Tweet
I personally don't feel it should have been stopped in that moment. Groves got caught a few times but took the shots, he threw two punches seconds before the fight was stopped and was moving and trying to evade punches. He wasn't caught on the ropes, getting teed off on with his head snapping back.
Having said that probably a few seconds later it would have been time to stop it. Probably.
But due to the circumstances in that moment, the nature of the fight and its importance I feel Groves earned an extra few seconds to prove he could weather the storm.
But to be fair to the referee he's got a split second to make a decision. If he'd allowed it to continue and Froch seriously hurt Groves then everyone would be crucifying him for that reason.
What I take issue with is that he gave Froch every chance after the knockdown. Froch was down heavily and on jelly legs when he got back up. Groves followed up with two big punches that buckled Froch. He made the correct decision there and let Froch get saved by the bell and weather the storm. So why in a similar situation for Groves does he immediately stop the fight?
You don't see many stoppages taking place in the centre of the ring, while the other guy is still on his feet.
Bottom line is: yes Froch probably would have stopped him for real soon after, but Groves earned the right to have the chance to prove that outcome wrong.
Gutted for him. You could see what it meant to him. Froch his usual cocky, motormouth self.
Froch believed his own hype and got exposed. Non existent defense. Always struggles against someone who can box skillfully. Which makes a mockery of his suggestions he would have beat Calzaghe and would have won a rematch against Ward.
For that reason I'm not convinced he genuinely wants a rematch with Groves.
Hopefully his hurt pride will make it happen. Because it's what we want to see. There's too much doubt after an ending like that.
Never seen public opinion change like that. Groves is being portrayed as the gallant loser and Froch as someone who lucked out.
Have some sympathy for Froch though. He wouldn't have wanted it to turn out like that. But it is what is it is.
Having said that probably a few seconds later it would have been time to stop it. Probably.
But due to the circumstances in that moment, the nature of the fight and its importance I feel Groves earned an extra few seconds to prove he could weather the storm.
But to be fair to the referee he's got a split second to make a decision. If he'd allowed it to continue and Froch seriously hurt Groves then everyone would be crucifying him for that reason.
What I take issue with is that he gave Froch every chance after the knockdown. Froch was down heavily and on jelly legs when he got back up. Groves followed up with two big punches that buckled Froch. He made the correct decision there and let Froch get saved by the bell and weather the storm. So why in a similar situation for Groves does he immediately stop the fight?
You don't see many stoppages taking place in the centre of the ring, while the other guy is still on his feet.
Bottom line is: yes Froch probably would have stopped him for real soon after, but Groves earned the right to have the chance to prove that outcome wrong.
Gutted for him. You could see what it meant to him. Froch his usual cocky, motormouth self.
Froch believed his own hype and got exposed. Non existent defense. Always struggles against someone who can box skillfully. Which makes a mockery of his suggestions he would have beat Calzaghe and would have won a rematch against Ward.
For that reason I'm not convinced he genuinely wants a rematch with Groves.
Hopefully his hurt pride will make it happen. Because it's what we want to see. There's too much doubt after an ending like that.
Never seen public opinion change like that. Groves is being portrayed as the gallant loser and Froch as someone who lucked out.
Have some sympathy for Froch though. He wouldn't have wanted it to turn out like that. But it is what is it is.
Comment