Who won? Froch? Or Dirrell?

[JazMerkin]

At least Mayweather has skill to back up his trash talking.

You also don't hear Mayweather talking shit about an opponent he's just beat like Froch. I find it hard to believe that I was the only one put off by all that stuff about Dirrell being a coward right after he got a gift against him.

I know you can't but like the others you don't address the falling to the knees shit, same as the Hopkins fans don't seem to remember Bernard clutching his balls like a fucking loser trying to steal the fight againsed Joe.

One guy wants to fight, the other tries to steal it by doing stupid shit like faking fouls and going to his knees. As a judge what the fucking hell would you do seriously?

"He is trying to get a point taken off Joe to win the fight, what genius"

"I like the guy who keeps falling to his knees to avoid shots, smart stuff"

None of that has anything to do with any of the scoring criteria. That is the referee's job to deal with. A judge is there to address (again, even though others have posted it)

Who was landing the cleaner & more effective punches - Froch wasn't landing so this could only be Dirrell. In fact, Dirrell was never staggered, it was Froch who was hurt, particularly towards the end of 10th & 11th rounds.

Defensive skills - This was clearly Dirrell, who was barely hit as Froch 'came forward', in fact on the rare occasions Froch did connect with a shot, Dirrell would be right back at him with more. It's not hard to see who did better.

Effective aggression - Froch came forward, but he did nothing when coming forward. When Dirrell came forward he was landing punches, particularly working well to the body.

Ring generalship - I think the fact it didn't turn into a war & swingfest shows this was Dirrell again. He made Froch fight his fight & beat him handily at it. In fact the occasions when he did get involved in Froch's fight, he appeared to be besting him there as well.