A serious question for those who believe Dirrell won

[NachoMan]

I know the legesitics of the sport, but boxing clearly isn't that black and white mate.

Dirrell can't expect to come to Froch's hometown and get a decision fighting the way he did, sorry. Even his own corner told him he needed a KO in the 12th.

His corner said that because they knew Dirrell was not going to get a fair shake on a decision in Nottingham, not because they thought he was losing. No corner ever wants to leave a fight to the judges in their opponents home town.

[Chunk..]

His corner said that because they knew Dirrell was not going to get a fair shake on a decision in Nottingham, not because they thought he was losing. No corner ever wants to leave a fight to the judges in their opponents home town.

That's the point i was making. I didn't have Dirrell losing going into the 12th but i knew he wasn't gonna to get the win on decision in Froch's backyard.

[Chase8400]

I know the legesitics of the sport, but boxing clearly isn't that black and white mate.
For what it's worth, i though Dirrell won, but the decision wasn't a shock at all.

That's all I needed to hear. As long as were on the same planet Chunk, I'm good. Carry on and have a shot for me. Or a Guiness if that suits you better.

[slicksouthpaw16]

The porpose of me saying that wasn't to convince you to think like everyone else. I'm very big on individuality. I was simply pointing out that your opinion on this is severely in the minority of the active census. There's a reason for that and I'll let you guess what that reason is.
Have a good evening.

Like i said, i respect eveyone's opinion but it never effects mine. Fact of the matter is, Dirrell was ineffective most of the times, and there was only one man ignitiating the exchanges and that was Froch. In the end, he won. There's a reason for that and I'll let you guess what the reason is.

Take care

I'm probably ******ed.

You should go and get that checked out.

[The Gambler1981]

I disagree I think Dirrell initiated. A lot of the rabbit punches that Froch land (points should of been taken off for even maybe DQ'd) were initiated by Dirrell clinches. Especially I think it was round 6. That was horrible. Dirrell clinched than landed punches in that round. If I am not mistaken it was round 6. Dirrell should be DQ'd for clinching aswell you can go both ways. Both are agaisnt the rules.

It was not all Dirrell, and it was not even close to Henry Akinwande level who did zero while only hugging Lewis. Dirrell fought effectively but also held.

Froch played a role in the holding aswell grabbing Dirrell's head, putting him in headlocks he held to slow Dirrell down so he could get off, watch teh fight again it is clear.

[jrosales13]

He tied him up because Crotch wouldn't stop cheating.

How so????

[Pullcounter]

I see both sides on arguements. Froch hardly landed anything. And Dirrell seemed content to just box and move in the early rounds.

there is no argument.

dirrell outboxed Froch and got robbed. you don't win fights by hardly landing anything... at least if you hardly land anything, you should KO the other guy like AA did.

I would rather be the one who is pressing the fight and chasing someone who was affraid of me, and also tying me up when i got close and complaining to the referee when i got inside.

I'd rather be the one who lands the cleaner punches... that guy was Dirrell and he got robbed.

I know the legesitics of the sport, but boxing clearly isn't that black and white mate.

Dirrell can't expect to come to Froch's hometown and get a decision fighting the way he did, sorry. Even his own corner told him he needed a KO in the 12th.

You need to be aggressive on away days, not run and hold and hope boxing suddenly becomes fair and that you'll get the right and honorable decision.

For what it's worth, i though Dirrell won, but the decision wasn't a shock at all.

Dirrell can and should expect fair judging... he got robbed.

[jrosales13]

It was not all Dirrell, and it was not even close to Henry Akinwande level who did zero while only hugging Lewis. Dirrell fought effectively but also held.

Froch played a role in the holding aswell grabbing Dirrell's head, putting him in headlocks he held to slow Dirrell down so he could get off, watch teh fight again it is clear.

I agree and you should watch the fight again aswell bro. Again what I saw every time Froch grabbed a hold of Dirrell was Dirrell initiating to begin with. And, watch round 6. There should of been atleast 2 points for that one. Maybe even DQ.

[The Gambler1981]

That's the point i was making. I didn't have Dirrell losing going into the 12th but i knew he wasn't gonna to get the win on decision in Froch's backyard.

That is pretty much correct, I was not shocked or even mad even though I thought Dirrell outclassed Froch and lost money on the fight. He fought the way he fought which in a way was brillient because Froch could not do anything about it, but in another guys hometown that is a hard way to get the nod.

[BMWM3P]

there is no argument.

dirrell outboxed Froch and got robbed. you don't win fights by hardly landing anything... at least if you hardly land anything, you should KO the other guy like AA did.


I'd rather be the one who lands the cleaner punches... that guy was Dirrell and he got robbed.


Dirrell can and should expect fair judging... he got robbed.

Just one look at your dumb sig says it all, you can't score a fight worth a ****.

If Froch wasn't landing anything and Dirrell was landing at will. Then why the *** would he need to run and hold like his life depended on it?