Im sick of these people trying make a case for that loser Froch

this is why i enjoy the tourney style so much. Froch isn't going to be able to pull this bullshit in the next group fights. The Froch myth will be unveiled sooner than later more specifically his roy jones jr technique. it worked for roy because he was athletically sound and gifted, i dont know who hes fooling with the wide hooks and lack of hand speed.

Froch got a gift. he knew he was winning the minute the fight site became england

Carl Froch makes margarito look like Bernard Hopkins and Roy Jones put together.

:lol1: :lol1: Don't be a dick sam.. Yeah but come on man, you gotta be winding us up. You know I love you really. :luvbed: 100% free webcam site! | Awesome chicks and it is absolutely free! | Watch free live sex cam - easy as 1-2-3

Froch got a gift.

He won on ring generalship, effective aggressiveness and clean punching. Dirrell was hit cleanly as evidenced by his bloody nose and welts on his face. 8-4 Carlos Frochos. Seriously, get the **** out of here. 100% free webcam site! | Awesome chicks and it is absolutely free! | Watch free live sex cam - easy as 1-2-3

me and 2 of my friends were screaming at the tv about all of frochs rabbit punches... every other second it was a punch to the back of the head Pretty blatant too. I don't have much sympathy for Dirrell when he held and turned his head so the punch to the side hit him in the back of his head... you shouldn't expose the back of your head and not expect it to get hit like that. BUT, when Froch had him bending straight over, and was punching him to the back of the head... that's ridiculous. I thought it was crazy that the guy who held got a point taken away, but the guy who landed flush twice on the break, rabbit punched constantly, and hip tossed his opponent did not get a point taken. But I'm only saying this because I'm a Froch hater and an American. :usa1:

me and 2 of my friends were screaming at the tv about all of frochs rabbit punches... every other second it was a punch to the back of the head I hear ya reed, although I wasn't quite screaming at the TV because it was 3 AM in my house. I can't believe Froch got away with such blatantly dirty tactics. If Froch was winning this fight fairly, why did he feel the need to cheat? That mother****er knew he was losing and being made to look like an amateur. I'm not even a Froch basher, I've been supportive of him until now, but he fought like shit. 100% free webcam site! | Awesome chicks and it is absolutely free! | Watch free live sex cam - easy as 1-2-3

me and 2 of my friends were screaming at the tv about all of frochs rabbit punches... every other second it was a punch to the back of the head

I have yet to see a solid case made for Froch and really do not know what he did to win the fight. I know what Dirrelll did that is how he fights and he even though he looked sloppy and held a good deal that does not really change that he was the one landing the cleaner effective punches. To me Froch did zero in the fight so even if Dirrell was not really dominating he was doing something, something is much greater then nothing. Out of all the so-called "bad decisions" this year I can make cases for either side in Berto-Collazo, John-Juarez 1, Cotto-Clottey and Diaz-Malinaggi I can make a case for either side winning those fight (or a draw) in this fight I can not find a way to make a case for Froch to win more then four rounds. Really I can not think of a worse decision this year in a big fight, it might not be a robbery but it is pretty bad.

the rounds were close and a lot could have gone either way! I like both fighters but prefer dirrells style. My impression after the fight was a point win either way or preferably a draw. I was suprised how 2 judges had it 3 points for froch, but a robbery it was NOT!!!!!!!!!:?!: The rounds were not close because Froch made them competitive, they were close because Dirrell did what he had to, to win the rounds, if you watch that fight closely for what actually lands Dirrell won clearly, even with a point deduction.

If anyone should have been DQ'd it was Froch for those rabbit punches, Dirrell schooled him.

I'm a Froch supporter but I think he lost. Wasn't a robbery or anything but Dirrell didn't do himself any favors but holding so much

Yeah, it was shit. Dirrell won't be able to draw flies after that. Mind you, its a good job Froch has been in some good fights in the past other wise noone would want to watch one of his fights again either.

for me they both deserved a draw, or a dq. that was a horrible fight on both counts. shit!

Of course he ran! and didnt punch quite enough! If he'd have stood his ground a little more the judges would have been kinder to him. its just not good to watch all that back peddling I don't know, it appeared to me he punched a lot more than the other guy. And landed a lot more too. Guy must be magician to pull that off while running.

I don't understand this running bit. Did he clinch excessively? Yes. Run? Huh??? Of course he ran! and didnt punch quite enough! If he'd have stood his ground a little more the judges would have been kinder to him. its just not good to watch all that back peddling

I was at ringside for the fight and I thought it was shit fight with lots of close rounds, I've watched the Showtime coverage and I think Bernstein is pretty much right, it was a very hard fight to score. I had Dirrell by 1 point. If he'd have fought the first 9 rounds like he did the last 3 he would've won easily - it was by no means the robbery some people are making it out to be. I read a stat that he (Dirrell) only threw 20 punches in the first 4 or 5 rounds... You can't win a world title being that negative. But saying that Froch was dire at times and seemed to be thinking far too much at times when he should've just let his hands go. He has a lot of work to do if he's going to beat Kessler, but stylistically its probably a better fight for Froch as he won't have to go looking for Kessler as much as he did Dirrell but still if Kessler is still prime (which lets be honest we can't be certein he is, he hasn't fought a world class opponent since Calzaghe, and by the time the Froch fight takes place will be over 3 years ago) she should have too much for Froch. But either way it will be a great fight to watch.

Im sick of these people trying make a case for that loser Froch. Plain and basic commonsense. How do you win a fight where you are out landed in almost every rounds and you dont score the cleaner harder shots? Froch was also hurt in the fight. You can pretend all you like but you know what i just said is an undisputed fact!!!!!! If Froch was landing the volume and Dirrell was landing the cleaner shots sporadically i could understand someone calling Froch the winner, but how do you get outworked &!!!!!! not land the cleaner shots and win the fight. Its absolutely retarded to think Froch won that fight, it was not even a close fight, the only thing that was close about the fight was how narrowly the rounds were won, they were not won narrowly because Froch made them competitive they were won narrowly because Dirrell threw as much as he needed to throw to take the rounds. Even if you dont think Dirrell won there is no way Froch won, even the most biased Froch fan applying some commonsense would have to say Dirrell did enough not to lose to get a draw. GET A CLUE FROCH SUPPORTERS the rounds were close and a lot could have gone either way! I like both fighters but prefer dirrells style. My impression after the fight was a point win either way or preferably a draw. I was suprised how 2 judges had it 3 points for froch, but a robbery it was NOT!!!!!!!!!:?!:

How many punches did Froch actually land? I haven't seen any stats for this fight but I reckon it's probably an embarrassingly low number. I dont know, but yes more than likely a pitiful number.