Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

Froch v Groves



D

Deleted member 18477

Guest
A poor end to a great fight. Froch was all over the place twice in that fight, I just wonder if Froch's reputation for withstanding immense punishment comes into the referees decision making process earlier in the fight and if so is that really fair?

Did froch take 5, 6, 7 shots in a row before turning his back and leaving a free shot?

Did GG?

Thats why it was stopped. Its the rules of boxing. Froch got knocked down but got straight back up and always offered a shot back...

Did GG deserve to lose like that? No and he would have won on points... GG will learn from this. Froch will hopefully agree a rematch because its what the fans want and it was a great fight to watch.
 




The Truth

Banned
Sep 11, 2008
3,754
None of your buisness
Last edited:


Lenny Rider

Well-known member
Sep 15, 2010
5,477
Eddie Hearn's involved should we expect anything less?

On a positive note Groves left the ring the fans favourite and is young enough to come again and dominate this division. I'm pleased to see Groves and Adam Booth apparently reconciled, hopefully they will sort out any major differences they have and work together again. Bizarrely as good as Groves's new trinder was I think Booth's prescience in his corner last night might have put a different slant on the fight for ref Howard Foster, there's no doubt he favoured Froch throughout and I'm sure Booth would have been in his ear at the end of each round. Whether that would have made a difference we will never know but I think it might have been a factor.

The real loser will be James Degale, not financially as he will be due a big pay day, but Groves will never lose to him on this form and with his further development, and that must grate with Degale far more than any amount of money.
 




Guinness Boy

Tofu eating wokerati
Helpful Moderator
NSC Patron
Jul 23, 2003
34,518
Up and Coming Sunny Portslade




kevtherev

Well-known member
Feb 28, 2008
10,459
Tunbridge Wells
I agree Groves was the better fighter on the night. I agree it should never have been stopped. I agree that Groves was ahead and I agree Froch has never looked so bad. But a fight is over 12 rounds, not 1 or even 7 or 8. Froch was slowly but surely edging his way back into the fight and Groves was getting very leggy indeed. The ref did stop it to soon and robbed us all. But I've no doubt what so ever that Froch was going to stop him. Facts are Froch was out boxed, out scored and out classed. Yet he still won the fight. A fact that is slightly being over looked this morning.
 


bhawoddy

Well-known member
Jan 25, 2011
3,621
I agree Groves was the better fighter on the night. I agree it should never have been stopped. I agree that Groves was ahead and I agree Froch has never looked so bad. But a fight is over 12 rounds, not 1 or even 7 or 8. Froch was slowly but surely edging his way back into the fight and Groves was getting very leggy indeed. The ref did stop it to soon and robbed us all. But I've no doubt what so ever that Froch was going to stop him. Facts are Froch was out boxed, out scored and out classed. Yet he still won the fight. A fact that is slightly being over looked this morning.

If this was a football match fans would be crowing over how good froch is. Not at his best but still managed a win....... Great fighter who has proved it on so many occasions.
 






Ernest

Stupid IDIOT
Nov 8, 2003
42,743
LOONEY BIN
The winner was Groves as he is now made as the peoples champion, everyone loves a plucky loser rather than a gob shite winner like Froch who has in one night ruined any career in the limelight and came over as many knew him to be.

Foster was crap from start to finish, reminded me of the ref in the Hatton v Mayweather fight and seemed to give the hero everything and the challenger nothing. I'm not sure what Froch needed to do to lose a point as he got away with numerous warnings.

I would like the ref to answer to his actions last night, it seems now that not only can you not beat a Hearn fighter on points by the judges scoring but also the referee is in it too.
 


Lenny Rider

Well-known member
Sep 15, 2010
5,477
The winner was Groves as he is now made as the peoples champion, everyone loves a plucky loser rather than a gob shite winner like Froch who has in one night ruined any career in the limelight and came over as many knew him to be.

Foster was crap from start to finish, reminded me of the ref in the Hatton v Mayweather fight and seemed to give the hero everything and the challenger nothing. I'm not sure what Froch needed to do to lose a point as he got away with numerous warnings.

I would like the ref to answer to his actions last night, it seems now that not only can you not beat a Hearn fighter on points by the judges scoring but also the referee is in it too.


Could the governing bodies step in and call it a no contest?
 






big nuts

Well-known member
Jan 15, 2011
4,868
Hove
I agree Groves was the better fighter on the night. I agree it should never have been stopped. I agree that Groves was ahead and I agree Froch has never looked so bad. But a fight is over 12 rounds, not 1 or even 7 or 8. Froch was slowly but surely edging his way back into the fight and Groves was getting very leggy indeed. The ref did stop it to soon and robbed us all. But I've no doubt what so ever that Froch was going to stop him. Facts are Froch was out boxed, out scored and out classed. Yet he still won the fight. A fact that is slightly being over looked this morning.[/QUOTE

Pretty much agree with all of that I would say it was very likely that Froch would have caught up with Groves at some stage in the final third of the fight, the unfortunate thing is we will never know for sure due to the intransigence of the ref, who royally stitched up the crowd and everyone involved in the fight apart from maybe matchroom who can have a nice PPV in April now that the Fury vs Haye fight is off.
 


Lenny Rider

Well-known member
Sep 15, 2010
5,477
I agree Groves was the better fighter on the night. I agree it should never have been stopped. I agree that Groves was ahead and I agree Froch has never looked so bad. But a fight is over 12 rounds, not 1 or even 7 or 8. Froch was slowly but surely edging his way back into the fight and Groves was getting very leggy indeed. The ref did stop it to soon and robbed us all. But I've no doubt what so ever that Froch was going to stop him. Facts are Froch was out boxed, out scored and out classed. Yet he still won the fight. A fact that is slightly being over looked this morning.[/QUOTE

Pretty much agree with all of that I would say it was very likely that Froch would have caught up with Groves at some stage in the final third of the fight, the unfortunate thing is we will never know for sure due to the intransigence of the ref, who royally stitched up the crowd and everyone involved in the fight apart from maybe matchroom who can have a nice PPV in April now that the Fury vs Haye fight is off.


I would be very surprised if in the cold light of day Froch even considers getting back in the ring with Groves. Groves will get another shot from Eddie 9 Bob Note Hearn at one of the other belts which I think he would win, possibly with the exception of Andre Ward, which in turn builds up the Degale rematch, which he would win all day.
 


D

Deleted member 18477

Guest
The winner was Groves as he is now made as the peoples champion, everyone loves a plucky loser rather than a gob shite winner like Froch who has in one night ruined any career in the limelight and came over as many knew him to be.

Foster was crap from start to finish, reminded me of the ref in the Hatton v Mayweather fight and seemed to give the hero everything and the challenger nothing. I'm not sure what Froch needed to do to lose a point as he got away with numerous warnings.

I would like the ref to answer to his actions last night, it seems now that not only can you not beat a Hearn fighter on points by the judges scoring but also the referee is in it too.

Froch ruined any career in limelight? What the hell was Froch meant to do? It was the refs decision.

Froch was going to knock GG down, 5, 10, 15 seconds later. He's just reassure real boxing fans that he's a brutal warrior and no matter how good a boxer his opponent is he fights till the end! A great champion!

Do I wanna see a rematch? Yes because that was one of the best fights I've ever seen.
 
Last edited by a moderator:






Billy the Fish

Technocrat
Oct 18, 2005
17,514
Haywards Heath
Froch was going to knock GG down, 5, 10, 15 seconds later.

Thing thing is you can't be certain about that, that's why it is such a poor decision from the ref. Groves wasn't given the chance to prove he can come back from being rattled like froch did. It's like froch was given the benefit of the doubt because of what he's done in the past and Groves wasn't.

I don't see how you can say he didn't offer a defence when he was still throwing punches as the ref jumped in. He was definitely in big trouble, but he might've made it to the bell and sorted himself out for the next round, or he might've been put down in which case we wouldn't be questioning the result. Now we'll never know because the ref jumped in 30 seconds too early.
 


D

Deleted member 18477

Guest
Hurt!
 

Attachments

  • uploadfromtaptalk1385299779126.jpg
    uploadfromtaptalk1385299779126.jpg
    114.3 KB · Views: 52






The Truth

Banned
Sep 11, 2008
3,754
None of your buisness
A BBC link old boy? I thought they were not to be trusted since they're run by a secret society of Zionist lizards. Or is their sports output ok?

obsessed and lacking in humour :ffsparr:

Don't waste your time on his pathetic attempts at you know what!
 
Last edited:


The Truth

Banned
Sep 11, 2008
3,754
None of your buisness


Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here