 |
|
Thanks: 0
Likes: 0
Dislikes: 0
hardest poster on saddos
Array
Re: What Dirrel does that i hate.
Originally Posted by JazMerkin
No, he really does come out with this shit all the time
I'm waiting to discover that he's actually Daniel Day-Lewis doing some method acting in preparation for his latest role as a drunken buffoon
Yes jaz because andre dirrell is infact the super middleweight version of arturo gatti
one dangerous horrible bloke
Saddo's Ernie Hudson
Array
Re: What Dirrel does that i hate.
No, he really does come out with this shit all the time
I'm waiting to discover that he's actually Daniel Day-Lewis doing some method acting in preparation for his latest role as a drunken buffoon
Yes jaz because andre dirrell is infact the super middleweight version of arturo gatti
Did I say that? No, you made your usual poorly conceived comeback. I didn't like how Dirrell fought, but the fact is he was no greater a problem than Froch. Just because you are determined to forcefully ram your tongue up any British fighter's arse no matter what, try & actually read what the guy was saying.
He was talking about the basic fundamental skills you use in boxing, most importantly guarding the chin. You then use it as an excuse to go on about something completely different, because, let's face it, you like boxing to basically be a slightly classier version of the WWE.
Many others saw the irony of you complaining about holding being a Hatton fan, but I suppose that's ok because he used it to shove his head in his opponent's face & punch them illegally
hardest poster on saddos
Array
Re: What Dirrel does that i hate.
No, he really does come out with this shit all the time
I'm waiting to discover that he's actually Daniel Day-Lewis doing some method acting in preparation for his latest role as a drunken buffoon
Yes jaz because andre dirrell is infact the super middleweight version of arturo gatti
Did I say that? No, you made your usual poorly conceived comeback. I didn't like how Dirrell fought, but the fact is he was no greater a problem than Froch. Just because you are determined to forcefully ram your tongue up any British fighter's arse no matter what, try & actually read what the guy was saying.
He was talking about the basic fundamental skills you use in boxing, most importantly guarding the chin. You then use it as an excuse to go on about something completely different, because, let's face it, you like boxing to basically be a slightly classier version of the WWE.
Many others saw the irony of you complaining about holding being a Hatton fan, but I suppose that's ok because he used it to shove his head in his opponent's face & punch them illegally
Do you actually listen to yourself sometimes. Seriously read the original post then read what was just highlighted in red.
The guy was pointing out particulars of the fight that he did not like from andre dirrell. I replyed saying andre also wasnt my cup of tea..you completely throw the whole thing together...come up with 47 and then start talking about the "fundamentals of boxing"
The hatton remark wasnt lost on me. As i clearly pointed out hattons technique is a completely valid acceptable one while dirrells wild clambering of an opponent isnt.
If your gonna pick at a post at least get your facts right
jeez
one dangerous horrible bloke
Saddo's Ernie Hudson
Array
Re: What Dirrel does that i hate.
:lolatyou:
Yes jaz because andre dirrell is infact the super middleweight version of arturo gatti
Did I say that? No, you made your usual poorly conceived comeback. I didn't like how Dirrell fought, but the fact is he was no greater a problem than Froch. Just because you are determined to forcefully ram your tongue up any British fighter's arse no matter what, try & actually read what the guy was saying.
He was talking about the basic fundamental skills you use in boxing, most importantly guarding the chin. You then use it as an excuse to go on about something completely different, because, let's face it, you like boxing to basically be a slightly classier version of the WWE.
Many others saw the irony of you complaining about holding being a Hatton fan, but I suppose that's ok because he used it to shove his head in his opponent's face & punch them illegally
Do you actually listen to yourself sometimes. Seriously read the original post then read what was just highlighted in red.
The guy was pointing out particulars of the fight that he did not like from andre dirrell. I replyed saying andre also wasnt my cup of tea..you completely throw the whole thing together...come up with 47 and then start talking about the "fundamentals of boxing"
The hatton remark wasnt lost on me. As i clearly pointed out hattons technique is a completely valid acceptable one while dirrells wild clambering of an opponent isnt.
If your gonna pick at a post at least get your facts right
jeez
Yes, the fundamentals of boxing, something Dirrell wasn't doing. That's what he was criticizing. I agree with him that sliding out move is an accident waiting to happen, he's already been dropped like that once in his career. He was talking about it as a technical issue, that's why he thought you were being sarcastic, because no one can possibly be that dumb.
You talking about facts is funny, it's like Russell Brand talking about abstinence. Seriously, from a boxing stand-point, nothing you said had anything to do with it. You & facts just don't go together. You & brash, baseless generalizations do go together.
You also clearly did not point out how Hatton has a clearly acceptable technique. Show me the post where you did that. Hatton wrestles, hits below the belt, tries every dirty trick in the book. You CANNOT dig your head into your opponent's face, it really is not legit.
hardest poster on saddos
Array
Re: What Dirrel does that i hate.
:lolatyou:
Did I say that? No, you made your usual poorly conceived comeback. I didn't like how Dirrell fought, but the fact is he was no greater a problem than Froch. Just because you are determined to forcefully ram your tongue up any British fighter's arse no matter what, try & actually read what the guy was saying.
He was talking about the basic fundamental skills you use in boxing, most importantly guarding the chin. You then use it as an excuse to go on about something completely different, because, let's face it, you like boxing to basically be a slightly classier version of the WWE.
Many others saw the irony of you complaining about holding being a Hatton fan, but I suppose that's ok because he used it to shove his head in his opponent's face & punch them illegally
Do you actually listen to yourself sometimes. Seriously read the original post then read what was just highlighted in red.
The guy was pointing out particulars of the fight that he did not like from andre dirrell. I replyed saying andre also wasnt my cup of tea..you completely throw the whole thing together...come up with 47 and then start talking about the "fundamentals of boxing"
The hatton remark wasnt lost on me. As i clearly pointed out hattons technique is a completely valid acceptable one while dirrells wild clambering of an opponent isnt.
If your gonna pick at a post at least get your facts right
jeez
Yes, the fundamentals of boxing, something Dirrell wasn't doing. That's what he was criticizing. I agree with him that sliding out move is an accident waiting to happen, he's already been dropped like that once in his career. He was talking about it as a technical issue, that's why he thought you were being sarcastic, because no one can possibly be that dumb.
You talking about facts is funny, it's like Russell Brand talking about abstinence. Seriously, from a boxing stand-point, nothing you said had anything to do with it. You & facts just don't go together. You & brash, baseless generalizations do go together.
You also clearly did not point out how Hatton has a clearly acceptable technique. Show me the post where you did that. Hatton wrestles, hits below the belt, tries every dirty trick in the book. You CANNOT dig your head into your opponent's face, it really is not legit.
JESUS H CHRIST
Have we met before?
Of the 3,000 odd posts ive made on this site im gonna go on record and say at least 700 of them have been about hatton, with a good 50/60 about his style and technique.
I was asked if i was being sarcastic because, and get this.............
he thought i was being "SARCASTIC"
Hatton does this, that etc - i really couldnt give a shit. 90% of fighters at the highest level bend rules as much as they possibly can to get the job done. If you can name me a single fighter in the history of the sport who has never "hit below the belt", "wrestled" "dug head into an opponents face" id just love to hear it.
Yes a lot of what i say on here about fighters i like can at times be biased. I completely agree i do defend my fave fighters (not just british ones) on here because i follow the sport with a passion. But when youve close contests such as this one you have to accept that 50% of the time your boy will miss out and put it down to bad luck rather than bitching about it.
one dangerous horrible bloke
Saddo's Ernie Hudson
Array
Re: What Dirrel does that i hate.
Normally, when people say I've clearly pointed out they mean in that particular thread. No one ever remembers your posts, you may follow the sport with a passion, but you follow the fighters you like Hatton, Froch etc & blindly give them the benefit no matter what. I would be fine Froch getting the decision, if he had just done something for it. Dirrell fought like a prick, but its as much down to Froch that it was shit as him. Froch never really tried to press. Yes he walked forward, but he never went for it.:lolatyou:
Do you actually listen to yourself sometimes. Seriously read the original post then read what was just highlighted in red.
The guy was pointing out particulars of the fight that he did not like from andre dirrell. I replyed saying andre also wasnt my cup of tea..you completely throw the whole thing together...come up with 47 and then start talking about the "fundamentals of boxing"
The hatton remark wasnt lost on me. As i clearly pointed out hattons technique is a completely valid acceptable one while dirrells wild clambering of an opponent isnt.
If your gonna pick at a post at least get your facts right
jeez
Yes, the fundamentals of boxing, something Dirrell wasn't doing. That's what he was criticizing. I agree with him that sliding out move is an accident waiting to happen, he's already been dropped like that once in his career. He was talking about it as a technical issue, that's why he thought you were being sarcastic, because no one can possibly be that dumb.
You talking about facts is funny, it's like Russell Brand talking about abstinence. Seriously, from a boxing stand-point, nothing you said had anything to do with it. You & facts just don't go together. You & brash, baseless generalizations do go together.
You also clearly did not point out how Hatton has a clearly acceptable technique. Show me the post where you did that. Hatton wrestles, hits below the belt, tries every dirty trick in the book. You CANNOT dig your head into your opponent's face, it really is not legit.
JESUS H CHRIST
Have we met before?
Of the 3,000 odd posts ive made on this site im gonna go on record and say at least 700 of them have been about hatton, with a good 50/60 about his style and technique.
I was asked if i was being sarcastic because, and get this.............
he thought i was being "SARCASTIC"
Hatton does this, that etc - i really couldnt give a shit. 90% of fighters at the highest level bend rules as much as they possibly can to get the job done. If you can name me a single fighter in the history of the sport who has never "hit below the belt", "wrestled" "dug head into an opponents face" id just love to hear it.
Yes a lot of what i say on here about fighters i like can at times be biased. I completely agree i do defend my fave fighters (not just british ones) on here because i follow the sport with a passion. But when youve close contests such as this one you have to accept that 50% of the time your boy will miss out and put it down to bad luck rather than bitching about it.
As for the last section, how about you in future apply that logic to the Joe Cortez situation.
Forum Greatest Of All Time
Array
Re: What Dirrel does that i hate.
Let me be clear. I'm a Dirrel fan. I like his style. When he first turn pro i prefer his brother because he wasn't quite as flashly. Andre unless i have the two mxed up use to do things in the ring that reminded me of Prince Naseem. Not a bad thing but not my favorite thing. His brother Anthony on the other hand had a slick boxing style but was slightly more fundamental. I could be completley wrong because haven't seen as much of them as i would have liked.
Anyway my rant about the slide out move was because i don't want to see him get hurt. Moves like that are good for playing touch football but in boxing that could get you hurt. There are better ways to slide off the ropes. Just ask Hopkins.
body shot knockouts
Array
Re: What Dirrel does that i hate.
if by that you mean that Dirrell was holding, and Froch was hitting (to include to the back of the head), then you would be correct...Froch is far uglier a boxer than Dirrell, holding and hitting blatantly, and he didnt get a warning. Hitting behind the head every tie up. The dude is a dirty fighter, he got away with alot and Dirrell got deducted and warned left and right. Would love to see the punch numbers from that fight.
His whole style is just butt ugly
grabbing at the 1st opportunity, throwing his hands over his opponent whenever possible, constant ducking when an opponent trys to attack, endless unneccessary lunging into an opponent, falling to the floor whenever possible
The guy is the very thing boxing doesnt need right now
"...went 12 rounds with Ali, and never took a backwards step."
"Now speak only fists"
Array
Re: What Dirrel does that i hate.
More action on this page than on Saturday night (Sunday morning)!!!
You do a commercial and you're off the artistic roll call... forever
--Bill Hicks
Una mas semana
Array
Re: What Dirrel does that i hate.
Indeed, for being such a "boring" fight it sure has caused some exciting arguments.More action on this page than on Saturday night (Sunday morning)!!!
For every story told that divides us, I believe there are a thousand untold that unite us.
Forum Wiseass
Array
Re: What Dirrel does that i hate.
No there was a few times he was chasing after Dirrell and when he caught him he would hold and hit. Yes Dirrell did initiate the clinches mainly, Froch would then hit him in the back of the head. He cant be blamed too much but I would have thought with how much it happened he would have gotten at least a warning. I think everyone gets caught up with that you have to clearly beat a champ shit. Dirrell won most of those rounds seems like people were just giving Froch close rounds due to Dirrells style. When Dirrell was landing more shots.if by that you mean that Dirrell was holding, and Froch was hitting (to include to the back of the head), then you would be correct...Froch is far uglier a boxer than Dirrell, holding and hitting blatantly, and he didnt get a warning. Hitting behind the head every tie up. The dude is a dirty fighter, he got away with alot and Dirrell got deducted and warned left and right. Would love to see the punch numbers from that fight.
Forum Wiseass
Array
Re: What Dirrel does that i hate.
I would have to say that Calzaghe was right about froch, he would handle him pretty easily IMO. The winner of Bute V Andrade should meet Froch. I hope its Librado, that would be a good matchup eh, a guy that wants to come forward against a guy that never takes a step backwards.
hardest poster on saddos
Array
Re: What Dirrel does that i hate.
dont wanna be that guy that has to break some bad news to you but.....
BBC SPORT | Boxing | Froch signs for Super Six series
one dangerous horrible bloke
Forum Greatest Of All Time
Array
Re: What Dirrel does that i hate.
Dirrel was doing some holding and yes Froch was push Dirrels head down and hitting behind the head. The thing that bothered me most about the situation was that when the ref finaly does take a point he takes it from Dirrel when Froch committed way more fouls. Also i was getting tired of Dirrel complaining to the ref. It was clear that the ref wasn't going to do anything so stop complaing and protect yourself. Once Dirrel did that he fought a much better fight.
I'm sorry Froch fans but to take a point away from Dirrel without warning in round 10 of a close fight is wrong.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks