Carl Froch Edges Andre Dirrell With Split Call Verdict

[SHB]

I had it 8-3-1 to Dirrell, and I'm even debating whether Froch even won 3 rounds. Dirrell didn't do himself any favours with his tactics, but he clearly won the fight. Did Froch actually land a single punch all fight?

[handler000]

The slip and run tactics of Dirrell really made this a very dull fight despite Froch trying unsuccessfully to cut the ring down the entire match and actually make a fight of it. It also made it very difficult to score and very much more subjective than most fights.

Who do you go for, a guy who is throwing a few cleaner and crisper punches but has nothing much behind them as he's more interested in staying out of trouble, or a guy who is struggling bigtime to catch the runner but does look like he hurt the other guy when he did manage to catch him, and is actually trying to fight?

Everyone judges a fight differently. I actually think Froch gave a pretty honest interview at the end there. You can't come and take a title away from someone who is trying to fight by running and holding most of the time. Dirrells defence was superb on the night, he looked very slick and sharp the whole 12 rounds bar the 2 or 3 times Froch caught up with him and he had to hold on. His footwork in particular was very impressive. Froch stalked him also for the whole 12 and couldn't quite close the gap except those few times. Trouble is, I just don't think you can call it a Dirrell win cos I don't think you should win a fight by being so very negative. Froch was the one trying to have a fight with a guy who just didn't want to know.

While some people might disagree with that, to call it a disgrace or robbery is a bit naive in my opinion.

So if Froch only caught up with him 2 or 3 times how can it NOT be a robbery? Now that is naive. If Dirrell was running how is it that Froch was the one doing the chicken dance? Get a clue about the sport before you comment on it.

[AnthrAxNSB]

There are a few members who saw the fight in much the same way I did. I scored the fight 118-109 Dirrell. I thought three of the rounds I gave Dirrell were close. One of the rounds I gave to Froch was close. So, even if I gave Froch all of the close rounds, I have the fight 115-112 Dirrell. That's the scoring.

I thought Dirrell made Froch look silly for much of the fight. Froch had a terrible time reaching him and threw winging punches that missed wide quite often. I also thought Froch fought quite dirty, and it was particularly conspicuous early, as frustration was setting in. The rabbit punches, the belly-to-belly suplex, the backhand. Later, it was rabbit punches and forearm shots. That Froch was not deducted a point for any of this despite a number of warnings is outrageous, particularly considering Dirrell was deducted a point for holding.

However, Dirrell did punch and hold quite a bit, though at least he threw combinations and then held. This wasn't a Hopkins vs. Anybody, Ruiz vs. Anybody or Ward vs. Miranda scene. And, Dirrell did skip around the ring. Skipping around the ring isn't a foul, though, unless you are not fighting in between (see Klitschko vs. Arreola). In this case, skipping around the ring was intelligent defense.

I think what will be most stunning is the punch stat numbers, because I suspect Froch's accuracy was below 20% and Dirrells was around 40%. What's worse (with respect to this decision), is that I also think Dirrell likely out-threw Froch (or it was more or less even). I think Dirrell landed more of everything...well, except rabbit punches. He landed the more effective shots, more power shots, and more jabs. And his defense was superb throughout the fight.

Even giving Froch the close rounds, I still had Dirrell winning seven rounds, Froch winning four, and one round even (because of the point deduction).

This was a robbery.

[DJ Keno]

This is sad. I found it funny how the Showtime cast tried to prevent saying the word "robbery". They implied something was icky, but since this is their tournament, they didn't want to cast doubts on the first night. Really really sad.

Very ugly fight but I don't blame Direll for holding too much. He is an outside fighter so everytime he felt he was out of his range, he either jumped around like a clown to avoid him or holded. Totally valid if you ask me. Now Froch's holding and hitting (and unpenalized illegal tactics), that's cheap, but that was the only way he could get a few punches. But still, even with all this, Direll landed more clean effective punches through the fight to win it. Shame shame shame. And more shame!

Whoever feels Froch won should feel ashamed to even post here. And I'm not a fan of either one.

[NachoMan]

So if Froch only caught up with him 2 or 3 times how can it NOT be a robbery? Now that is naive. If Dirrell was running how is it that Froch was the one doing the chicken dance? Get a clue about the sport before you comment on it.

Co-signed.

[lildee2020]

History repeats itself. You need to knock the champ down or out to win the fight? Leaving it up to the judges is always risky.

i co-sign that. dirrell won hands down, but he really needs to work on his inside game.

[kingfaze19]

another hometown decision,another robbery, well what do you expect, after all this is the sport of boxing right? this is disgusting, froch couldnt even tickle dirrel let alone hit him, i said it before il say it again, i love boxing but that was BULL****

[NachoMan]

There are a few members who saw the fight in much the same way I did. I scored the fight 118-109 Dirrell. I thought three of the rounds I gave Dirrell were close. One of the rounds I gave to Froch was close. So, even if I gave Froch all of the close rounds, I have the fight 115-112 Dirrell. That's the scoring.

I thought Dirrell made Froch look silly for much of the fight. Froch had a terrible time reaching him and threw winging punches that missed wide quite often. I also thought Froch fought quite dirty, and it was particularly conspicuous early, as frustration was setting in. The rabbit punches, the belly-to-belly suplex, the backhand. Later, it was rabbit punches and forearm shots. That Froch was not deducted a point for any of this despite a number of warnings is outrageous, particularly considering Dirrell was deducted a point for holding.

However, Dirrell did punch and hold quite a bit, though at least he threw combinations and then held. This wasn't a Hopkins vs. Anybody, Ruiz vs. Anybody or Ward vs. Miranda scene. And, Dirrell did skip around the ring. Skipping around the ring isn't a foul, though, unless you are not fighting in between (see Klitschko vs. Arreola). In this case, skipping around the ring was intelligent defense.

I think what will be most stunning is the punch stat numbers, because I suspect Froch's accuracy was below 20% and Dirrells was around 40%. What's worse (with respect to this decision), is that I also think Dirrell likely out-threw Froch (or it was more or less even). I think Dirrell landed more of everything...well, except rabbit punches. He landed the more effective shots, more power shots, and more jabs. And his defense was superb throughout the fight.

Even giving Froch the close rounds, I still had Dirrell winning seven rounds, Froch winning four, and one round even (because of the point deduction).

This was a robbery.

Good and reasoned post. I agree with everything except your guess on Froch's accuracy. I'd be stunned to find that Froch landed more than 2% of his punches.

[handler000]

History repeats itself. You need to knock the champ down or out to win the fight? Leaving it up to the judges is always risky.

Dirrell would have needed 5 knockdowns just to make it close.

[Sroey]

I havent seen much of Direll but he is a real talent and was unlucky not to get the decision. I would be mad as hell if I followed Direll. Froch was lucky tonight...he was made to look clumsy - Froch may have the points - but Direll won a lot of fans tonight.