Who won? Froch? Or Dirrell?

[erics44]

. When he stopped to fight & sat down on his punches he looked really good.

he lost because he did this just once in 12 rounds

boxing is about fighting not running

I don't disagree with what you say (and I am about as patriotic Brit as you will find BTW) but if you look at it objectively and score it as the rules dictate then it is very hard to see anything other than A dirrell victory imo. Looking at it subjetively and from a point of view of who was coming forward etc then yes, you would look towards Froch

no i think you have got it wrong, boxing is about fighting and entertaining

dirrell ran and threw a few punches along the way, it was a pretty aweful performance and he didnt deserve a round imo

remember when lennox lewis faught akimwanda (spelling!), i think only that was a worse performance of anti-boxing that I have seen

i agree, dirrell probably landed as many punches as froch, but when froch was pushing the fight so much dirrell had a lot more opportunity

when i say "froch pushing the fight so much" that is a massive understatement, ive never seen a fight so one sided in that way

Dirrell didnt deserve to win, and it would have been bad for boxing as a whole if a fighter can use those tactics and win a world title fight