i love dd btw (and understand he's just back from stoke (so dont get too handy stag), but froch should have had at least one point deducted for foul play aswell as the blatent elbow and headbut. groves was class, and his tears were justified imo
Don't always agree with Khan but he was bang on when he said the ref favoured Froch. If he's going to stop a fight for that, he should have stopped it when Groves dropped Froch.
he had no choice at that stage but to try and knock groves out, he was losing so bad there was no other option
He was hurt but got no chance to recover, unlike Froch who was given chance after chance, and did so. Total injustice.
Exactly. I think when all the ex-pro's and current pro's are saying it's a shocker, and someone comes on here trying to say the ref was right, you know they're just deluded and will support that guy no matter what.
Froch was going all out for the knockout. As long as Groves stayed up he had the fight won. It was taken from him.
And he did knock him out. I find it hilarious that khan and haye are making out the ref got him in a headlock. He held him up. Better that than falling on his face. Falling unconscious on your face is horrific. Fair play to groves. He's come out of this a champ and it will do wonders for him. As far Carl. The fight was tremendous. The ref might just have saved a lads career there was no defence and serious damage could have been caused. We don't know. No losers tonight for me.
Really hope neither you nor anyone close to you takes a punch too many and you begin to understand what I mean.
mate, i respect your opinion so i'm saying no more till i've seen it again (watchin django again atm - superb film) need to see it some more, if he was out on his feet as you say he was then thats a different matter and maybe his tears were failiure rather than dissapointment?
Great film tarrantinos best after reservoir dogs for me. No point arguing like but I'm a ****ing poor boxer and I used to be quite good looking and articulate. Now I'm an ugly spaz. I wouldn't have minded taking a few less punches in scraps I wasn't going to win.
I respect your opinion but you can't play the "saving his career" card. Why didn't the ref "potentially save" Froch's career when Groves had him punch drunk early on in the fight. It's one rule for one, a different rule for another. The judges scoring is far too suspect aswell I'm afraid. I'm no expert but to have Groves 1 round ahead is bordering on the outrageous. I appreciate you've been through something tough but I reckon all the experts and pro's know what they're talking about and Groves was okay to carry on there.
groves was going to win, the crowd knew it, the pundits knew it, the paying fight fans knew it, stinks of corruption to me edit : still watching django, still havnt wtached it again - i'm off this thread
Except he wasn't, cos the judges were clearly not giving him rounds that he was winning! There is truly no other plausible explanation other than a fix to set up the rematch.
Gotta think, all those die-hard boxing fans who paid their way in, booed Groves on and booed Froch off, they knew.
I'm not playing the card mate. Just raising the question. The referee is there to make a decision and he saw more than you or I. He might have been wrong and might have robbed the lad of a victory. He may have been right and saved hsome needless damage. Its opinion really and not fact though because it's all what ifs. I'm of the belief that Froch had it won. Others reckon groves would have won. It was a ****ing great fight though. Can't disagree with the judges being stupidly harsh. Had the fight carried on to round 10 I'd have still had Froch 3 points down after winning 9 with a knockdown.
