Froch vs Dirrell: Did Froch get a hometown decision????

[removed]

if you land the cleaner and more effective punches, you are supposed to win the round.


fighting at home really shouldn't matter.

I always assumed you had to 'take' the belt off the champion? Dirrell was a highly skilled boxer. If he wasn't such a ***** he could've gone far in the sport.

[New England]

I always assumed you had to 'take' the belt off the champion? Dirrell was a highly skilled boxer. If he wasn't such a ***** he could've gone far in the sport.

that's not in the official rules for scoring.


you should be awarding the rounds to the more effective puncher. dirrell could have easily won the fight based on those criteria.

[removed]

that's not in the official rules for scoring.


you should be awarding the rounds to the more effective puncher. dirrell could have easily won the fight based on those criteria.

How could Dirrell have landed the more effective punchers when Froch didn't have a mark on him at the end of the fight? Yet Dirrell was busted up?

If Dirrell was robbed why didn't he demand the rematch? I don't even recall him being too upset when the result was read out.

Anyway, it was a close fight, and one i'll never watch again haha.

[F!x]

brits should start wearing a scarlett "B" on their chests / sigs.


the bias is getting f#Cking absurd.

Everyone can be biased, it's not an attribute restricted to any particular nationality.

For example some Paul Williams fans claim he beat Lara, some Bradley fans claim he beat Pacquiao, some Rios fans claim he beat Abril, some Cloud fans claim he beat Campillo.. They were all bad decisions in the USA and a lot of biased fans supported them.

[#1Assassin]

So on your card Froch is "gifted" rounds while Dirrell "won" his? Agenda much?

It was a close fight that could have gone either way, champ fighting at home got the decision - that's boxing.

thats what happened. dirrell struggles to make 168, had never fought a world class fighter before or went 12 rounds. froch is a very physical and durable fighter and dirrell clearly had doubts about his own ability to go 12 rounds.

when he went to work dirrell outboxed froch rather easily and won rounds. but then he would go into energy saving mode and try to just kill time by spoiling, handing over rounds to froch. froch never really won any rounds by putting in good work, he hardly did any good work all night. he really was gifted rounds due to dirrells unwillingness to do anything at all.

i had froch winning by a point but he didnt really win the fight, dirrell threw it away.

[New England]

Everyone can be biased, it's not an attribute restricted to any particular nationality.

For example some Paul Williams fans claim he beat Lara, some Bradley fans claim he beat Pacquiao, some Rios fans claim he beat Abril, some Cloud fans claim he beat Campillo.. They were all bad decisions in the USA and a lot of biased fans supported them.

no they didn't, lol. horrible examples.


saying that american fans are as biased as brits is just ridiculous. we have more boxers, and even import boxers. we don't have the nationalist investment in fighters that you guys have.

mexican, PR, and one philipino are some of the most popular boxers in america. cotto, pacquiao, canelo, marquez, the list goes on.



brits have a greater bias than americans. americans do have some bias, but it's nowhere near the level of the brits.


just own and recognize it. there's nothing wrong with it. just wear your scarlett B on your chest.

[removed]

no they didn't, lol. horrible examples.


saying that american fans are as biased as brits is just ridiculous. we have more boxers, and even import boxers. we don't have the nationalist investment in fighters that you guys have.

mexican, PR, and one philipino are some of the most popular boxers in america. cotto, pacquiao, canelo, marquez, the list goes on.



brits have a greater bias than americans. americans do have some bias, but it's nowhere near the level of the brits.


just own and recognize it. there's nothing wrong with it. just wear your scarlett B on your chest.

You're stereotyping. Some Brits are biased, as are some Americans, some Mexicans etc.

[junior gong]

that's not in the official rules for scoring.


you should be awarding the rounds to the more effective puncher. dirrell could have easily won the fight based on those criteria.

Dirrell could and should have been disqualified.

[removed]

Careful guyz, #1Assassin is giving out red k to people disrespecting his boyfriend Andre.

[F!x]

no they didn't, lol. horrible examples.

saying that american fans are as biased as brits is just ridiculous. we have more boxers, and even import boxers. we don't have the nationalist investment in fighters that you guys have.

mexican, PR, and one philipino are some of the most popular boxers in america. cotto, pacquiao, canelo, marquez, the list goes on.

brits have a greater bias than americans. americans do have some bias, but it's nowhere near the level of the brits.

just own and recognize it. there's nothing wrong with it. just wear your scarlett B on your chest.

They are perfectly legit examples, you're just being petty now because I listed off so many examples of American bias, so quickly. There are many, many more, and in fact you just showed some yourself.

If you'd seen my first post on this thread you would have seen that I thought Dirrell won the fight so you can keep that scarlett B on your own chest. You just demonstrated that you have a "bias" or a prejudice against non-Americans by assuming that I thought Froch won. Thanks for proving my point.

Americans have just as much bias and nationalist investment in their fighters - when they are fighting non-American fighters. How many times have you heard the crowd chanting "USA" when it's an American vs a non-American, fighting in America. I've heard it in Hopkins, Ward, Bradley, Mayweather fights, to name a few. It happens a lot.

You're just guilty of looking at the issue entirely subjectively and applying no objectivity at all.