I can't figure out what the fuss is about. Every article I've seen keeps referring to the DQ as controversial. It was a hit straight to the face when he was down.
Any fighter would have been DQ'd. Reminds me of Jones V Griffin.
Where's the controversy? Am I missing something?
He acted like a coward, he had taken bigger punches in the fight.
He was hurt in the 10th round knockdown, you could see he didn't want to go 12 after that.
Pretty much all the controversy is whether or not Dirrell was faking/exaggerating it.
Hitting a opponent on the canvas is a very frequent foul. The only time it results in a DQ/no-contest is when the guy can't or won't continue the fight.