Carl Froch-Andre Dirrell: The Pre-Fight Report Card

[Carlisle]

Wess you are correct.. Dirrell schooled Froch. Rado picked Froch to win so of course he's going to try and save face because he's probably embarassed he supported Froch. Froch is limited which exactly what I have been saying, what you have been saying and which Dirrell made clear.

But those short spells won him 8 rounds on my card. Froch was running and being the aggressor but he himself hardly EVER landed and was being effectively countered regardless if Dirrell was running or not. I think people expected him sit there and **** with Froch because if that where the case he would lose. I also think they knew he likes run so this is what people use to suit there agenda as to why Dirrell lost. Running or NOT its a hit and don't get hit game called boxing and Dirrell won the boxing match. EASY. Froch won the "MMA" match. The incompetent REF should have deducted at least 2 points from Froch. It was unbelievable what he was turning the fight into. I cant imagine Froch fighting Hopkins. Froch would be DQ'ed because as a limited fighter he would result to dirty tactics and be DQ'ed due to Hopkins style.



I watched it on SHOWTIME and was shocked that they used the term "a close fight". I think they didn't want to sound biased. Because in no way at all was it a close fight "IMO". The rounds I DID give to Froch where out of sympathy. I just couldn't give him rounds when he hardly landed or when he did it was to the back of the head. Yes he kept coming forward but that was about it..... he didn't know what else to do and Dirrell is a green contender and all he knew was box and stay away from the inside where Froch wanted to be. It wasn't hard to see. Just because Dirrell didn't give Froch the fight he wanted does not make Dirrell the loser. In fact he fought a PERFECT fight. The judges just wanted to see a slugging match due to that being Froch's style...




I understand that but when all you do is chase and never hit anything or hit to the back of the head, use elbows, throw a fighter to the floor, push etc you cant score that as being effective. Froch was embarrassed and used dirty tactics to get points. He was CLEARLY being out boxed and out classed by a GREEN contender in Dirrell.



In Dirrell's case his punches where clean and effective to the point that Froch was getting frustrated. I had Dirrell winning and out landing Froch the entire first 6 rounds. I think it was 7,8,9 and10 Froch won, MAINLY due to dirty tactics and an incompetent ref. 11 and 12 Dirrell won and ultimately won the fight. It was CLEAR. More clear than the Clazaghe Hopkins fight. Joe slaps and has a windmill style that he just swings away. Dirrell did not.

[Dave Rado]

Wess you are correct.. Dirrell schooled Froch. Rado picked Froch to win so of course he's going to try and save face because he's probably embarassed he supported Froch. Froch is limited which exactly what I have been saying, what you have been saying and which Dirrell made clear.

Don't be daft. I don't support Froch, I don't think he stands a chance against Kessler or Abraham, and I only picked him to beat Dirrell because Dirrell had never fought anyone close to this level before, and has often been sloppy against the journeymen he has fought. I've always said that skills-wise, Froch is very limited, but he is a lot better than you pretend he is. This "discussion" only started because you made the ridiculous comment that no fighter who fights with his hands low can be possibly be any good, which is very ironic in view of who is in your sig. And regardless of the fact that it wouldn't have been so close without the point deduction, the fact is that it was close, in the opinion of most boxing experts. You can't just pretend the point deduction didn't happen.

[Carlisle]

I never said no fighter can fight with his hands low.. I said, " the first thing they teach you in boxing when you throw a jab is to bring it back to your chin to avoid an overhand counter" then your dumb ass referenced Ali and I replied "Froch is no Ali" in other words Froch doesn't have the natural ability to fight like that. You wouldn't know that because you've never boxed.

Furthermore, if you read my post I said the fight was not as close as the scores indicated. Close scores does not mean the fight was close it just means it was scored close. In this case it was scored close because of errors the ref made but that doesn't change the fact that Dirrell outclassed him.. He just got robbed due to ref not deducting from Froch instead deducting from Dirrell + it was in Nottingham.

Don't be daft. I don't support Froch, I don't think he stands a chance against Kessler or Abraham, and I only picked him to beat Dirrell because Dirrell had never fought anyone close to this level before, and has often been sloppy against the journeymen he has fought. I've always said that skills-wise, Froch is very limited, but he is a lot better than you pretend he is. This "discussion" only started because you made the ridiculous comment that no fighter who fights with his hands low can be possibly be any good, which is very ironic in view of who is in your sig. And regardless of the fact that it wouldn't have been so close without the point deduction, the fact is that it was close, in the opinion of most boxing experts. You can't just pretend the point deduction didn't happen.

[shogunn]

I just finished wtaching it on my DVR. I thought dirrel won, or at least it couldve been scored a draw. Clearly the ref who scored it 115-112 was looking for something else. I still dont know why that ref took away that point, while Froch was fighting dirty all night.

Dirrell cried a ***** much, especially when he was getting punched in the face. He spent alot of time on his knees for not getting punched.

Froch's style is ugly as ****.

[WESS]

Almost every boxing expert had it close. Boxingscene's fight report scored it to Dirrell by one round. So did Gary Shaw. So did The Ring. Showtime scored it to him by two rounds. Raphael scored it to Froch by one round. If you think it wasn't close, then you're entitled to your opinion, but almost every boxing expert disagreed with you.

I know and that is why I was shocked. I'm no expect by any means but I box and understand the game. I also understand that when your effectively hitting/countering/out landing the other guy you should be winning fairly easy. Yes Froch was the aggressor but wasn't effective with it in anyway. Just like Dirrell wasn't effective fighting on the inside which is why he "ran". IMO what he did was fight a perfect fight and what Froch did proved my point that Dirrell beat him. Froch was frustrated and dirty aka got schooled. It also proves that a GREEN contender in Dirrell presented the fans with a VERY VERY VERY limited fighter in Froch who didn't know what to do....

I also think US "experts" didn't want to sound biased especially since Kessler and AA are the favorites to win. No way do the Americans win this thing so why would the "experts" sound biased towards them when they probably wouldn't make it passed stage two of the tournament? I just don't see how it was that close. I mean it was almost a blow out IMO.... one guy desperately chasing the other while getting frustrated because he cant hit "properly" so he uses dirty tactics. The other runs all night because he cant fight in the inside but counters effectively. That's all you need when the other isn't doing anything but MMA. As I said before the fight, Forch would be exposed and embarrassed by a "GREEN" contender in Dirrell. I think I was right and I think to my credit for the fight being "CLOSE" it only proves me right since Froch is a "Champion" and Dirrell is............ well a contender a green one at that.

[slimshandy69]

Wess you are correct.. Dirrell schooled Froch. Rado picked Froch to win so of course he's going to try and save face because he's probably embarassed he supported Froch. Froch is limited which exactly what I have been saying, what you have been saying and which Dirrell made clear.

what are you smoking not one round i could give to dirrell not one..froch bloodied dirrells face and was poping him with the jab all nioght hence my sig..

Allan green, the showtime commentators, primetime commentators, ringside press, ea5t5ide boxing forums, boxing scne, and most importantly the non british judges all thought froch won...which is the correct decision...stop being jealous of froch...

[Carlisle]

Hold the laughter.. At least one person had Froch winning every round.

You have Froch winning every round? That doesn't even deserve a response.

what are you smoking not one round i could give to dirrell not one..froch bloodied dirrells face and was poping him with the jab all nioght hence my sig..

Allan green, the showtime commentators, primetime commentators, ringside press, ea5t5ide boxing forums, boxing scne, and most importantly the non british judges all thought froch won...which is the correct decision...stop being jealous of froch...