Carl Froch vs George Groves

Steintreppe · 30-11-2013 02:49PM

walshb wrote: »

I see your point, but when you analyse it closer, Froch was hurt right at rd 1 whilst very fresh. He got dropped, got back up and acknowledged to the referee that he was ready. The other times he was "hurt" was rd 6, but again, he was sturdy, upright and firing back cleanly. He wasn't wobbling, reeling or heading south.

The 9th rd in my eyes was a bit different. George did look ragged and was taking clean and hard shots whilst looking ragged, moving/leaning backwards, head to the ground and swinging. Finally he sways forwards with head and body going south. That for me was when the referee felt that he was not capable of defending himself, and that Froch posed too serious a risk to Groves.

When I first watched it on a very average youtube feed I couldn't really see the shots that Froch was landing as Groves was backing up to the ropes. I have since seen it a lot clearer, and IMO I can't really fault the referee's decision too much. I would have liked an extra couple of seconds, but sometimes that is all it takes for real danger.

I have a feeling that when many watch it back now and later they may not feel as outraged. When you're in the moment, adrenalin pumping, high as a kite and loving the ding dong action of a fight, a sudden stoppage can kill you and have you seething.

Groves was ok imo. He has a style that makes him look slouched over. Look at him from the opening bell.

blade1 · 30-11-2013 02:53PM

walshb wrote: »

That's fair enough. Like I have been saying, there is no "right or wrong" here. That's what a lot of the posts seem to be about. One camp claiming they're right and the other camp claiming they're right. Both camps claiming to know what would have or could have happened had this occurred or this not occurred. It's all speculation.

Ok, let's forget what might have happened so.
Up to the very point where the fight was stopped, Groves was ahead and the fight should not have been stopped.
So there is a wrong and a right and it was wrong IMO,stank even!

walshb · 30-11-2013 03:02PM

blade1 wrote: »

Ok, let's forget what might have happened so.
Up to the very point where the fight was stopped, Groves was ahead and the fight should not have been stopped.
So there is a wrong and a right and it was wrong IMO,stank even!

Yes, the decision was wrong in your view, not in everyone's view, as you have alluded to. Boxing has thrown up these scenarios for many many years and will continue to throw them up.

blade1 · 30-11-2013 03:12PM

walshb wrote: »

Yes, the decision was wrong in your view, not in everyone's view, as you have alluded to. Boxing has thrown up these scenarios for many many years and will continue to throw them up.

I know, doesn't make it ok or acceptable though.

walshb · 30-11-2013 03:46PM

blade1 wrote: »

I know, doesn't make it ok or acceptable though.

For you!

blade1 · 30-11-2013 03:53PM

walshb wrote: »

For you!

Good answer.
It must be just me so.

walshb · 30-11-2013 03:55PM

blade1 wrote: »

Good answer.
It must be just me so.

No, not just you.

blade1 · 30-11-2013 03:58PM

walshb wrote: »

No, not just you.

I know that.
I was joking.

Johner · 02-12-2013 07:08PM

http://www.espn.co.uk/boxing/sport/story/261959.html

"As much as the fans want to see it reach a natural conclusion against George Groves, with me knocking him out again, I feel personally I gave him his chance and he blew it - he can't cut it at world level," Froch told BBC East Midlands Today.

"I've done my job and it's time to move on, but we'll see what happens. I'm not motivated by money, I'm motivated by securing a legacy and the love for my sport that I have."

Read more at http://www.espn.co.uk/boxing/sport/story/261959.html#voiU65JZEdZLCc72.99

Lol. It's quite obvious Froch wants nothing to do with Groves again.

HigginsJ · 02-12-2013 09:09PM

Johner wrote: »

http://www.espn.co.uk/boxing/sport/story/261959.html

Lol. It's quite obvious Froch wants nothing to do with Groves again.

Why would he? There is nothing in it for him. He has only a handful of fights left in his career. He has nothing to gain & everything to lose in a Groves rematch. Lots of people will criticise him for it but it's business.

MD1990 · 02-12-2013 10:59PM

HigginsJ wrote: »

Why would he? There is nothing in it for him. He has only a handful of fights left in his career. He has nothing to gain & everything to lose in a Groves rematch. Lots of people will criticise him for it but it's business.

it would be his biggest payday most likely
he knows deep down he would most likely lose a rematch

walshb · 02-12-2013 11:13PM

MD1990 wrote: »

he knows deep down he would most likely lose a rematch

Not sure he does. When he looks back maybe he thinks of the positives from the fight. The fact that he stayed in there, took the best that Groves had and got back into the fight. Started to bother Groves, hurt him and force the referee to halt the fight. Maybe he also thinks that he has damaged Groves as a fighter?

Johner · 02-12-2013 11:20PM

HigginsJ wrote: »

Why would he? There is nothing in it for him. He has only a handful of fights left in his career. He has nothing to gain & everything to lose in a Groves rematch. Lots of people will criticise him for it but it's business.

He would make more money from a rematch with Groves than any other fight out there, we all know why he doesn't fancy the rematch and it's nothing to do with boxing being a business, sure the business sense would be a rematch. Froch's ego couldn't take a defeat to Groves. He said Groves has proved he is not world class.

Surely if he feels that way Groves would be an easy fight for him and he would KO him again. Whats the benefit of a fight with Ward? He will be beaten easily on points and make less money. A rematch with Groves should be happening but it wont.

Johner · 02-12-2013 11:21PM

walshb wrote: »

Not sure he does. When he looks back maybe he thinks of the positives from the fight. The fact that he stayed in there, took the best that Groves had and got back into the fight. Started to bother Groves, hurt him and force the referee to halt the fight. Maybe he also thinks that he has damaged Groves as a fighter?

Then why is it looking like he's not going to take the rematch? Surely if he felt the way you are saying he wouldn't be talking up other fights and dismissing a rematch.

walshb · 02-12-2013 11:25PM

Johner wrote: »

Then why is it looking like he's not going to take the rematch? Surely if he felt the way you are saying he wouldn't be talking up other fights and dismissing a rematch.

I am not sure what way he is feeling. Maybe he thinks it's too much of a risk. But, that does not mean that he "deep down knows he loses."

MD1990 · 02-12-2013 11:52PM

walshb wrote: »

Not sure he does. When he looks back maybe he thinks of the positives from the fight. The fact that he stayed in there, took the best that Groves had and got back into the fight. Started to bother Groves, hurt him and force the referee to halt the fight. Maybe he also thinks that he has damaged Groves as a fighter?

he forced the referee to stop the fight?
how does he think he damaged Groves since he didn't knock him down.
the fans & nearly every boxing pundit think there should be a rematch & it would be a huge fight financially.
he is ducking the fight as he doesn't feel he will win imo
he wants Ward in the UK so he can get a dodgy decision if he doesn't get completley schooled like he did in 2011

walshb · 03-12-2013 09:15AM

MD1990 wrote: »

he forced the referee to stop the fight?
how does he think he damaged Groves since he didn't knock him down.
the fans & nearly every boxing pundit think there should be a rematch & it would be a huge fight financially.
he is ducking the fight as he doesn't feel he will win imo
he wants Ward in the UK so he can get a dodgy decision if he doesn't get completley schooled like he did in 2011

Maybe you should hop into the mind of Froch and tell us exactly how he's thinking as regards Groves and the fight?

And yes, he did force the referee to stop the fight. That is actual fact. You may not agree with the stoppage, but that is completely irrelevant.

My use of the word 'maybe' in my original post means that I can't know how he's thinking.

One more thing, what has knocking someone down got to do with damaging a fighter?

MD1990 · 03-12-2013 10:27AM

walshb wrote: »

Maybe you should hop into the mind of Froch and tell us exactly how he's thinking as regards Groves and the fight?

And yes, he did force the referee to stop the fight. That is actual fact. You may not agree with the stoppage, but that is completely irrelevant.

My use of the word 'maybe' in my original post means that I can't know how he's thinking.

One more thing, what has knocking someone down got to do with damaging a fighter?

usually when a fighter is badly damaged he will be put down.if Groves was hurt more frequently it could be true.But to say Groves could be damaged for upcoming fights for getting hurt by Froch once in 9 rounds is an odd thing to think & im sure Froch with his experience isnt thinking that. The reason i have this theory on Froch's mentality towards a Groves rematch is because after the fight he said Groves showed he was world class & led the fans to believe in a post fight interview there was going to be a rematch.
now he says Groves proved he wasn't world class & he doesn't want to go over old ground

walshb · 03-12-2013 10:35AM

MD1990 wrote: »

usually when a fighter is badly damaged he will be put down.if Groves was hurt more frequently it could be true.But to say Groves could be damaged for upcoming fights for getting hurt by Froch once in 9 rounds is an odd thing to think & im sure Froch with his experience isnt thinking that. The reason i have this theory on Froch's mentality towards a Groves rematch is because after the fight he said Groves showed he was world class & led the fans to believe in a post fight interview there was going to be a rematch.
now he says Groves proved he wasn't world class & he doesn't want to go over old ground

A lot of fighters change their minds. Being interviewed right after a tough fight you will usually get the whole, "let's do it again" line. It almost always happens if the fight was close or "controversial."

As for damaging Groves: We can't know the answer to that. It was a tough fight that saw both men take a fair deal of heavy leather, Froch more so. We don't know what Groves is made of. We need to wait and see. Most likely he should be fine. I would love a rematch. I would side with Groves, but in no way would I be surprised if Froch did a better number on him second time around.

nacho libre · 03-12-2013 01:36PM

walshb wrote: »

Taylor and Dirrell are/were very very skilled boxers. Ward never met them. Nobody can know how he would fare. Froch knocked one out and won a close decision against the other in a cloise close fight. Remember, Dirrell was well ahead of AA before the KO. That's how skilled and difficult an opponent Dirrell is.

Taylor would lose to Ward because of his poor stamina, if that man had good stamina, i believe he'd give Ward everything he could handle in a bout.

Taylor was a classy boxer.

About Ward's record:

Kessler was not over the hill when he fought Ward. Ward simply outclassed him. He might not have been quite as sharp as when he fought Calzaghe, but he was nowhere near the shadow of a fighter he was when he fought Froch the second time around.
This is probably why he did not want a third fight with Froch, as he knew he did not have it anymore.

megadodge · 03-12-2013 08:14PM

I have to laugh at some of the 'thinking' here.

1. It's only 10 days since the fight and some people here have already decided that the rematch is never happening. Jesus, have you people only just started following boxing?

2. Froch is ducking Groves...... by fighting Andre Ward ??????

Johner · 03-12-2013 08:40PM

megadodge wrote: »

I have to laugh at some of the 'thinking' here.

1. It's only 10 days since the fight and some people here have already decided that the rematch is never happening. Jesus, have you people only just started following boxing?

2. Froch is ducking Groves...... by fighting Andre Ward ??????

Why do you have to laugh at the thinking? I'm not saying a rematch definitely won't happen but have you not heard the way Froch has been talking? That Groves has proved he isn't world level and basically saying there is no need for a rematch.

And as for fighting Ward again Froch wants to avenge the loss, he has said that before and maybe if he gets him over the England then he might think he has a chance. I had it Ward 118-110 last time but iirc two judges had it 115-113 which was a joke btw but maybe he thinks he can win, I think he would lose easily though. Also a loss to Groves would damage his reputation a whole lot more than a loss to the first or second best pound for pound fighter out there. I don't think Froch could actually take a loss to Groves and my opinion is that he won't risk it after seeing how good Groves actually is.

Syferus · 07-12-2013 03:30AM

To be fair, fighting Ward and not fighting Groves immediately is Froch ducking Groves.

Froch is signalling he's in it for the big pay-day, we all know he hasn't a snowball's chance of dealing with Ward. He knows he can fight Groves even after he loses to Ward, but he's smart enough to know he won't be palatable for the Ward fight if he loses to a regional fighter. Basically he'll cost Groves world titles that he is deserving of at least fighting for again.

Very hard to tell if Groves will even win a world title without that shot because Froch was so poor for so much of their fight that he'd have made a journey-man look borderline world-class. Especially if GGG and Ward start hovering up the titles around him, Groves' realistic opportunities could be very limited.

Pighead · 23-01-2014 05:00PM

Froch just interviewed on Sky Sports News. Says that he is looking to fight twice this year. Close to a deal to fight Chavez Jr in the MGM Grand next and he said he could possibly George Groves after that. Says the Chavez Jr fight excites him more which is why he is hoping to face him next.

Alpha Dog 1 · 23-01-2014 05:02PM

Running scared by the sound of it.

walshb · 23-01-2014 05:02PM

Pighead wrote: »

Froch just interviewed on Sky Sports News. Says that he is looking to fight twice this year. Close to a deal to fight Chavez Jr in the MGM Grand next and he said he could possibly George Groves after that. Says the Chavez Jr fight excites him more which is why he is hoping to face him next.

I'd love to see Froch-Chavez. Could be a slugging war while it lasts.

supersean1999 · 23-01-2014 06:09PM

Not bothered if I ever see Froch fight again

Felexicon · 23-01-2014 08:03PM

supersean1999 wrote: »

Not bothered if I ever see Froch fight again

Why? He is a very godd if often over hyped boxer who is always involved in exciting fights

T-K-O · 23-01-2014 08:04PM

Felexicon wrote: »

Why? He is a very godd if often over hyped boxer who is always involved in exciting fights

Exactly, more times than not froth has been well worth the entrance fee

Strongbow10 · 23-01-2014 08:33PM

Chavez v Froch is a clash of the 2 highest profile fighters with probably the least technical skills combined.

Still think it will be an exciting fight but not for the purists thats for sure.

Carl Froch vs George Groves

Comments