Comments Thread For: Groves: Carl Froch is Scared of The Damage in Rematch

[Dirk Diggler UK]

No they are not.

Froch won't take the fight and is trying to distance himself from the fight.

Yes they are. Educate yourself. Do you understand the difference between a mandatory defence and a voluntary?

There was no rematch clause or options the first time because Groves had been manuvered into a mandatory position.

[D4thincarnation]

Yes they are. Educate yourself. Do you understand the difference between a mandatory defence and a voluntary?

There was no rematch clause or options the first time because Groves had been manuvered into a mandatory position.

Funny I don't remember Khan having a rematch clause with Peterson or Garcia.

Groves is still the mandatory, because the IBF realise that the joke stoppage was clearly wrong.

[Kris Silver]

That offer was tied to so many things, Groves would have been giving half of his future earnings away to Hearn and Froch.

It was a joke offer designed to be turned down but good PR for Froch and Hearn who could say they made a huge offer to Groves.

This is also true. Groves hasn't revealed precisely what he didn't like about the offer but did infer it related to stuff in the future beyond the rematch.

Hearn wants the big £ rematch and wants Groves long-term. I don't think Groves wants a rematch clause and to be locked in. Can't blame him given contract battles with Booth etc.

[D4thincarnation]

George Groves back up everything he said and true to his word.

You cannot say the same about Froch you has spouted continuous BS since the fight.

[jas]

kirk diggler is destroying d4 in this debate. its like tyson mcneeley, hopkins - trinidad,

[D4thincarnation]

This is also true. Groves hasn't revealed precisely what he didn't like about the offer but did infer it related to stuff in the future beyond the rematch.

Hearn wants the big £ rematch and wants Groves long-term. I don't think Groves wants a rematch clause and to be locked in. Can't blame him given contract shabbacles with Booth etc.

Groves is a free agent, he looking for an promoter but does not want any long term deal.

Obviously Hearn would love for Groves to come on board then he can put Froch out to pasture.

The purse bid will get him less money but none of these dodgy clauses put in by Matchroom

[Kris Silver]

Groves is a free agent, he looking for an promoter but does not want any long term deal.

Obviously Hearn would love for Groves to come on board then he can put Froch out to pasture.

The purse bid will get him less money but none of these dodgy clauses put in by Matchroom

I know all this, that's why I said what I said.

[LacedUp]

People need to educate themselves. Rematch clauses/options are always put in when its a voluntary defence.

Great the IBF ordered the rematch so Groves can now make significantly lesser than what he was offered.

Why do you care what Groves is making?

[LacedUp]

I don't necessarily think it would be a duck if Froch went another route. Everyone with a sense of brains knows it will be a lot more acceptable for Froch to lose to someone like Ward than Groves - and I wouldn't really like for him to go down that route, because I don't believe he thinks he can beat Ward.

Jr would be a cherrypick, but then again, Froch has earned himself a cherrypick in my opinion.

The Groves fight will probably happen though, if not in May, then November.

[Dirk Diggler UK]

Funny I don't remember Khan having a rematch clause with Peterson or Garcia.

Groves is still the mandatory, because the IBF realise that the joke stoppage was clearly wrong.

Peterson was Khan's mandatory challenger. The Garcia fight was a unification.

Educate yourself.