Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The media thoughts on the froch verses dirrell fight..

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by damned1974 View Post
    With that logic it seems you must be admitting old man Hopkins owned Calzaghe.....

    he did...calslappe lost that fight...

    Comment


    • #32
      Froch doesn't have the defense to deal with Abraham or Kessler.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by slimshandy69 View Post
        obviously you are cosing your eyes when looking at my sig...btw journalists are struggling to find punches landed by dirrell in there photo files, whys that???

        Whyt did dirrell have a bloodied nose and swollen face and froch was looking handsome at the end of the fight???Again froch landed some lovely jabs all night...dirrell just ran...
        get off frochs tip...****

        Comment


        • #34
          The German press is talking of a controversial, close decision win by Froch...lots of them saw the fight for Direll as well as the German commentator. Though, they said that the fight could have gone either way and a draw might be the most legitimized verdict...

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by Tom_Tocca View Post
            The German press is talking of a controversial, close decision win by Froch...lots of them saw the fight for Direll as well as the German commentator. Though, they said that the fight could have gone either way and a draw might be the most legitimized verdict...
            so thats not controvertial then...

            Not one person has come up with a legitermite rerason to me why dirrell even deserved a split loss decision yesterday...imo all three judges should have froch winning by at least 3 rounds...

            My sig shows froch landing better shots...dirrells face was a mess, froch was perfect...

            Farochg nwas landing jabs all night while dirrell ran like mad...

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by RealDeal90 View Post
              like how all your links are from the UK
              RTE isn't UK.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by Carnivore View Post
                Carl Froch won 114-113 on my card.

                The decision was fair, I'm even happy to see it was a SD instead of a UD because the fight was very close.

                Yes, Dirrell is the more talented fighter, but his game plan STUNK. Fighters who run, fall, hold, bend and ***** for 12 rounds don't deserve to win world titles.
                Agreed, plus in the end of the fight, Dirells face looked worse of Froch looked like he could have gone for a photo shoot
                Decision could have gone either way, but dirrell stinks he came to avoid a fight, will be interesting to when Abrahams fights him, one of them will have to fight

                Kessler or Abraham gong to win i fink

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Walterson View Post
                  How can you say Dirrell was pathetic, if that's the case, then Froch was just complete ****. HE FAILED big time.
                  Check my posts and you'll see I make no great claim for Froch's performance. His limitations were well known before the fight, though.



                  I'm talking about Dirrell's performance, and the misguided notion that it represented some kind of masterclass in defensive boxing. It was poor, not slick, poor.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by slimshandy69 View Post
                    blanked by the yanks and calzaghe boys..
                    hey werent you the same guy the said you cant score a round 9-9 that someone must have a 10?

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      froch loss on espn aol esideboxing yahoo and some people on sky ll but one which was bruce had dirrell winning

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X
                      TOP