ESPN's Dan Rafael: 114-113 for Froch

[!! Shawn]

Just reading his chats. He said Dirrell gave up too many rounds by running and holding.

http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/chat...ael-after-dark. Don't know if the links will be updated or something. If it doesn't work, just go to ESPN boxing, then go to chat.

Dan has always been ******ed, no idea why he gets any respect. Guy is the fatest palest loser I have ever seen.

[-EX-]

What does Dan Rafael know about running...he has never seen it or done it in his life.

But I'm sorry Dirrell won that fight...but I guess in a close fight(if it was...I aint score it) the champ may get the benefit of the doubt...

[Freddy Krueger]

Dan Rafael doesn't even watch fights, he got caught lying about his scorecard on another fight he didn't even watch. Plus, the british announcers even had Dirrell winning and we know how biased their asses are. They had it much closer then most of us, I don't give Froch rounds when he is punching air throwing Dirrell on the ground. Headlocking the **** out of dirrell.

[-EX-]

Yea the British announcers did feel Dirrell had won the fight...Froch did capture some middle rounds and maybe 1 early round...

I think he won 3-4 rounds but I honestly aint score it...

[crold1]

Dan Rafael doesn't even watch fights, he got caught lying about his scorecard on another fight he didn't even watch. Plus, the british announcers even had Dirrell winning and we know how biased their asses are. They had it much closer then most of us, I don't give Froch rounds when he is punching air throwing Dirrell on the ground. Headlocking the **** out of dirrell.

Dan watches more fights than almost any living boxing writer.

[#4#king]

rafael probably thinks GB beat the US in the revolutionary war too...

[Freddy Krueger]

Dan watches more fights than almost any living boxing writer.

On another topic not sure if someone was trying to slander Dan but they said Dan lied about watching a fight. I believe it was the chris john/Marquez fight. And he had some bogus scorecard for it too... Again that user may have made it all up.

[gqjohnb]

Dan's just one of those guys who will give a guy the win just because of the style. He's just a biased writer who goes with what he likes which is very linear and narrow. In my opinion that gets no respect when your a writer. If you write for boxing you should be able to appreciate many aspects of the sport. You can't just give a guy the win because the other guy clinched when in range even though he was landing the more effective shots and avoiding the other guys shots. I've formed my opinion about Dan Rafael from reading and listening to his work on the espn site.

[BOX-A-LOT]

Just reading his chats. He said Dirrell gave up too many rounds by running and holding.

http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/chat...ael-after-dark. Don't know if the links will be updated or something. If it doesn't work, just go to ESPN boxing, then go to chat.

Man, that's what I thought too, being slick and landing here and there is simply not good enough, unless your name is Floyd jr.

That's why I always advice my gym mates, that whenever they get their opponent out of position, to make 'em pay, rather than just back away.

[BOX-A-LOT]

Dan watches more fights than almost any living boxing writer.

How did you score it Cliff?

I wish I scored the fight as I was watching it. But, I felt Dirrell did enough, but, again, not scoring it round by round, there were probably about 5 rounds that were hard to score.

Because there was alot of posing by both fighters and the fact that Froch was the one that kept stepping and stepping towards Dirrell may have been the difference in those tough rounds to score.

I also don't understand how Froch got away with a body slam. I mean, for chrissakes, the rules are very clear, body slams are illegal! and Froch didn't even get a warning for it.