Carl Froch: "Andre Dirrell Tried To Steal a Decision"

Collapse
Collapse
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • djtmal
    Undisputed Champion
    Unified Champion - 10,00-20,000 posts
    • Apr 2008
    • 12665
    • 1,237
    • 11
    • 39,097

    #101
    lets everyone give the brit judges and ref a round of applause for recognizing rabbit punching and wwf takedowns as legal blows

    Comment

    • e_boxer
      Up and Comer
      • Mar 2008
      • 95
      • 23
      • 0
      • 6,170

      #102
      Dirrell was a ***** that was not boxing what he was doing if he wants to hug he should take his ass to the UFC froch did the right thing in wacking him in back of the head since thats all he was giving him

      Comment

      • MCM Traynor
        Amateur
        Interim Champion - 1-100 posts
        • Feb 2009
        • 28
        • 1
        • 0
        • 6,061

        #103
        Listen, I watched the fight and I felt Dirrell won. Still, I can see why he lost. As his promoter said after the bout:

        "Andre’s lesson is that when you come over on someone else’s territory and they are the champion, you have to win convincingly or you are going to lose. We didn’t do that.”

        Is that fair? No. But has it been a reality in boxing for a long time? Yes. Should Dirrell have engaged more (especially when it became apparant he was more successful when he did so)? Certainly.

        Also:

        Originally posted by djtmal
        lets everyone give the brit judges and ref a round of applause for recognizing rabbit punching and wwf takedowns as legal blows
        Are you joking?

        The ref was Panamanian.

        The three judges were of Mexico, Belgium and Italy.


        There are plenty of examples of poor British refing/judging, but Froch-Dirrell wasn't one of them. Do your research.

        Comment

        • arnold_jasper
          Banned
          • Dec 2007
          • 123
          • 2
          • 0
          • 162

          #104
          Originally posted by MCM Traynor
          Listen, I watched the fight and I felt Dirrell won. Still, I can see why he lost. As his promoter said after the bout:

          "Andre’s lesson is that when you come over on someone else’s territory and they are the champion, you have to win convincingly or you are going to lose. We didn’t do that.”

          Is that fair? No. But has it been a reality in boxing for a long time? Yes. Should Dirrell have engaged more (especially when it became apparant he was more successful when he did so)? Certainly.

          Also:



          Are you joking?

          The ref was Panamanian.

          The three judges were of Mexico, Belgium and Italy.


          There are plenty of examples of poor British refing/judging, but Froch-Dirrell wasn't one of them. Do your research.

          Ultimately, it is very apparent that dirrel did nothing to deserved a victory. His performance is unworthy of the crown. The crown is reserve for deserving athlete who do their best to win not by easy - lucky approach.

          Comment

          • Clint650
            Undisputed Champion
            Platinum Champion - 1,000-5,000 posts
            • Feb 2009
            • 1566
            • 46
            • 1
            • 7,741

            #105
            Oh really Froch?

            from what i saw, Dirrell hit you in the face so fast you must of not even noticed. i guess Andre was also too quick for the judges.

            Froch couldn't touch Dirrell, he had to pull a Ricky Hatton just to get in this fight. I'm sorry Carl but it's called boxing, if you want to throw dudes on the floor and grab necks then fight in the UFC. Sure, Andre ran a bit much for my taste, but his counters made up for it. His incredible head movement made up for it, and above all Andre buckled Froch. Put together a clip of all the crisp shots landed by Dirrell in comparison to whatever Froch connected with and see who impresses you more.

            Comment

            • arnold_jasper
              Banned
              • Dec 2007
              • 123
              • 2
              • 0
              • 162

              #106
              Skillful boxing

              Originally posted by FightDoctor.
              Who ever said boxing is about standing and fighting. The greatest ran and set up there foes. Its about strategies, and skill. Froch is a straight ahead fighter, dirrell is a mover. It just two different styles.Also remember that in the last rounds dirrell stood with froch a couple times and froch couldn't hit him and dirrell hurt him 3 times and froch backed up . Old saying when ever you have a fighter going backwards that wants to come forward he's in trouble. dirrell didn't steal anything he took the win but those judges went with the home town hero.So who lost, froch did and you KNOW IT ,count his clean punches. I count 8 through the fight, dirrell , I count over 32 for dirrell . I'm talking about clean shots. landed punches dirrell wins. So froch is the *****.And kessler is going to be the Penis. Froch vs Kessler. Froch out by 8. Kessler wins by KO KO KO KTFO!
              Your comment is misleading and elementary. Standing and fighting is not literally mean to stand there and fight toe to toe which sometimes happened in boxing, but boxing is a battle of skill and mind. The skill of boxing is by showing it in the center of the ring infront of your opponent by using handspeed, good footwork, good body balance and movement and presence of mind. This is not to say you can't run and hold , it can be done in dire necessity when you are in the disadvantage situation. Ali run when he fight but his running style is not really running, he is dancing around his opponent and punching while dancing making his style entertaining. That is footwork, body movement and mind. Dirrel don't know how to do footwork and body movement. All he know is to run to evade his opponent. He is not the so called elusive fighter. A coward in the ring blaming himsel why he is there.

              Comment

              • tommy boo boxer
                Banned
                • Oct 2008
                • 451
                • 18
                • 36
                • 629

                #107
                Originally posted by arnold_jasper
                And what you call him? Brave? You are insane don't know what boxing is made of. Use your boxing ability in the center of the ring by using hand speed, good footwork and body movement, that's boxing. Not running around the ring and hold when caught. Dirrel don't deserve the victory.
                i haven't called him anything, Im just saying if his plan was too hit and not get hit by any means, i dont see a problem with it... its a strategy, its part of the science... Froch must've felt deep down he knew he lost, the way he is carrying on, that is the sound of a coward and not a very humble champion.

                If boxing was the way you described only... it would've ceased to exist.

                Comment

                • Clint650
                  Undisputed Champion
                  Platinum Champion - 1,000-5,000 posts
                  • Feb 2009
                  • 1566
                  • 46
                  • 1
                  • 7,741

                  #108
                  Froch couldn't outbox the slicker Dirrell. if he could have we would have saw Dirrell on the canvas. Also, when he caught up to him against the ropes or cornered him Dirrell pretty much blocked and dodged everything Froch had to offer. You can see the disappointment in Froch's face at the end. i doubt it had anything to do with Andre running and holding. Im sure it had everything to do with not catching Dirrell and hurting him.

                  Comment

                  • arnold_jasper
                    Banned
                    • Dec 2007
                    • 123
                    • 2
                    • 0
                    • 162

                    #109
                    insane

                    Originally posted by Syf
                    I'll reiterate..

                    only non fighters throw the words coward, and ***** around. It takes a lot of guts to get in the ring with a trained fighter. Especially a neanderthal like Carl Froch. Good lord. It takes courage to take a punch to the face that would debilitate some plebe keyboard afficionado such as yourself, and continue to stand, and not only stand, but stay aware and reacting. Something you would never know about with your armchair warrior abstractionist ass throwin stones in a glass house... GTFO
                    oo

                    What guts are you talking about that dirrel has? Guts to run and hold.? Guts is coexistent with courage. Guts cannot coexist with cowardice. Dirrel is a coward, hence, he has no guts. Froch is not a good fighter either, but he has guts and courage to do his part in the ring to deserve retention of his crown. Dirrel has not done enough to steal the glory from froch.

                    For your knowledge enhancement. Take this as a lesson: boxing is a battle of skill in the ring by using hand speed, footwork, body movement and presence of the mind. Not by running and holding the way dirrel did. Running and holding is part of it but only when you need it and not at the entire round you will. Dirrel's peformance is a mess in boxing.

                    So shut your mouth... girl.

                    Comment

                    • Khalid X
                      The Truth *********
                      Unified Champion - 10,00-20,000 posts
                      • May 2008
                      • 11976
                      • 691
                      • 531
                      • 20,762

                      #110
                      Originally posted by K-Nan
                      LOL...hilarious, and I'm glad you pointed that out.


                      or how about this one




                      How this guy has a rep power of 7 is beyond me.
                      Last edited by Khalid X; 10-22-2009, 04:26 AM.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      TOP