Should Froch Hand Over The Belt To Dirrell Like a Proud Warrior?

[The Dice]

This was a robbery.

[Drunk Punch]

Is that like a strawberry?

[Sparked_1985]

well, no. There were some rounds when Dirrell showed almost no attacking intent whatsoever.

You can't win a title like that, surely. If men won title fights by making opponents look foolish Emanuel Augustus would be pound for pound king. Dirrell is good but he spent 80% of the fight on his bike. Which is a shame because he could have stood in front of Froch and got the best of him but the solid punches he took disuaded him.

He could have got a decision but Dirrell would have been very lucky to do so.

[BoxCleva]

Why even vote on this? It's not going to happen. It's essentially another "who do you think won?" thread.

What I'm getting at is that, deep down, Froch will not be able to honestly claim he won the fight, it really wasn't a particularly close fight and after watching the film I'm pretty sure Froch would agree. Dirrell should have won a UD by at least a few rounds. Should Froch publicly acknowledge that, as a true warrior?

[Pullcounter]

froch has already convinced himself that he won, even though he didn't

[Drunk Punch]

I think Dirrell was really naive to think such negative tactics could win. If you are the defending champ, then maybe, just maybe you could retain your belt by dancing, holding, moving but you can't come to a foreign country and win a belt like that.

I would have more sympathy for Dirrell if he didn't talk so much **** before the fight.

[mickey malone]

Bad match of styles.. One guy desperately trying to attack another guy who is desperately trying to run.. No robbery, just a champ having to win ugly..

Kessler won't run, and he won't be able to KO Froch either.. Should be interesting..

[The_Visitation]

What I'm getting at is that, deep down, Froch will not be able to honestly claim he won the fight, it really wasn't a particularly close fight and after watching the film I'm pretty sure Froch would agree. Dirrell should have won a UD by at least a few rounds. Should Froch publicly acknowledge that, as a true warrior?

He doesn't have to 'claim' it, he did win it.

Before you can start on boxing knowledge you need some grasp of human nature! Even if you were right - which you aren't - of course Froch wouldn't agree "it really wasn't a particularly close fight", certainly in Dirrell's favour. C'mon, we've all seen fighters winning and losing far less close fights than that firmly convinced the result went in their favour!

[BoxCleva]

He doesn't have to 'claim' it, he did win it.

Before you can start on boxing knowledge you need some grasp of human nature! Even if you were right - which you aren't - of course Froch wouldn't agree "it really wasn't a particularly close fight", certainly in Dirrell's favour. C'mon, we've all seen fighters winning and losing far less close fights than that firmly convinced the result went in their favour!

I believe Froch has the integrity to acknowledge when he lost a fight, even going against his natural inclination to wallow in this pseudo-success. He was frustrated throughout the fight, unable to land consistently and looked slightly surprised when he was awarded the victory. Dirrell landed more and made Froch miss regularly - this is the art of hitting and not being hit.

I think the post-fight interview was a way to vent his frustrations at not being able to out-box Dirrell, he knew even at that point that he was lucky to get away with it. When he reviews the fight I'm pretty certain he'll admit, at least to himself, that Dirrell won it. This wasn't even as close as Hopkins vs Calzaghe, Dirrell won by a comfortable margin.

[The_Visitation]

I believe Froch has the integrity to acknowledge when he lost a fight, even going against his natural inclination to wallow in this pseudo-success.

So do I; but the 'pseudo-success' thing is your opinion, no more. It's not mine and it's even less likely to be his. Dirrell did not 'win by a comfortable margin', he lost on a split decision.

The rest we could argue about all day. Was Froch "slightly surprised" or just relieved? Was Dirrell surprised or disappointed? I didn't notice any great histrionics from him or his corner, but then that would just be "because he was never going to get the decision", wouldn't it? As to landing more; I don't know if we will get stats or not but even if he did the differential was far less than between B-Hop and Calzaghe, and many claim that result was equally controversial. Of course, that would be because Calzaghe 'slaps' and B-Hop landed the 'cleaner, crisper shots', or words to that effect. Dirrell landed a few of those, as did Froch.. but just not enough to take the title while running the rest of the time. IMO (I actually scored it a draw before the point deduction). And the judges, of course. But then they were 'corrupt', weren't they?