up? Maybe Dirrell lacks power or Froch just doesn't mark up easily - who knows, it's irrelevent anyway. Why was dirrells face bloody and swollen with bleding nose and lips...?? As above; everyone physically reacts to being hit differently. Oh, and boxing is scored on rounds won, not how bloodied up your face is for the record. Well put. The scores were off. 115-112 Froch makes literally no sense. It would mean that every round that was close was given to Froch, which is absurd because in some of those rounds he didn't land a single punch.

Um Hbo didnt say it was a dodgy decision because the fight was on Showtime lol

Why did hbo not say it was dodgy decision??? I think you mean Showtime, and I assume they don't want to take the shine off the tournament - although the interviewer (I forget his name) clearly thought it was a dodgy result. They did all have Dirrell winning I believe. The British punditry team, apart from Buncey, all looked very sheepish and alluded to it being a robbery too. Although even Buncey was reduced to effectively justifying the robbery ("Froch is the champion in his hometown you have to do extra to take the belt yadda yadda). Why did the non english referees all score it to froch... I have no idea. whyt did the press have froch winning apart from one who had it a draw.. They were all British and our boxing media is notoriously home-centric in their views. Why did dirrells corner say "you got kncok him out to win this" in thje final round... They rightly assumed they wouldn't get a fair shake. "They won't give you a decision here". Why did allan green have froch winning by 3 rounds... I have no idea. Why did Berto, Dawson, Cunningham and Ward have Dirrell winning comfortably? Why did *ea5t5ide boxing have froch winning.. I have no idea. Why did dirrell only box for 20 percent of the fight, land about 0.1 percent of those punches and not leave one mark on froch.. Dirrell landed more than Froch in every single round. Froch only landed about 4 non-jabs throughout the twelve rounds. Dirrell may not have done a lot but he did way more than Froch. Why did Froch not seem marked up? Maybe Dirrell lacks power or Froch just doesn't mark up easily - who knows, it's irrelevent anyway. Why was dirrells face bloody and swollen with bleding nose and lips...?? As above; everyone physically reacts to being hit differently. Oh, and boxing is scored on rounds won, not how bloodied up your face is for the record.

Just answer these simple questions... Why did hbo not say it was dodgy decision??? Why did the non english referees all score it to froch... whyt did the press have froch winning apart from one who had it a draw.. Why did dirrells corner say "you got kncok him out to win this" in thje final round... Why did allan green have froch winning by 3 rounds... Why did *ea5t5ide boxing have froch winning.. Why did dirrell only box for 20 percent of the fight, land about 0.1 percent of those punches and not leave one mark on froch.. Why was dirrells face bloody and swollen with bleding nose and lips...?? Good lukc in answering these questions.. Coz froch and Nottingham suck! Na jokin, good questions actually! Let's just wait fir kessler fight I guess