Re: Why would dirrel need to act, he was going to win anyway...

Originally Posted by
ninjaspy3

Originally Posted by
GuyIncognito76
It's hard to say for certain, but it did look like he was playing. The bit where he was being interviewed and he thought he'd lost did appear to be akin to a tee-totaller pretending to be drunk.
I'm not saying he was acting, I guess only he knows for sure -the punch didn't seem to catch him flush, and he'd been hit with better shots in the fight, but I will accept that he wasn't ready for it.
I did like the balls of Abrahams in his interview though

The punch caught him flush. There's video with slow motion replay.
Anyway, let's say, for the sake of argument that Dirrell was acting. Are you saying that the DQ should only be given if a fighter is illegally KOd? I dont think there is a rule saying that one must be hit while down + almost be KOd from the shot for a DQ to be taken into consideration.
I didn't say I disagreed with the DQ. Dirrell was clearly down and he was hit by a good punch. The issue is whether, or not, Dirrell was play acting. The Ref was shocking; he missed (or miss-called) two knockdowns and should probably waved the fight off as soon as Abrahams hit him -Dirrell's reaction appears to be the only reason the fight was called off (of course, so useless was the ref that he may have been intending to call off the fight anyway, but just wasn't very decisive)
You do a commercial and you're off the artistic roll call... forever
--Bill Hicks
Bookmarks