Froch did not stop the fight the ref did, granted will look like a get out of jail but groves was on his way down if not that round the next. Froch would be foolish to fight him again, he's too quick and will beat him next time.
Can't believe what I've just seen. To be honest it makes me never wanna watch boxing again, and I love boxing. Froch always gets the iffy decision going his way.
Great fight, spoilt. Froch classless at the end again as well, lost a lot of fans tonight. Groves on the other hand...
If that round had ended two of the judges would have had it level and probably Froch would have won on points. Just a shame it did't reach a natural conclusion.
Why on earth did the ref have Groves in a headlock?!
To protect his head!
Really, some people!
Excuse me?
I take it you missed the part where Groves was being dragged away and Froch landed a full on body shot?
Well you've just answered your own question haven't you? The ref wanted to stop the fight and considering what had gone on before made a point of protecting Groves' head. Pretty obvious.
Why on earth did the ref have Groves in a headlock?!
To protect his head!
Really, some people!
Excuse me?
I take it you missed the part where Groves was being dragged away and Froch landed a full on body shot?
Well you've just answered your own question haven't you? The ref wanted to stop the fight and considering what had gone on before made a point of protecting Groves' head. Pretty obvious.
That ref should be banned from stepping in the ring ever again .
Yeah defo.
What a ridiculous statement! So maybe he got it wrong? But how thin is the line between stopping a fight and letting it go on one punch too many? I bet the ref in the Eubank/Watson fight wishes he'd stepped in earlier.
Why on earth did the ref have Groves in a headlock?!
To protect his head!
Really, some people!
Excuse me?
I take it you missed the part where Groves was being dragged away and Froch landed a full on body shot?
Well you've just answered your own question haven't you? The ref wanted to stop the fight and considering what had gone on before made a point of protecting Groves' head. Pretty obvious.
I can only apologise, Tom.
For what? I think we may be at cross purposes here?
Maybe I should explain how I saw it.
Tom asked why the ref had Groves in what looked like a headlock when he stopped the fight. I said to protect his head. I thought that it was pretty obvious that ref had taken into account all the "afters" that had gone on in the previous rounds, mainly by Froch. He had hit a few times after the bell and after the ref had called break and had probably been lucky not to have had a penalty against him for some of his misdemeanours. So, when the ref decided to step in, rightly or wrongly, he was mindful of Frotch's history and so protected Groves's most vulnerable part, his head, as he pulled him away.
I hope that clears everything up.
I did't agree with the refs decision but he is an experienced professional boxing referee and none of us on here are. Except Nolly maybe.
Comments
I think Froch will have very few fans now, what we were saying early about him being disrespectfull will no be a national opinion IMO.
The ref couldve given a standing 8
Its not a cheating decision it was a bad one
Rematch needed I am off to get wasted
That promoter was loving it.
Froch certainly won't be going after Ward again on tonights evidence. Re-match with Groves or retire i think.
This has probably given Groves a better boost than being robbed on the scorecards after a few more Froch rounds.
Great fight, spoilt. Froch classless at the end again as well, lost a lot of fans tonight. Groves on the other hand...
Joke decision groves was 4 up and I had a few quid on him
Gutted
Really, some people!
I take it you missed the part where Groves was being dragged away and Froch landed a full on body shot?
What a ridiculous statement! So maybe he got it wrong? But how thin is the line between stopping a fight and letting it go on one punch too many? I bet the ref in the Eubank/Watson fight wishes he'd stepped in earlier.
Your comment just sums you up perfectly.
Maybe I should explain how I saw it.
Tom asked why the ref had Groves in what looked like a headlock when he stopped the fight. I said to protect his head. I thought that it was pretty obvious that ref had taken into account all the "afters" that had gone on in the previous rounds, mainly by Froch. He had hit a few times after the bell and after the ref had called break and had probably been lucky not to have had a penalty against him for some of his misdemeanours.
So, when the ref decided to step in, rightly or wrongly, he was mindful of Frotch's history and so protected Groves's most vulnerable part, his head, as he pulled him away.
I hope that clears everything up.
I did't agree with the refs decision but he is an experienced professional boxing referee and none of us on here are. Except Nolly maybe.
Where is Nolly? I'm concerned.