Dirrell vs Froch...your view.

I never got the chance to watch the Froch-Dirrell fight. For those of you that have seen it, give me your impressions of the fight. I have heard some say Dirrell got shafted and some have said Dirrell didn't do anything but hold in the fight.

I'm interested in what you saw that night and who you thought was the winner.

Aggressive brawler type guy coming forward dictating the pace of the fight while a boxer counter fighter backs up landing some counters where the effectiveness is completely debatable. The announcer team of boxing elitists prefered Dirrell heavily but I felt Froch controlled the fight, fought more aggressive, and landed the bigger blows.

It was a stalemate in a clash of styles where philosophy dictates how'd you score it.

Dirrell fought like a disgrace, think of Calzaghe vs Hopkins round ten times 100. Constant prat falling,clinching and whining to the ref.

Ya, I forgot about that as much as I did the actual fight in itself. That certainly helped reflect the view that the only one that looked like a proper fighter out there was Froch.

Dirrell won that fight

he was Frochin Froch up with lefts, was a bullshit decision imo

The fight was a pretty big clusterfuck IMO. All the clinching, seperations, etc. distracted from the fight and considering it was very close hard to see who was being more effective. I though Dirrell did enough but it was definetly his fault the fight was so sloppy looking. Froch did get away with a few cheap shots during seperations though so Dirrells whining was a bit warranted in my book...it's not like Abraham who complains about nut shots everytime he gets hit in the body.