Carl Froch vs George Groves

efb · 25-01-2014 03:41PM

Ask Floyd Mayweather

walshb · 25-01-2014 03:42PM

efb wrote: »

Yes and sometimes they are incorrect. Not infallible. As was the case here. Incorrect decision corrected!

You are making out that this is somehow provable; an exact science. It's not. Incorrect call in your view and the IBFs view. That doesn't make the call incorrect.

walshb · 25-01-2014 03:43PM

efb wrote: »

Ask Floyd Mayweather

I'd go with Ray Leonard or Thomas Hearns.

efb · 25-01-2014 03:46PM

Certainly not Hearns. Hagler on my calendar for Jan. Great man for great month

Deiseboy01 · 25-01-2014 04:10PM

walshb wrote: »

I'd be disgusted if I was a referee and this is how the "authorities" were supporting me. Where do you draw the line? This is a very dangerous precedent. What now? Referees allowing boxers to take more punishment so that the referee isn't castigated for an "early" stoppage?

I have no issue with disagreeing with calls, but this is way out of line. Doesn't surprise me. It's pro boxing. Full of corrupt and bent people.

A referee's decision and decision making is crucial to the safety of boxers, and here we have an organisation going against that. Foster made a call in the best interests of George, and the IBF are pissing on him. Disgraceful.

Totally agree with this post. Watching the fight I though it was only a matter of time until Groves got stopped badly. If I were Froch on the night I would have been disgusted that I hadn't been allowed to end it. Ref was premature but acted in the fighters interests. IBF hanging him out to dry. Shameful. Wonder did Hearn bring any influence to bear there? He's on record saying he really wants the rematch. Wants to put on a show at Wembly. Not interested in the Ward or Chavez fights. Ego maniac looking to put on the big shows to match the Benn, Eubanks, Collins era ones. Said he couldn't push Froch into it, getting the IBF to do so plays into his hand. He knows Carl will not vacate.

clubwelly · 25-01-2014 04:15PM

No surprised at all that a rematch was made by the IBF. It is a shame for Howard Forster cos he made his call with Groves safety in mind and he was the man in the ring. At the end of the day money talks again.
I remember when this bout was announced we were saying it can't be pay per view and sure sky are laping it up cos it's a guaranteed pay per view uk sell out

Deiseboy01 · 25-01-2014 04:20PM

efb wrote: »

CT scan medicals..

Thus is nonsense. Ok let's say Groves had a CT after the fight and it's clear, does that indicate that the fight was stopped too soon? No. What if he'd been allowed to fight on, took three or four savage blows and then had a CT, that could have shown serious damage. Too late at that stage of course.

Admiral Steelhammer · 25-01-2014 06:45PM

Deiseboy01 wrote: »

Thus is nonsense. Ok let's say Groves had a CT after the fight and it's clear, does that indicate that the fight was stopped too soon? No. What if he'd been allowed to fight on, took three or four savage blows and then had a CT, that could have shown serious damage. Too late at that stage of course.

The safest thing to do would be to stop the fight as soon as the bell rings.

willmunny1990 · 25-01-2014 06:47PM

People are going OTT about how much danger Groves was in. He was hurt but still standing and moving then the ref came in and headlocked him away

It was a championship match and he should of been given the chance to recover.

Going against the official like this does set a precedent alright, but none the less im happy for Groves as he gave Froch a lesson in boxing last time for the most part, It'll be a different fight next time round but Groves has all the tools to win this.

Deiseboy01 · 25-01-2014 07:04PM

pac_man wrote: »

So he's an "ego maniac" for wanting to put on big shows?

Maybe ego maniac is too strong but he is putting himself ahead if the fighter when you hear him speak about the deal. Froch wants his day in the sun in Vegas. He's entitled to that and even if he lost to Chavez, which I don't think he would, then the Groves fight is still a possibility.

fsfg · 25-01-2014 08:23PM

walshb wrote: »

Ok, we're getting somewhere now. He has that right.

Thing is that it's split seconds. Referees can't stop the fight to get medical scans etc. They can't and should NOT allow fights to continue just because the fighter "says he's ok." They have to act in split seconds. Foster acted in that way. To many he acted early. To many he only acted a little early, and to others he was correct.

Stepping into the ring does put you in danger, hence why we need referees. Now we have an organization castigating a referee for a stoppage. It's wrong, and it sets a dangerous precedent. Had the stoppage been form an innocuous jab I would agree. That was not the case in the Groves-Froch fight.

Give it a rest! You can't take that last few seconds without looking at The whole fight to put it into context (and the build up for that matter). Groves was hurting Froch round after round, had him down in the first and caught him clean with many punches in the 6th- without taking much back the whole way.

The ref made a flawed call and it was obvious to all that Groves chinney reputation along with Froch's reputation for finishing strong unduly influenced his decision. Every person who has quoted Froch saying he was seconds away is wrong to be swayed by the PR. Groves took some punches for the first time but had every right to be allowed continue.

Your saying things like his hands were slumped to the canvas- nonsense and disingenuous. Foster was closer but he didn't have the right to make that call as he did. The IBF thankfully agreed.

ebbsy · 25-01-2014 08:26PM

Remember as well the judges scorecards up that point were also nonsense.

Can Groves fight as well second time around ? If he does Froch will probably lose.

Frankie Lee · 25-01-2014 09:13PM

The IBF are a disgrace of an organisation and like all governing bodies are corrupt to some extent.

I still think it was a premature stoppage for a world title fight that Groves should have been winning. Groves was in a spot of bother admittedly but could well have survived but we will never know. The judges scorecards were silly too.
Still for the IBF to do this is a bigger disgrace again though.

If it was a run of the mill undercard fight the stoppage would have been acceptable, grey areas.

Henno30 · 27-01-2014 03:00PM

The IBF are an embarrassment, but then the rest of them are too. I think the stoppage was certainly early, far too early to be honest. But, people also seem to be underestimating the extent to which Froch was grinding Groves down.

I've watched it a few times and I've come around to the view that Froch was going to stop him in a legitimate fashion going down the stretch. Not that this justifies the stoppage, as no one can tell the future and Groves should have had the chance to make his stand.

But for me Groves was inactive in the pocket far too often and increasingly so as the fight progressed. He was just standing there with the ear muffs up while Froch hammered his body initially and then moved upstairs in the rounds that preceded Foster's intervention. Groves was tangling with Froch too much and paying the price for it. I think Groves needs to manage distance much better in the rematch if he's to win. Unless he can knock Froch out, but that's a very, very difficult thing to do.

Andrew Flexing · 27-01-2014 03:17PM

I was up for Froch (and will be again if a rematch happens) but my opinion was that it was never a stoppage at that point. Groves was tired but still trading and hadnt even looked like going down.
Froch should be more annoyed than Groves at the stoppage as he was turning the tide and was (in my view) was getting more and more on top and would have stopped Groves eventually and conclusively and now may have to go through it all over again.

walshb · 27-01-2014 03:37PM

I too think the stoppage was early, but only just, and for that I cannot really fault Howard Foster. And for the IBF to do as they have is a disgrace. Different referees would come to different conclusions I would imagine. I wanted Groves to win. I want him to win the rematch.

I have looked at the stoppage several times. I think it's incorrect to say that Groves looked ok. He looked hurt, but more importantly, he looked vulnerable. That is key to Foster's call. Foster watched him take several hard shots and saw him weaken. I think he felt that Groves was in real danger of taking some flush shots whilst weakened and in trouble. He jumped in. This happens a lot.

Only good thing is that we may get to see round 2!

walshb · 27-01-2014 03:40PM

ebbsy wrote: »

Remember as well the judges scorecards up that point were also nonsense.

Can Groves fight as well second time around ? If he does Froch will probably lose.

No, the cards weren't nonsense. One judge had it as I had it, 78-73 Groves. I think two judges had it to Groves by one point. A couple of rds could have went either way, so it wasn't nonsense.

walshb · 27-01-2014 03:41PM

fsfg wrote: »

Give it a rest! Y.

Give what a rest? Debating points?

Andrew Flexing · 27-01-2014 03:52PM

walshb wrote: »

I too think the stoppage was early, but only just, and for that I cannot really fault Howard Foster. And for the IBF to do as they have is a disgrace. Different referees would come to different conclusions I would imagine. I wanted Groves to win. I want him to win the rematch.

I have looked at the stoppage several times. I think it's incorrect to say that Groves looked ok. He looked hurt, but more importantly, he looked vulnerable. That is key to Foster's call. Foster watched him take several hard shots and saw him weaken. I think he felt that Groves was in real danger of taking some flush shots whilst weakened and in trouble. He jumped in. This happens a lot.

Only good thing is that we may get to see round 2!

Just curious...why were you up for Groves? I didn't like his trash talk....he came across more immature than someone trying to get under an opponents skin.

I take your point about Groves taking shots and looking vulnerable...but Froch looked worse when got back to his feet in R1. But I guess it IS the ref's call.

walshb · 27-01-2014 03:57PM

Andrew Flexing wrote: »

Just curious...why were you up for Groves? I didn't like his trash talk....he came across more immature than someone trying to get under an opponents skin.

I take your point about Groves taking shots and looking vulnerable...but Froch looked worse when got back to his feet in R1. But I guess it IS the ref's call.

Yes, but rd 1 is a lot different. It's a different scenario. One single punch in the first rd. Froch was out. Hit the deck and woke up. Steadied himself and responded to the the referee. That was that. If I could compare that to say LL when LL got dropped heavily by Oliver McCall. Difference was that LL could barely steady himself and was falling towards the referee. That needed to be stopped, and I bet had Froch been like that then Foster would have waved the fight off.

I just wanted Groves to win. Yes, he was a dick pre fight. I still wanted him to win. I thought Froch was unjustly criticised post fight. I though he handled himself very well. He was very candid. Groves too was good in the psot fight. The interviews and comments by both men shone a positive light!

Andrew Flexing · 27-01-2014 04:00PM

walshb wrote: »

Yes, but rd 1 is a lot different. It's a different scenario. One single punch in the first rd. Froch was out. Hit the deck and woke up. Steadied himself and responded to the the referee. That was that. If I could compare that to say LL when LL got dropped heavily by Oliver McCall. Difference was that LL could barely steady himself and was falling towards the referee. That needed to be stopped, and I bet had Froch been like that then Foster would have waved the fight off.

I just wanted Groves to win. Yes, he was a dick pre fight. I still wanted him to win. I thought Froch was unjustly criticised post fight. I though he handled himself very well. He was very candid. Groves too was good in the psot fight. The interviews and comments by both men shone a positive light!

I thought it was going to be a quick night for Groves when Groves stumbled to his feet! It was an interesting fight...and will be more interesting to see how both approach a rematch.

Agreed, both came across well afterwards.

walshb · 27-01-2014 04:02PM

Andrew Flexing wrote: »

I thought it was going to be a quick night for Groves when Groves stumbled to his feet! It was an interesting fight...and will be more interesting to see how both approach a rematch.

Agreed, both came across well afterwards.

You mean when Froch stumbled to his feet?

Andrew Flexing · 27-01-2014 04:15PM

yea! Sorry Froch.....! Don't ever remember seeing him rocked like that....was he ever down before? my memory is gone!

Andrew Flexing · 27-01-2014 04:16PM

Did Taylor have him down?

walshb · 27-01-2014 04:18PM

Andrew Flexing wrote: »

Did Taylor have him down?

Yes, Taylor had him down and hurt. Allowed to continue. I think it was rd 3 he was down.

JacksonHeightsOwn · 27-01-2014 07:39PM

walshb wrote: »

Yes, Taylor had him down and hurt. Allowed to continue. I think it was rd 3 he was down.

had him all the over the shop before the knockdown if my memory serves me right.

The actual knockdown wasnt even the hardest punch he took in that round.

I dont think Taylor was a huge puncher either was he.

Froch is dropable, but to be fair to the big nosed cocky **** his powers of recovery are fantastic.

I remember hearing Joe Calzaghe saying that there's two types of people when they get hit. Ones who stay hit, or ones that dont. Froch is one of the ones that doesnt stay hit.

HigginsJ · 27-01-2014 08:38PM

I wonder will Froch agree to the rematch or look to get Chavez Jr. In Vegas. All the reports are that he wants a big night in Vegas before he retires. A loss to Groves could scupper any chance of that (not that he loses the re-match)

T-K-O · 27-01-2014 08:42PM

If I was Carl I would take the IBF strap to the local pawn shop

gaybeer · 28-01-2014 12:12PM

I for one would love to see the Chavez fight, I think it would be a very exciting fight to watch. The Groves rematch will be there any way but should he lose to Groves the Chavez match is no longer a runner. Build up to the fight should be pretty entertaining as well

Henno30 · 28-01-2014 03:30PM

chrisbonnie wrote: »

had him all the over the shop before the knockdown if my memory serves me right.

The actual knockdown wasnt even the hardest punch he took in that round.

I dont think Taylor was a huge puncher either was he.

Froch is dropable, but to be fair to the big nosed cocky **** his powers of recovery are fantastic.

I remember hearing Joe Calzaghe saying that there's two types of people when they get hit. Ones who stay hit, or ones that dont. Froch is one of the ones that doesnt stay hit.

He looked worse after the Groves knockdown to me. I think Groves could have dropped him again if he had another 20 seconds. You're right about the Taylor fight. Taylor had landed some real bombs on him before he finally got him down.

Carl Froch vs George Groves

Comments