-
Re: Who won? Froch? Or Dirrell?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kel
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Majesty
The only people that are gonna pick Froch are only picking him because Dirrell doesn't have a style they like.
But whether you like Dirrells style or think it's boring or whatever you want to believe, it doesn't take away that he won the fight whether you like it or not.
And also after he got that point taken away HE was the one backing up Froch, he was the one making the fight, he was the one going all out while Froch looked confused especially after Dirrell hurt him, and continued to hurt him.
It's funny how no one mentions that. They mention Dirrells holding but don't mention Froch's holding, and rough housing and rabbit punches, and there were times it looked like he was winding up those rabbit punches and lets not forget the hitting on the break and the ref did nothing. He warned Froch a bunch of times but then took a point from Dirrell without any warning whatsoever.
You are only picking Froch because you don't like Dirrells style. But boxing ain't about what style you like when it comes to a decision. Dirrell won the fight and he won it pretty one sidedly. Whether you like the way he did it or not doesn't mean Froch won. Because if you are complaining on somethin Dirrell did then how can you give Froch credit for not being able to do shit about it?
Dirrell won. Simple as that. And I'll pick Dirrell in any of the other fights before I pick Froch.
Who is your fav white fighter?
WTF has that got to do with anything??
-
Re: Who won? Froch? Or Dirrell?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kel
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Majesty
The only people that are gonna pick Froch are only picking him because Dirrell doesn't have a style they like.
But whether you like Dirrells style or think it's boring or whatever you want to believe, it doesn't take away that he won the fight whether you like it or not.
And also after he got that point taken away HE was the one backing up Froch, he was the one making the fight, he was the one going all out while Froch looked confused especially after Dirrell hurt him, and continued to hurt him.
It's funny how no one mentions that. They mention Dirrells holding but don't mention Froch's holding, and rough housing and rabbit punches, and there were times it looked like he was winding up those rabbit punches and lets not forget the hitting on the break and the ref did nothing. He warned Froch a bunch of times but then took a point from Dirrell without any warning whatsoever.
You are only picking Froch because you don't like Dirrells style. But boxing ain't about what style you like when it comes to a decision. Dirrell won the fight and he won it pretty one sidedly. Whether you like the way he did it or not doesn't mean Froch won. Because if you are complaining on somethin Dirrell did then how can you give Froch credit for not being able to do shit about it?
Dirrell won. Simple as that. And I'll pick Dirrell in any of the other fights before I pick Froch.
Who is your fav white fighter?
:p
Do you really want to go down that road?
-
Re: Who won? Froch? Or Dirrell?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kel
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Majesty
The only people that are gonna pick Froch are only picking him because Dirrell doesn't have a style they like.
But whether you like Dirrells style or think it's boring or whatever you want to believe, it doesn't take away that he won the fight whether you like it or not.
And also after he got that point taken away HE was the one backing up Froch, he was the one making the fight, he was the one going all out while Froch looked confused especially after Dirrell hurt him, and continued to hurt him.
It's funny how no one mentions that. They mention Dirrells holding but don't mention Froch's holding, and rough housing and rabbit punches, and there were times it looked like he was winding up those rabbit punches and lets not forget the hitting on the break and the ref did nothing. He warned Froch a bunch of times but then took a point from Dirrell without any warning whatsoever.
You are only picking Froch because you don't like Dirrells style. But boxing ain't about what style you like when it comes to a decision. Dirrell won the fight and he won it pretty one sidedly. Whether you like the way he did it or not doesn't mean Froch won. Because if you are complaining on somethin Dirrell did then how can you give Froch credit for not being able to do shit about it?
Dirrell won. Simple as that. And I'll pick Dirrell in any of the other fights before I pick Froch.
Who is your fav white fighter?
Lennox Lewis
-
Re: Who won? Froch? Or Dirrell?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Majesty
The only people that are gonna pick Froch are only picking him because Dirrell doesn't have a style they like.
But whether you like Dirrells style or think it's boring or whatever you want to believe, it doesn't take away that he won the fight whether you like it or not.
And also after he got that point taken away HE was the one backing up Froch, he was the one making the fight, he was the one going all out while Froch looked confused especially after Dirrell hurt him, and continued to hurt him.
It's funny how no one mentions that. They mention Dirrells holding but don't mention Froch's holding, and rough housing and rabbit punches, and there were times it looked like he was winding up those rabbit punches and lets not forget the hitting on the break and the ref did nothing. He warned Froch a bunch of times but then took a point from Dirrell without any warning whatsoever.
You are only picking Froch because you don't like Dirrells style. But boxing ain't about what style you like when it comes to a decision. Dirrell won the fight and he won it pretty one sidedly. Whether you like the way he did it or not doesn't mean Froch won. Because if you are complaining on somethin Dirrell did then how can you give Froch credit for not being able to do shit about it?
Dirrell won. Simple as that. And I'll pick Dirrell in any of the other fights before I pick Froch.
I stopped reading your post as soon as i read Dirrell was the one making the fight, Dirrell won but some of your posts as usual as quite annoying and Bizzare.
-
Re: Who won? Froch? Or Dirrell?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
skel1983
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Majesty
The only people that are gonna pick Froch are only picking him because Dirrell doesn't have a style they like.
But whether you like Dirrells style or think it's boring or whatever you want to believe, it doesn't take away that he won the fight whether you like it or not.
And also after he got that point taken away HE was the one backing up Froch, he was the one making the fight, he was the one going all out while Froch looked confused especially after Dirrell hurt him, and continued to hurt him.
It's funny how no one mentions that. They mention Dirrells holding but don't mention Froch's holding, and rough housing and rabbit punches, and there were times it looked like he was winding up those rabbit punches and lets not forget the hitting on the break and the ref did nothing. He warned Froch a bunch of times but then took a point from Dirrell without any warning whatsoever.
You are only picking Froch because you don't like Dirrells style. But boxing ain't about what style you like when it comes to a decision. Dirrell won the fight and he won it pretty one sidedly. Whether you like the way he did it or not doesn't mean Froch won. Because if you are complaining on somethin Dirrell did then how can you give Froch credit for not being able to do shit about it?
Dirrell won. Simple as that. And I'll pick Dirrell in any of the other fights before I pick Froch.
I stopped reading your post as soon as i read Dirrell was the one making the fight, Dirrell won but some of your posts as usual as quite annoying and Bizzare.
To be fair Skel, he did say that it was after the point got taken away that Dirrell was the one making the fight which is a fair assessment of 10-12.
-
Re: Who won? Froch? Or Dirrell?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Majesty
The only people that are gonna pick Froch are only picking him because Dirrell doesn't have a style they like.
But whether you like Dirrells style or think it's boring or whatever you want to believe, it doesn't take away that he won the fight whether you like it or not.
And also after he got that point taken away HE was the one backing up Froch, he was the one making the fight, he was the one going all out while Froch looked confused especially after Dirrell hurt him, and continued to hurt him.
It's funny how no one mentions that. They mention Dirrells holding but don't mention Froch's holding, and rough housing and rabbit punches, and there were times it looked like he was winding up those rabbit punches and lets not forget the hitting on the break and the ref did nothing. He warned Froch a bunch of times but then took a point from Dirrell without any warning whatsoever.
You are only picking Froch because you don't like Dirrells style. But boxing ain't about what style you like when it comes to a decision. Dirrell won the fight and he won it pretty one sidedly. Whether you like the way he did it or not doesn't mean Froch won. Because if you are complaining on somethin Dirrell did then how can you give Froch credit for not being able to do shit about it?
Dirrell won. Simple as that. And I'll pick Dirrell in any of the other fights before I pick Froch.
I seen some of these posters previous posts before. There only picking Fraud cuz Dirrell is black. It's pretty obvious. I would hate to think there really that stupid that they can't score a fight that was pretty much easy to score
-
Re: Who won? Froch? Or Dirrell?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kel
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Your right in everything you say. But Dirrell is not from the UK. So therefor he can not win. The fix was in from the beginning. It's how they roll in the UK and Europe. The home fighter wins no matter what.
Maybe Dirrell should have knocked out Froch as he was so much better:rolleyes:.
Funny thread that's for sure.
Like that would of mattered. Soon as Fraud would of hit the canvas the bell would of rang early and Fraud's corner would of rushed in to help him. Some how it would of been ruled a slip. I seen this shiit happen in Europe before. Don't make a fool of yourself by denying it hasn't. It's the most corrupt continent in the whole fukkin world.
What are the worst decisions you know of to come out of the the UK of late? (Not Europe like you say)
-
Re: Who won? Froch? Or Dirrell?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kel
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Your right in everything you say. But Dirrell is not from the UK. So therefor he can not win. The fix was in from the beginning. It's how they roll in the UK and Europe. The home fighter wins no matter what.
Maybe Dirrell should have knocked out Froch as he was so much better:rolleyes:.
Funny thread that's for sure.
Like that would of mattered. Soon as Fraud would of hit the canvas the bell would of rang early and Fraud's corner would of rushed in to help him. Some how it would of been ruled a slip. I seen this shiit happen in Europe before. Don't make a fool of yourself by denying it hasn't. It's the most corrupt continent in the whole fukkin world.
You are ridiculous. That just doesn't happen. Sure some european countries are quite bad (Germany, Italy for instance, Italy being the worst IMO) but i honestly don't feel the UK is any worse than anywhere else, and certainly not worse than good ol' YooS.A. You also make a fool of yourself by wrongly viewing Europe as a single entity. Its a diverse continent containing wildly different cultures, customs and ethics. The UK does not exactly have a history of 'corrupt' decisions, and in fact i challenge you to a name and shame. You name an incident of corrupt scoring in the UK and i will reply with an example from the US.
Oh and just to clarify, i had Dirrell winning by two. But I have no real problem with the decision as he was supposed to be taking part in a boxing match, not strictly come dancing. Either way i think its creative to call the outcome corrupt.
-
Re: Who won? Froch? Or Dirrell?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
JazMerkin
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kel
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Majesty
The only people that are gonna pick Froch are only picking him because Dirrell doesn't have a style they like.
But whether you like Dirrells style or think it's boring or whatever you want to believe, it doesn't take away that he won the fight whether you like it or not.
And also after he got that point taken away HE was the one backing up Froch, he was the one making the fight, he was the one going all out while Froch looked confused especially after Dirrell hurt him, and continued to hurt him.
It's funny how no one mentions that. They mention Dirrells holding but don't mention Froch's holding, and rough housing and rabbit punches, and there were times it looked like he was winding up those rabbit punches and lets not forget the hitting on the break and the ref did nothing. He warned Froch a bunch of times but then took a point from Dirrell without any warning whatsoever.
You are only picking Froch because you don't like Dirrells style. But boxing ain't about what style you like when it comes to a decision. Dirrell won the fight and he won it pretty one sidedly. Whether you like the way he did it or not doesn't mean Froch won. Because if you are complaining on somethin Dirrell did then how can you give Froch credit for not being able to do shit about it?
Dirrell won. Simple as that. And I'll pick Dirrell in any of the other fights before I pick Froch.
Who is your fav white fighter?
WTF has that got to do with anything??
Why do you ask?
-
Re: Who won? Froch? Or Dirrell?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
CFH
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kel
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Majesty
The only people that are gonna pick Froch are only picking him because Dirrell doesn't have a style they like.
But whether you like Dirrells style or think it's boring or whatever you want to believe, it doesn't take away that he won the fight whether you like it or not.
And also after he got that point taken away HE was the one backing up Froch, he was the one making the fight, he was the one going all out while Froch looked confused especially after Dirrell hurt him, and continued to hurt him.
It's funny how no one mentions that. They mention Dirrells holding but don't mention Froch's holding, and rough housing and rabbit punches, and there were times it looked like he was winding up those rabbit punches and lets not forget the hitting on the break and the ref did nothing. He warned Froch a bunch of times but then took a point from Dirrell without any warning whatsoever.
You are only picking Froch because you don't like Dirrells style. But boxing ain't about what style you like when it comes to a decision. Dirrell won the fight and he won it pretty one sidedly. Whether you like the way he did it or not doesn't mean Froch won. Because if you are complaining on somethin Dirrell did then how can you give Froch credit for not being able to do shit about it?
Dirrell won. Simple as that. And I'll pick Dirrell in any of the other fights before I pick Froch.
Who is your fav white fighter?
:p
Do you really want to go down that road?
What road?
-
Re: Who won? Froch? Or Dirrell?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kel
Quote:
Originally Posted by
JazMerkin
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kel
Who is your fav white fighter?
WTF has that got to do with anything??
Why do you ask?
Because it has nothing to do with the thread & it's not hard to see what you're insinuating.
-
Re: Who won? Froch? Or Dirrell?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
JazMerkin
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Pugilistic
The difference between the Hopkins - Calzaghe fight and the Froch - Dirrell fight is Calzaghe's aggression was actually effective as he threw more than Hopkins and was able to land some shots especially as the fight went on.
Froch on the other hand came forward but threw less than Dirrell the whole fight and landed literally nothing.
Exactly, I thought Hopkins just edged Calzaghe, but supporting Joe, I had no real problem it going the other way. However, that was a fight with a lot of close rounds where it came down to activity or cleaner effective punching. The difference was both were landing.
I'm pretty sure Froch threw less & definitely landed less. This fight should be compared to fights like Berto-Urango & Khan-Kotelnik. It was in no way comparable to JMM-Pac II or B-Hop-Joe
Kel was giving an example of another fight in which one fighter playacted in order to gain an advantage. Thats all. He wasn't comparing the validity of the scoring in any way.
-
Re: Who won? Froch? Or Dirrell?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kel
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kel
Maybe Dirrell should have knocked out Froch as he was so much better:rolleyes:.
Funny thread that's for sure.
Like that would of mattered. Soon as Fraud would of hit the canvas the bell would of rang early and Fraud's corner would of rushed in to help him. Some how it would of been ruled a slip. I seen this shiit happen in Europe before. Don't make a fool of yourself by denying it hasn't. It's the most corrupt continent in the whole fukkin world.
What are the worst decisions you know of to come out of the the UK of late? (Not Europe like you say)
:vd: What is the UK not part of Europe? I did say continent
-
Re: Who won? Froch? Or Dirrell?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kel
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Like that would of mattered. Soon as Fraud would of hit the canvas the bell would of rang early and Fraud's corner would of rushed in to help him. Some how it would of been ruled a slip. I seen this shiit happen in Europe before. Don't make a fool of yourself by denying it hasn't. It's the most corrupt continent in the whole fukkin world.
What are the worst decisions you know of to come out of the the UK of late? (Not Europe like you say)
:vd: What is the UK not part of Europe? I did say continent
yep, its also part of the northern hemisphere. Thats how relevant it is.
-
Re: Who won? Froch? Or Dirrell?
Froch-115-114 on my cards.
-
Re: Who won? Froch? Or Dirrell?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kel
Quote:
Originally Posted by
CFH
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kel
Who is your fav white fighter?
:p
Do you really want to go down that road?
What road?
The road where you imply Majesty is a racist.
-
Re: Who won? Froch? Or Dirrell?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kel
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Like that would of mattered. Soon as Fraud would of hit the canvas the bell would of rang early and Fraud's corner would of rushed in to help him. Some how it would of been ruled a slip. I seen this shiit happen in Europe before. Don't make a fool of yourself by denying it hasn't. It's the most corrupt continent in the whole fukkin world.
What are the worst decisions you know of to come out of the the UK of late? (Not Europe like you say)
:vd: What is the UK not part of Europe? I did say continent
Yes the UK is in Europe but you know damn well that you are trying to to say we are like Germany etc.. in terms of bullshit results. Not the case at all.
-
Re: Who won? Froch? Or Dirrell?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ryanman89
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kel
Maybe Dirrell should have knocked out Froch as he was so much better:rolleyes:.
Funny thread that's for sure.
Like that would of mattered. Soon as Fraud would of hit the canvas the bell would of rang early and Fraud's corner would of rushed in to help him. Some how it would of been ruled a slip. I seen this shiit happen in Europe before. Don't make a fool of yourself by denying it hasn't. It's the most corrupt continent in the whole fukkin world.
You are ridiculous. That just doesn't happen. Sure some european countries are quite bad (Germany, Italy for instance, Italy being the worst IMO) but i honestly don't feel the UK is any worse than anywhere else, and certainly not worse than good ol' YooS.A. You also make a fool of yourself by wrongly viewing Europe as a single entity. Its a diverse continent containing wildly different cultures, customs and ethics. The UK does not exactly have a history of 'corrupt' decisions, and in fact i challenge you to a name and shame. You name an incident of corrupt scoring in the UK and i will reply with an example from the US.
Oh and just to clarify, i had Dirrell winning by two. But I have no real problem with the decision as he was supposed to be taking part in a
boxing match, not strictly come dancing. Either way i think its
creative to call the outcome corrupt.
It's obvious your Boxing knowledge is very limited if you actually believe that. Go watch more Boxing and gain more knowledge. Maybe than you'll be worth debating with.
-
Re: Who won? Froch? Or Dirrell?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Majesty
The only people that are gonna pick Froch are only picking him because Dirrell doesn't have a style they like.
But whether you like Dirrells style or think it's boring or whatever you want to believe, it doesn't take away that he won the fight whether you like it or not.
And also after he got that point taken away HE was the one backing up Froch, he was the one making the fight, he was the one going all out while Froch looked confused especially after Dirrell hurt him, and continued to hurt him.
It's funny how no one mentions that. They mention Dirrells holding but don't mention Froch's holding, and rough housing and rabbit punches, and there were times it looked like he was winding up those rabbit punches and lets not forget the hitting on the break and the ref did nothing. He warned Froch a bunch of times but then took a point from Dirrell without any warning whatsoever.
You are only picking Froch because you don't like Dirrells style. But boxing ain't about what style you like when it comes to a decision. Dirrell won the fight and he won it pretty one sidedly. Whether you like the way he did it or not doesn't mean Froch won. Because if you are complaining on somethin Dirrell did then how can you give Froch credit for not being able to do shit about it?
Dirrell won. Simple as that. And I'll pick Dirrell in any of the other fights before I pick Froch.
1) I don't mean to be difficult but thought i should point out that Froch won.....whether you like it or not.
2) i think its well known that judges preferences are important in the scoring of a fight. Im sure Dirrell knew that too.
3) Did he?
-
Re: Who won? Froch? Or Dirrell?
Unfortunatly I had Dirrell winning.Froch reacted to him for the better part of the night and I think Dirrell was there to be walked down and hurt late but had banked enough rounds early.
-
Re: Who won? Froch? Or Dirrell?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ryanman89
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Like that would of mattered. Soon as Fraud would of hit the canvas the bell would of rang early and Fraud's corner would of rushed in to help him. Some how it would of been ruled a slip. I seen this shiit happen in Europe before. Don't make a fool of yourself by denying it hasn't. It's the most corrupt continent in the whole fukkin world.
You are ridiculous. That just doesn't happen. Sure some european countries are quite bad (Germany, Italy for instance, Italy being the worst IMO) but i honestly don't feel the UK is any worse than anywhere else, and certainly not worse than good ol' YooS.A. You also make a fool of yourself by wrongly viewing Europe as a single entity. Its a diverse continent containing wildly different cultures, customs and ethics. The UK does not exactly have a history of 'corrupt' decisions, and in fact i challenge you to a name and shame. You name an incident of corrupt scoring in the UK and i will reply with an example from the US.
Oh and just to clarify, i had Dirrell winning by two. But I have no real problem with the decision as he was supposed to be taking part in a
boxing match, not strictly come dancing. Either way i think its
creative to call the outcome corrupt.
It's obvious your Boxing knowledge is very limited if you actually believe that. Go watch more Boxing and gain more knowledge. Maybe than you'll be worth debating with.
Im thinking i've got more than enough already for someone on your level.
Anyhow, i wasn't saying bad decisions don't happen. But your crazy example wouldn't happen in the UK. Or can you name one example when something remotely similar to that has happened in the UK?
-
Re: Who won? Froch? Or Dirrell?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kel
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kel
What are the worst decisions you know of to come out of the the UK of late? (Not Europe like you say)
:vd: What is the UK not part of Europe? I did say continent
Yes the UK is in Europe but you know damn well that you are trying to to say we are like Germany etc.. in terms of bullshit results. Not the case at all.
Last nights decsicion was a disgrace. Is the UK not the place where Hatton-Tszyu and McClellan-Benn took place. 2 fights in which the ref did everything in his power to help the home fighter? Speaking of Hatton, was it not in the UK in which the ref stopped the fight to tie his shoe laces while Lazcano was on the verge of knocking him out?
-
Re: Who won? Froch? Or Dirrell?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ryanman89
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ryanman89
You are ridiculous. That just doesn't happen. Sure some european countries are quite bad (Germany, Italy for instance, Italy being the worst IMO) but i honestly don't feel the UK is any worse than anywhere else, and certainly not worse than good ol' YooS.A. You also make a fool of yourself by wrongly viewing Europe as a single entity. Its a diverse continent containing wildly different cultures, customs and ethics. The UK does not exactly have a history of 'corrupt' decisions, and in fact i challenge you to a name and shame. You name an incident of corrupt scoring in the UK and i will reply with an example from the US.
Oh and just to clarify, i had Dirrell winning by two. But I have no real problem with the decision as he was supposed to be taking part in a boxing match, not strictly come dancing. Either way i think its creative to call the outcome corrupt.
It's obvious your Boxing knowledge is very limited if you actually believe that. Go watch more Boxing and gain more knowledge. Maybe than you'll be worth debating with.
Im thinking i've got more than enough already for someone on your level.
Anyhow, i wasn't saying bad decisions don't happen. But your crazy example wouldn't happen in the UK. Or can you name one example when something remotely similar to that has happened in the UK?
Don't start back pedaling on me. I clearly said Europe. In which you responded that type of stuff never happens. I got fights on my hard drive in which it happens. One involving Danny Williams. And it happened in Europe.
-
Re: Who won? Froch? Or Dirrell?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ryanman89
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Like that would of mattered. Soon as Fraud would of hit the canvas the bell would of rang early and Fraud's corner would of rushed in to help him. Some how it would of been ruled a slip. I seen this shiit happen in Europe before. Don't make a fool of yourself by denying it hasn't. It's the most corrupt continent in the whole fukkin world.
You are ridiculous. That just doesn't happen. Sure some european countries are quite bad (Germany, Italy for instance, Italy being the worst IMO) but i honestly don't feel the UK is any worse than anywhere else, and certainly not worse than good ol' YooS.A. You also make a fool of yourself by wrongly viewing Europe as a single entity. Its a diverse continent containing wildly different cultures, customs and ethics. The UK does not exactly have a history of 'corrupt' decisions, and in fact i challenge you to a name and shame. You name an incident of corrupt scoring in the UK and i will reply with an example from the US.
Oh and just to clarify, i had Dirrell winning by two. But I have no real problem with the decision as he was supposed to be taking part in a
boxing match, not strictly come dancing. Either way i think its
creative to call the outcome corrupt.
It's obvious your Boxing knowledge is very limited if you actually believe that. Go watch more Boxing and gain more knowledge. Maybe than you'll be worth debating with.
Do you even understand geography?
Lumping the UK in with Europe is as culturally relevant as lumping it in with the whole northern hemisphere. But that would also implicated the US wouldn't it?
-
Re: Who won? Froch? Or Dirrell?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ryanman89
Do you even understand geography?
Lumping the UK in with Europe is as culturally relevant as lumping it in with the whole northern hemisphere. But that would also implicated the US wouldn't it?
I think he does. The UK is in Europe. Particularly in boxing terms, the same set of referees, judges, timekeepers are shared out across Europe. In a boxing sense it is basically one entity in terms of how its administration is run.
-
Re: Who won? Froch? Or Dirrell?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kel
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
:vd: What is the UK not part of Europe? I did say continent
Yes the UK is in Europe but you know damn well that you are trying to to say we are like Germany etc.. in terms of bullshit results. Not the case at all.
Last nights decsicion was a disgrace. Is the UK not the place where Hatton-Tszyu and McClellan-Benn took place. 2 fights in which the ref did everything in his power to help the home fighter? Speaking of Hatton, was it not in the UK in which the ref stopped the fight to tie his shoe laces while Lazcano was on the verge of knocking him out?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ryanman89
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ryanman89
You are ridiculous. That just doesn't happen. Sure some european countries are quite bad (Germany, Italy for instance, Italy being the worst IMO) but i honestly don't feel the UK is any worse than anywhere else, and certainly not worse than good ol' YooS.A. You also make a fool of yourself by wrongly viewing Europe as a single entity. Its a diverse continent containing wildly different cultures, customs and ethics. The UK does not exactly have a history of 'corrupt' decisions, and in fact i challenge you to a name and shame. You name an incident of corrupt scoring in the UK and i will reply with an example from the US.
Oh and just to clarify, i had Dirrell winning by two. But I have no real problem with the decision as he was supposed to be taking part in a boxing match, not strictly come dancing. Either way i think its creative to call the outcome corrupt.
It's obvious your Boxing knowledge is very limited if you actually believe that. Go watch more Boxing and gain more knowledge. Maybe than you'll be worth debating with.
Do you even understand geography?
Lumping the UK in with Europe is as culturally relevant as lumping it in with the whole northern hemisphere. But that would also implicated the US wouldn't it?
Read the post above for your example's
-
Re: Who won? Froch? Or Dirrell?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ryanman89
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
It's obvious your Boxing knowledge is very limited if you actually believe that. Go watch more Boxing and gain more knowledge. Maybe than you'll be worth debating with.
Im thinking i've got more than enough already for someone on your level.
Anyhow, i wasn't saying bad decisions don't happen. But your crazy example wouldn't happen in the UK. Or can you name one example when something remotely similar to that has happened in the UK?
Don't start back pedaling on me. I clearly said Europe. In which you responded that type of stuff never happens. I got fights on my hard drive in which it happens. One involving Danny Williams. And it happened in Europe.
Im not back pedalling. My next sentence stated that some european countries are bad. My point is the UK isnt one of them, and furthermore, its not relevant to keep refering to the UK as if its one and the same as Europe. I stand by my comment that stuff like you described just doesn't happen. I know the Williams fight, it was unbelievable (he still won by stoppage), but this is one example. I would guess this is the one example you have, not multiple examples.
And anyway, as i have said, and Kel has said, proving corruption in Europe does not prove corruption in the UK. They are not one and the same. If you take nothing else away from this, please take that.
-
Re: Who won? Froch? Or Dirrell?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
JazMerkin
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ryanman89
Do you even understand geography?
Lumping the UK in with Europe is as culturally relevant as lumping it in with the whole northern hemisphere. But that would also implicated the US wouldn't it?
I think he does. The UK
is in Europe. Particularly in boxing terms, the same set of referees, judges, timekeepers are shared out across Europe. In a boxing sense it is basically one entity in terms of how its administration is run.
Thank you. Finally an unbiased UK poster.
-
Re: Who won? Froch? Or Dirrell?
Id'a gone with Benn/Malinga 1..maybe a Eubank/Thorton
-
Re: Who won? Froch? Or Dirrell?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
JazMerkin
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ryanman89
Do you even understand geography?
Lumping the UK in with Europe is as culturally relevant as lumping it in with the whole northern hemisphere. But that would also implicated the US wouldn't it?
I think he does. The UK
is in Europe. Particularly in boxing terms, the same set of referees, judges, timekeepers are shared out across Europe. In a boxing sense it is basically one entity in terms of how its administration is run.
But by his logic if we had 100 fights in a row, in Italy for example, that all had corrupt results, this would prove the existence of corruption in the United Kingdom - simply because they are both in Europe. This makes no sense.
-
Re: Who won? Froch? Or Dirrell?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Spicoli
Id'a gone with Benn/Malinga 1..maybe a Eubank/Thorton
Those are just 2 more examples. But I also wanted to provide proof about how ref's go out there way to help the home fighter. Hatton-Tszyu and McClellan-Benn are perfect examples.
-
Re: Who won? Froch? Or Dirrell?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
CFH
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kel
Quote:
Originally Posted by
CFH
:p
Do you really want to go down that road?
What road?
The road where you imply Majesty is a racist.
How dare you say this fucking shit! I feel offended big time! Fuck this place, I'm bored of this fucking "anything goes to try win an argument" shit
I'm outta this dead fucking hole.
Bye everyone
-
Re: Who won? Froch? Or Dirrell?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kel
Quote:
Originally Posted by
CFH
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kel
What road?
The road where you imply Majesty is a racist.
How dare you say this fucking shit! I feel offended big time! Fuck this place, I'm bored of this fucking "anything goes to try win an argument" shit
I'm outta this dead fucking hole.
Bye everyone
How dare they accuse you of being a rapist. Frankly I'm appalled.
-
Re: Who won? Froch? Or Dirrell?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kel
Quote:
Originally Posted by
CFH
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kel
What road?
The road where you imply Majesty is a racist.
How dare you say this fucking shit! I feel offended big time! Fuck this place, I'm bored of this fucking "anything goes to try win an argument" shit
I'm outta this dead fucking hole.
Bye everyone
since he is leaving can we subtract a person from the thinking froch won column??
-
Re: Who won? Froch? Or Dirrell?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ryanman89
Quote:
Originally Posted by
JazMerkin
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ryanman89
Do you even understand geography?
Lumping the UK in with Europe is as culturally relevant as lumping it in with the whole northern hemisphere. But that would also implicated the US wouldn't it?
I think he does. The UK
is in Europe. Particularly in boxing terms, the same set of referees, judges, timekeepers are shared out across Europe. In a boxing sense it is basically one entity in terms of how its administration is run.
But by his logic if we had 100 fights in a row, in Italy for example, that all had corrupt results, this would prove the existence of corruption in the United Kingdom - simply because they are both in Europe. This makes no sense.
Yeah, but there have been dodgy decisions in the UK as elsewhere in Europe. It's a federal system where the most powerful promoters like Warren, Sauerland & Hennessy end up having too much control, particularly in their country.
The argument is much harder to make in the US because they work on a state by state system, where each is different. I guarantee that there can be no comparison between Texas & Califiornia.
He said he'd seen this shiit in Europe, which is true & as a boxing entity we are one. He didn't say the UK is full of this shit (although there has to be some suspicion about the recent run of Hennessy fighters in the UK), but that Europe is. Much as I hate to admit it, he's right. We use far too small a pool of judges & referees over here. Generally the ref doesn't bother me as I tend to think most refs tend end up favouring the house fighter.
But the judges is a problem. There are way too few in Europe, often advancing to the top level much too easily (Van de Wiele last night had never judged above a basic Euro level). I tend to think that the power that the aforementioned promoters hold in Europe often holds a heavy sway over a judge looking over one of their fighters. Take a guess what's happened to the judges who had Thaxton's fight against Mezaache? Booted back off to their respective domestic levels.
-
Re: Who won? Froch? Or Dirrell?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kel
Quote:
Originally Posted by
CFH
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kel
What road?
The road where you imply Majesty is a racist.
How dare you say this fucking shit! I feel offended big time! Fuck this place, I'm bored of this fucking "anything goes to try win an argument" shit
I'm outta this dead fucking hole.
Bye everyone
Laters
* I do love how we've moved from being angered at someone being racist to anger at the accusation of racism to being angered at being accused of accusing someone of being racist (makes sense... no probably not)
** Does anyone else imagine Kel saying that in a Borat voice :p
Quote:
Originally Posted by markb018
since he is leaving can we subtract a person from the thinking froch won column??
Yes
-
Re: Who won? Froch? Or Dirrell?
hahaha - I haven't read all this thread. I just wanted to throw in I thnk Froch is shit. I base that on the fact he is.
-
Re: Who won? Froch? Or Dirrell?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Youngblood
hahaha - I haven't read all this thread. I just wanted to throw in I thnk Froch is shit. I base that on the fact he is.
I wish Kel hadn't stormed off to not accuse people of being racist, I really think that this could have had the potential of a HoF thread otherwise :-\
-
Re: Who won? Froch? Or Dirrell?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
JazMerkin
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Youngblood
hahaha - I haven't read all this thread. I just wanted to throw in I thnk Froch is shit. I base that on the fact he is.
I wish Kel hadn't stormed off to not accuse people of being racist, I really think that this could have had the potential of a HoF thread otherwise :-\
Don't give up so easily. There's still time.
-
Re: Who won? Froch? Or Dirrell?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kel
Quote:
Originally Posted by
CFH
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kel
What road?
The road where you imply Majesty is a racist.
How dare you say this fucking shit! I feel offended big time! Fuck this place, I'm bored of this fucking "anything goes to try win an argument" shit
I'm outta this dead fucking hole.
Bye everyone
If you have another explanation for what you said to Majesty I'd be happy to hear it. It seemed pretty obvious to me what you were implying, but I was wrong once before back in 1987 so it's conceivable that it could happen again I suppose.
