prove to me dirrell got robbed against froch..

[F l i c k e r]

Only HBO use computerbox, there were no computerbox for this as showtime do not do compiuterbox.Please dont give me that horrendous link of youtubed that lied and claimed dirrell threw over 600 punches and landed 240 of them, he didt even throw 240 punches....next

Well, they were claiming he only landed 3% which is rediculous, so I wanted proof of this.

I'm a Yank, and I am a Carl Froch fan. I believe Dirrell got what he deserved, a loss. Froch won fair and square.

[slimshandy69]

No one can prove anything to you.

Your blinded by your love for Froch so it would be pointless.

Point is, Dirrell won this fight. If you have a brain and scored the fight with the four scoring criterias that you follow in pro boxing you would of had Dirrell winning.

Clean effective punching: Dirrell landed consistently, and the shots he threw were clean hard shots. Froch landed rarely and was only able to land one shot at a time.

Ring generalship: Dirrell controlled the tempo of this fight with his movement and speed and all Froch could do was come forward.

Defense: Froch doesn't know the meaning of it and was hit constantly. Dirrell used his movement, head movement, etc to make Froch miss alot and would counter effectively.

Effective agression: Froch was aggressive, but he wasn't effective with it at all. He came forward but landed no shots and was getting countered throughout the fight.

Dirrell held abit yeah, but Froch was no better with his dirty tactics that he used.

Dirrell won clearly, and i'm sure the majority agree with me besides Froch fans.

clean effctive punches, lmaoooooooooo froc landed the best cleanest shots..in the 8th with that left hook...wasnt effective, so maing dirrell look like he been in a car crash wastn effecive, yet froch not even having skin cell killed after 12 was dirrell having effective punches???

Dirrell controled the fight...lmao look at my sig, if legging it is controlling the ring then you have a metal disease....

As i previously stated, you are all anti white, racist yanks thats crying as et another one of your over hyped boxers lost to a nottingham gangsta..


Dan hardy the nottingha ufc fighter spanks your fighters...froch spanks your fighters..nottingham is basically running the combat sport...

[slimshandy69]

Well, they were claiming he only landed 3% which is rediculous, so I wanted proof of this.

I'm a Yank, and I am a Carl Froch fan. I believe Dirrell got what he deserved, a loss. Froch won fair and square.

you are oviously a intelligent level headed bloke...unlike 90 percent of this forum....

[P.WILL]

[ИATAS]

Sorry, but dirrell had a bloody nose, bloody lips, and a swollen eye after 4 rounds froch didnt have a scratch after 12...

So by your horrnedous logic frochs 3 percent landed punches are 1000000 times more powerful than the 38 percent ofpunches landed by dirrell...????

Dirrell once got a bloody nose after a strong gust of wind came in his direction. He's a bleeder.

And last time I checked a winner is declared after adding up the amount of rounds won, not by who's face is in better condition, if that were the case Pacquiao would have lost to Clottey.

I cannot take anyone seriously on this website that can honestly say they felt Froch won MORE rounds than Dirrell, period.

You can say dirrell fought ******, he fought sloppy, he was a *****, you name it, that's fine by me, but as soon as you say Froch won MORE rounds than dirrell, I know for a fact you're either an idiot or biased as hell.

[The_Demon]

anybody who understands boxing saw dirrell beat froch

people saying otherwise are just biased nuthuggers who dont know how to score a fight

it was a hometown decision,that is obvious

[Uturn]

For me Dirrell won the fight in all fairness however he didn't deserve to become a world champion with a such a distasteful performance. I dont think winning a title fight like that should stand as it was never a boxing fight for starters it was more like cat and mouse in there... Im glad Froch got the nod cause Dirrell was being a straight up ***** about it and didn't come to fight that night, i just think it would have been harsh for anyone to lose their title in such a mannor. It was the right decision for Froch to keep the title but like i said Dirrell won the fight but not in convincing fashion, i hope he learnt a few things about that fight too.

[johnm is...]

LOL @ using "Froch landed the best punch of the fight". Yeah, it was also one of the ONLY punches he landed.

LOL @ "Dirrells face looked worse". Someone had better call Josh Clottey and let him know he beat Manny Pacquiao.

[Dirk Diggler UK]

Dirrell once got a bloody nose after a strong gust of wind came in his direction. He's a bleeder.

And last time I checked a winner is declared after adding up the amount of rounds won, not by who's face is in better condition, if that were the case Pacquiao would have lost to Clottey.

Calzaghe had a busted nose but Hopkins didnt have a scratch on him....lol

[ИATAS]

For me Dirrell won the fight in all fairness however he didn't deserve to become a world champion with a such a distasteful performance..

yeah it's too bad boxing doesn't work that way though, boxing works by whoever wins the most rounds wins the fight, period. Doesn't matter if someone looked good doing it or not.

Sure dirrell didn't look good but did froch look any better? lmao froch looked like a moron in the ring.