Enough with the Bull**** - Froch vs Dirrell was not a Robbery

[D-MiZe]

I don't particularly like Froch - his style is far too ugly to make my favourite fighter list - but it was a close fight. Even the horribly biased Showtime crew had it as being a close fight. I'm not telling anyone Froch definately won, although I think he just sc****d it by the margin of the deducted point.

Common sense isn't common anymore.

But you have certainly have it.

Good thread and post.

[S A M U R A I]

Lyoto Machida would end him

Not without raping him first.



100% free webcam site! | Awesome chicks and it is absolutely free! | Watch free live sex cam - easy as 1-2-3

[Crazylegs77]

It was not a robbery. It was a split decision.

Sad part is I dont recall some of these posters who are now ****ing the robbery drums for Dirrell back when Malinaggi was really robbed.

[bojangles1987]

Now, it's justifiable to say that Dirrell won by up to two rounds, but to call a fight that was that scrappy a robbery is just plain melodramatic. I gave it to Froch by a round personally. In my opinion Dirrell could have won the fight if he'd been more active in the earlier rounds. Froch couldn't handle his speed, but Dirrell only took advantage of it seriously later in the fight. Dirrell left the early rounds very close and with close rounds judges will often (rightly or wrongly) give the round to the aggressor and everyone knows it. He has no excuses. His attitude was so negative for a lot of the fight and his holding was excessive. Not that I'm really praising Froch, who had little success with anything other than the jab, which he periodically abandoned with frustration. Froch was aggressive though and landed some decent shots on the inside that the Showtime crew in particular didn't give any credit for. Against a more active fighter Froch would have lost. Dirrell showed some devastating accuracy in the later rounds and boxed Froch to pieces at times, just a shame he didn't do it earlier.

The term robbery should be reserved for fights in which decisions are beyond even reasonable doubt. This was not a robbery, it was at worst a bad decision if you gave it to Dirrell.

Your argument would have merit...

BUT FROCH DIDN'T THROW OR LAND EARLY IN THE FIGHT EITHER.

[D-MiZe]

It was not a robbery. It was a split decision.

Sad part is I dont recall some of these posters who are now ****ing the robbery drums for Dirrell back when Malinaggi was really robbed.

It's only a robbery when your favourite fighter loses.

I bet you any money half of these bitches crying about Dirrell losing were also trying to defend Diaz's win over Paulie.

[Pullcounter]

It was not a robbery. It was a split decision.

Sad part is I dont recall some of these posters who are now ****ing the robbery drums for Dirrell back when Malinaggi was really robbed.

malinaggi/diaz was a close fight.

dirrell beat froch 8-4.

[daggum]

I don't particularly like Froch - his style is far too ugly to make my favourite fighter list - but it was a close fight. Even the horribly biased Showtime crew had it as being a close fight. I'm not telling anyone Froch definately won, although I think he just sc****d it by the margin of the deducted point.

even the horribly biased primetime british crew had dirrell winning.

[Dirk Diggler UK]

A yank lost abroad, it must be a robbery and a travesty of the highest order.

[Syf]

It's only a robbery when your favourite fighter loses.

I bet you any money half of these bitches crying about Dirrell losing were also trying to defend Diaz's win over Paulie.

Lol @ Dirrell being my favorite fighter somehow.

[P4P Opinion]

Your argument would have merit...

BUT FROCH DIDN'T THROW OR LAND EARLY IN THE FIGHT EITHER.

Your argument would have merit if you weren't arguing in hyperbole. You can certainly argue that Froch didn't land much either, but he certainly landed more, although the majority were light jabs. He was also aggressive while Dirrell was passive. Those rounds made it a close fight.