I still can't get over it. Froch-Dirrell: Biggest Boxing Robbery Of 2009

[Dirk Diggler UK]

Close and frankly **** fight that could have gone either way. No robbery. TS is just butt-hurt that Carl said something negative about Khan.

[oaklandstephen]

dirrell whooped that ass!! ive said it numerous times anndddd ima say it again! if u get a split desicion in ur hometown u know u lost the fight.

[charlieg]

It was not close. See the video my friend.

The video is biased, made by a Dirrell fan. Hardly impartial viewing.

The video shows all Dirrell's good moments. It's telling that in the first 6 rounds there are about 10 punches that Dirrell landed. He was great at avoiding punches but he didn't turn on the attack until late in the fight. He spent the first 2/3s of the fight spoiling Froch and then he looked great for a few rounds at the end. It was spoiling tactics and it was a shame because he did show at the end of the fight that he had the skill to get to Froch as well, so he can only blame himself for losing by virtue of not winning.

It was a close fight but only because Froch was so bad (and I mean really, awfully bad) at the boxing basics (jabbing, cutting off the ring, basic combinations like 1-2). If Froch could do the simple things, he would have easily justified the point victory. However, because he was so poor overall, and because Dirrell only clearly won maybe 4 rounds - it was a case of do you score Dirrell's occasional jab or Froch's aggression, and the judges obviously went for the latter.

[bojangles1987]

Froch clearly lost
but who wanna cry for Dirrell?
he stunk up a title fight on foreign turf
you knew he'd get **** on by judges
so damn nervous he kept falling and ****

This is how I feel. Hopefully Dirrell learned from it, when you go to someone else's hometown you can't just win to take their belt, you have to make a statement. He fought ugly, and got punished for it.

It wasn't the biggest robbery of the year, not even close, but Froch lost.

[SonOfCuba]

hell of a roberry yes ! direll won that fight hands down.

[Sparked_1985]

The thing with this fight is you could if you wanted to score the fight for Froch you could find fairly long sequences where Dirrell is: back-peddling, not throwing any punches and frankly refusing to engage. You can probably find these instances in every single round.

It's the same reason why the Valuev and Haye fight was close. I'm not even sure Valuev hit Haye for 36-minutes. But, when Haye was just avoiding punches and going backwards: he was losing. How can you be winning being passive? Haye compensated by trying to throw huge power-punches to catch the eye. To be fair, if Haye lost a close decision nobody could have really argued too much (though, I do think it's the only way Haye could have fought and won.)

Dirrell was passive for too much of this fight. It is why he lost.

I take punch stats with a pinch of salt.

I think I had Dirrell winning. By a few rounds. But it was basically in spite of myself. Froch was awful, and Dirrell only actively engaged in the last two rounds. But, if you wanted to to, you could easily legitimately and with good reasons score this fight for Froch.

[The_Demon]

it was a terrible robbery

the definition of a hometown decision

[The_Demon]

The thing with this fight is you could if you wanted to score the fight for Froch you could find fairly long sequences where Dirrell is: back-peddling, not throwing any punches and frankly refusing to engage. You can probably find these instances in every single round.

It's the same reason why the Valuev and Haye fight was close. I'm not even sure Valuev hit Haye for 36-minutes. But, when Haye was just avoiding punches and going backwards: he was losing. How can you be winning being passive? Haye compensated by trying to throw huge power-punches to catch the eye. To be fair, if Haye lost a close decision nobody could have really argued too much (though, I do think it's the only way Haye could have fought and won.)

Dirrell was passive for too much of this fight. It is why he lost.

I take punch stats with a pinch of salt.

I think I had Dirrell winning. By a few rounds. But it was basically in spite of myself. Froch was awful, and Dirrell only actively engaged in the last two rounds. But, if you wanted to to, you could easily legitimately and with good reasons score this fight for Froch.

if you thought haye-valuev was close you clearly dont know how to score a boxing match,sorry mate,but you need to brush up on the scoring system

[lyricalether]

It doesnt fukin matter if dirrell boxed, ran, ran laps around the ring, fought in the crouch position the whole fight, fought with one shoe...The guy who lands the cleaner more effective shots should win the fight..Froch landed nothing..Only clean shots Froch landed was to the back of Dirrells head.. Dirrell torched him with counter shots and jabs all nite...Easy backyard decision for the Cobra..

[Mickey Gomez]

Close fight, something that isn't reflected by that biased video. Either fighter could have got the decision. Dirrel was guilty of his own hi jinx most notably wrapping his arm around Froch's neck on many occasions.