Carl Froch vs George Groves

fsfg

Froch prides himself on taking on all opponents and being a warrior etc but his attitude stinks when it comes to Groves (who is also annoying me with his moaning). Froch trying to spin what happened makes me lose respect for the 'honest champ' and saying 'other things come into play' like promoters etc is nonsense as its the easiest fight for his promoter to make.

I am not convinced he isn't just trying to better his negotiating position though as I can imagine Groves is calling for a large percentage of the purse considering all the options he keeps talking about.

gene_tunney

Froch is running scared and it's the most obvious thing in the world

Froch wins the hypothetical rematch IMO but he's scared because he knows he would have to absorb serious damage in the first few rounds while Groves is still fresh.

That said, I have zero desire for a rematch, would rather see Froch and Chavez

supersean1999

gene_tunney wrote: »

Froch is running scared and it's the most obvious thing in the world

Froch wins the hypothetical rematch IMO but he's scared because he knows he would have to absorb serious damage in the first few rounds while Groves is still fresh.

That said, I have zero desire for a rematch, would rather see Froch and Chavez

No desire for a rematch . Did you not see the first one.

supersean1999

Felexicon wrote: »

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

Personally iv never disliked a boxer as much and probably a human so I never want to see him again. in and out of the ring.

T-K-O

supersean1999 wrote: »

Personally iv never disliked a boxer as much and probably a human so I never want to see him again. in and out of the ring.

What are you, 10?

willmunny1990

supersean1999 wrote: »

Personally iv never disliked a boxer as much and probably a human so I never want to see him again. in and out of the ring.

Bit harsh.

He comes across as very smug at times but there is far worse out there.

Anyway, if he goes on to fight Chavez I think he'll win, Chavez is over rated.

supersean1999

T-K-O wrote: »

What are you, 10?

No why. I don't like him or rate him it's my opinion. No need to try insult me ok

supersean1999

willmunny1990 wrote: »

Bit harsh.

He comes across as very smug at times but there is far worse out there.

Anyway, if he goes on to fight Chavez I think he'll win, Chavez is over rated.

I'm sure there is someone who gets right up your *** . Froch does it to me.And i think Chavez might just out work him. There both overrated . It's not a fight I'll pay for that's for sure.

T-K-O

supersean1999 wrote: »

No why. I don't like him or rate him it's my opinion. No need to try insult me ok

That was my opinion and I wanted to confirm. If my comment insulted you, you're very easily insulted.

supersean1999

T-K-O wrote: »

That was my opinion and I wanted to confirm. If my comment insulted you, you're very easily insulted.

No not at all. I'd say you knew I was not 10. I'm just guessing. So stop trying to be smart. It does not suit some people. Now good bye

T-K-O

supersean1999 wrote: »

No not at all. I'd say you knew I was not 10. I'm just guessing. So stop trying to be smart. It does not suit some people. Now good bye

you said you were insulted, not me

gene_tunney

supersean1999 wrote: »

No desire for a rematch . Did you not see the first one.

Questions are generally indicated by ending the sentence with a question mark, as follows: "?".

I saw it, and now want to see something else. Too many rematches in boxing.

fsfg

gene_tunney wrote: »

Froch is running scared and it's the most obvious thing in the world

Froch wins the hypothetical rematch IMO but he's scared because he knows he would have to absorb serious damage in the first few rounds while Groves is still fresh.

That said, I have zero desire for a rematch, would rather see Froch and Chavez

Fair enough but you are in the smallest of minorities!

gene_tunney

fsfg wrote: »

Fair enough but you are in the smallest of minorities!

If a rematch happened I would watch it, as I'd watch nearly all boxing , but would rather see Froch vs Chavez or any other match up

wadacrack

If Froch is the "warrior" he claims to be.He will fight Groves again. Kessler gave him a rematch despite winning. Maybe froch should show a bit of humility and let the people see the fight come to a conclusion which did not happen in the first fight. Froch will ultimately be pushed into the fight and he knows Groves has his number

walshb

wadacrack wrote: »

If Froch is the "warrior" he claims to be.He will fight Groves again. Kessler gave him a rematch despite winning. Maybe froch should show a bit of humility and let the people see the fight come to a conclusion which did not happen in the first fight. Froch will ultimately be pushed into the fight and he knows Groves has his number

He doesn't know that Groves has his number. He won the fight. Yes, he may think that Groves poses serious problems, but that doesn't mean that Froch is somehow running scared. Maybe, just maybe Froch believes that "I took it all, came back and did a number on George." Maybe this fills him with confidence and satisfaction?

T-K-O

walshb wrote: »

He doesn't know that Groves has his number. He won the fight. Yes, he may think that Groves poses serious problems, but that doesn't mean that Froch is somehow running scared. Maybe, juts maybe Froch believes that I took it all, came back and did a number on George. Maybe this fills him with confidence and satisfaction?

If Carl is as big headed as many on here accuse him of being - He could very well believe that.

wadacrack

walshb wrote: »

He doesn't know that Groves has his number. He won the fight. Yes, he may think that Groves poses serious problems, but that doesn't mean that Froch is somehow running scared. Maybe, juts maybe Froch believes that I took it all, came back and did a number on George. Maybe this fills him with confidence and satisfaction?

If Froch was confident .Why wouldnt he take the rematch. It is a massive fight. Big payday and is the only way Froch can reclaim is diminishing reputation. The British boxing fans who have supported him for years would love to see the fight. there is no talk now of Froch fighting Ward or Stevenson. He is looking for an easy way out fighting Chavez who is not very good technically.Lets face it Froch was very very lucky in my opinion to get a stoppage. groves was in control according to all the media and expert scorecards. He hurt Groves but the stoppage was a joke. How he can could be satisfied with the conclusion of that fight beggars belief. But maybe his ego has become so big that he has become so delusional

walshb

wadacrack wrote: »

If Froch was confident .Why wouldnt he take the rematch. l

Maybe he doesn't fancy another tough fight at this stage of his career?

walshb

wadacrack wrote: »

to get a stoppage. groves was in control according to all the media and expert scorecards. He hurt Groves but the stoppage was a joke. How he can could be satisfied with the conclusion of that fight beggars belief. But maybe his ego has become so big that he has become so delusional

The more I watch the fight the less I think it was a bad stoppage. Maybe a fraction or so early, but it wasn't a terrible stoppage! Groves was hurt, groggy and it was rd 9. The referee made the call on what he saw at that time.

blade1

walshb wrote: »

The more I watch the fight the less I think it was a bad stoppage. Maybe a fraction or so early, but it wasn't a terrible stoppage! Groves was hurt, groggy and it was rd 9. The referee made the call on what he saw at that time.

Froch was in worse trouble in round 1.

wadacrack

walshb wrote: »

The more I watch the fight the less I think it was a bad stoppage. Maybe a fraction or so early, but it wasn't a terrible stoppage! Groves was hurt, groggy and it was rd 9. The referee made the call on what he saw at that time.

Froch was hurt throughout the fight.Groves was hurt tho. But In the states not a chance it would have been stopped

walshb

blade1 wrote: »

Froch was in worse trouble in round 1.

He was knocked down. Got up, shook it off and continued. Completely different scenario to rd 9 and what happened between rds 2-9.

blade1

blade1 wrote: »

Froch was in worse trouble in round 1.

walshb wrote: »

He was knocked down. Got up, shook it off and continued. Completely different scenario to rd 9 and what happened between rds 2-9.

Exactly!
No knockdown, no chance to shake it off.

T-K-O

blade1 wrote: »

Exactly!
No knockdown, no chance to shake it off.

Knock down Vs dead on your feet - I know which one I would prefer to be on end of

Gorman700

walshb wrote: »

The more I watch the fight the less I think it was a bad stoppage. Maybe a fraction or so early, but it wasn't a terrible stoppage! Groves was hurt, groggy and it was rd 9. The referee made the call on what he saw at that time.

There was 7 punches to the head where Groves DID NOT reply, when the ref moved in he slumped over with both hand touching the canvas. IMO he was out on his feet.

HOWEVER, Howard Foster should have allowed the knock down to happen.

I'll give everyone a scenario, rd 9, Froch drops Groves, he recovers a little and then Froch gives it to him on the ropes and Foster jumps in like he did.....fair stoppage???

It was a stoppage. Just premature.

walshb

Gorman700 wrote: »

There was 7 punches to the head where Groves DID NOT reply, when the ref moved in he slumped over with both hand touching the canvas. IMO he was out on his feet.

HOWEVER, Howard Foster should have allowed the knock down to happen.

.

This to me is nit picking. The referee acts on split second reactions. He does not have the luxury to analyses and look back. Should have this, should have that. You, like me agree that Groves was in danger and looking hurt, getting hit with heavy shots. The referee allowed him to get hit with several and in his mind he thought George had then taken enough.

MD1990

walshb wrote: »

The more I watch the fight the less I think it was a bad stoppage. Maybe a fraction or so early, but it wasn't a terrible stoppage! Groves was hurt, groggy and it was rd 9. The referee made the call on what he saw at that time.

maybe u do
but the IBF disagree
immediate rematch to take place withing 90 days from today
right decision because if that was alleged a fair stoppage we would be robbed of alot of classice fights

Pighead

MD1990 wrote: »

maybe u do
but the IBF disagree
immediate rematch to take place withing 90 days from today
right decision because if that was alleged a fair stoppage we would be robbed of alot of classice fights

Wow. So is this basically saying to Froch he has to fight Groves otherwise vacate his title?

PropJoe10

Pighead wrote: »

Wow. So is this basically saying to Froch he has to fight Groves otherwise vacate his title?

Yep. It'll be interesting to see how Froch responds to this, considering he's trying to get a fight against Chavez. I really dislike both Froch and Groves but considering the way the first fight ended, surely a rematch is the only option for Froch.

T-K-O

Am I reading this right... now Groves is playing the business game?

blade1

T-K-O wrote: »

Am I reading this right... now Groves is playing the business game?

All depends.
Don't think he is disputing the money but some of the after fight conditions.
Why not?

T-K-O

blade1 wrote: »

All depends.
Don't think he is disputing the money but some of the after fight conditions.
Why not?

Urgh.. pot and kettle. Either he wants to beat the warrior up or he doesn't. What happened to the confidence..


You see, all of these guys are just the same.

blade1

T-K-O wrote: »

Urgh.. pot and kettle. Either he wants to beat the warrior up or he doesn't. What happened to the confidence..


You see, all of these guys are just the same.

And that's what he wants to do.

He shouldn't just agree to everything they want without looking out for himself.

Johner

IBF say 'improper stoppage' behind their order for rematch between Carl Froch and George Groves. Fight ordered to take place within 90 days.

walshb

MD1990 wrote: »

maybe u do
but the IBF disagree
immediate rematch to take place withing 90 days from today
right decision because if that was alleged a fair stoppage we would be robbed of alot of classice fights

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.

MD1990

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.

no
he made a call of the best interest of Matchroom & Car Froch.
Fighters know the dangers of stepping into the ring & Groves wasn't even knocked down.Why didn't he stop it after Froch was nearly knocked out & after the fight he couldn't even remember the knockdown?

Kev M

I see the rematch going the same way only with Froch being more cautious in the early rounds, for obvious reasons. I would expect him to KO Groves again.

Froch is taking alot of stick from the 'fans', which is crazy because he just pulled off a gruelling brutal comeback against a dangerous capable opponent. It's a shame that if you lose a fight or in this case even come close to losing that so many idiots are immediately going to call you ****. He's always in good fights, he always puts on a show, he's good for boxing. Groves went in with a good gameplan, but he's not half the fighter Froch is, when it's all said and done and you look back at both their careers this will be obvious.

doublejj

ko again.. yes froch was coming strong and got knockdown,but thats boxing...he got a hiding off j taylor for 11 but sparked him it works both ways..

efb

I'll be shouting for groves but I can see Froch walk away from IBF Title

efb

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.

Ref's arnt infallible and shouldn't be treated as such

walshb

efb wrote: »

Ref's arnt infallible and shouldn't be treated as such

Who said they were? That is not the issue. It's a very subjective issue.

Foster made a split second call. Yes, it was "controversial," but not everyone agrees that it was a real bad call. Now we are subjected to an organization who is point blank slating an official who made that call. Where do we draw the line?

Foster had no idea how that bout was going to go. We have people claiming that he was on a fix. That's madness. Just because they thought he was early in stopping the fight. Look at Groves. He was hurt, groggy and was taking consecutive heavy shots. Foster steps in because at that time he thought George had taken enough, and he gets hung out to dry by those who should be supporting him? Scandalous.

I could understand the IBF if Foster stopped the fight after Froch landed a stiff jab. I too would agree in that case, but not for what happened on November 23rd. It was a very tough and physical fight.

Those same IBF crew and the fans would be calling for Foster's head had he let it go an extra few seconds, and possibly allowing Froch to unload more heavy artillery on a hurt fighter, resulting in real danger. This is the whole point. It's life and death and split second calls that can result in life and death. It's a disgrace that the IBF are castigating Howard Foster here.

Boxing referee's are not infallible. They can make bad calls, late calls, maybe early calls etc, but they are humans charged with protecting men in an extremely serious and dangerous sport. To be so against Foster here is sickening. Like I said, it wasn't like he stopped a fresh faced and super fit and competitive Groves. Groves was hurt, reeling and taking clean shots. Just before Foster jumped in, Groves was heading south.

Could he have let it go a few seconds more? To the baying mob? Absolutely yes. To the real boxing fan who respects the tough decisions referees have to make. Also, yes. But I believe that he made the right call for him at that time. For that he should not be hung!

I just hope that this doesn't result in referees now being afraid to step in "early," resulting in possible injury, and worse still, death!

efb

walshb wrote: »

Who said they were? That is not the issue. It's a very subjective issue.

Foster made a split second call. Yes, it was "controversial," but not everyone agrees that it was a real bad call. Now we are subjected to an organization who is point blank slating an official who made that call. Where do we draw the line?

Foster had no idea how that bout was going to go. We have people claiming that he was on a fix. That's madness. Just because they thought he was early in stopping the fight. Look at Groves. He was hurt, groggy and was taking consecutive heavy shots. Foster steps in because at that time he thought George had taken enough, and he gets hung out to dry by those who should be supporting him? Scandalous.

I could understand the IBF if Foster stopped the fight after Froch landed a stiff jab. I too would agree in that case, but not for what happened on November 23rd. It was a very tough and physical fight.

Those same IBF crew and the fans would be calling for Foster's head had he let it go an extra few seconds, and possibly allowing Froch to unload more heavy artillery on a hurt fighter, resulting in real danger. This is the whole point. It's life and death and split second calls that can result in life and death. It's a disgrace that the IBF are castigating Howard Foster here.

Boxing referee's are not infallible. They can make bad calls, late calls, maybe early calls etc, but they are humans charged with protecting men in an extremely serious and dangerous sport. To be so against Foster here is sickening. Like I said, it wasn't like he stopped a fresh faced and super fit and competitive Groves. Groves was hurt, reeling and taking clean shots. Just before Foster jumped in, Groves was heading south.

Could he have let it go a few seconds more? To the baying mob? Absolutely yes. To the real boxing fan who respects the tough decisions referees have to make. Also, yes. But I believe that he made the right call for him at that time. For that he should not be hung!

I just hope that this doesn't result in referees now being afraid to step in "early," resulting in possible injury, and worse still, death!

I have seen refs not step in when they should and step in far to early, this was the latter.

Groves wasn't in trouble and no hyperbole will convince me otherwise.

Rematches have been ordered before this is nothing new

nacho libre

walshb wrote: »

Who said they were? That is not the issue. It's a very subjective issue.

Foster made a split second call. Yes, it was "controversial," but not everyone agrees that it was a real bad call. Now we are subjected to an organization who is point blank slating an official who made that call. Where do we draw the line?


!

It was a premature stoppage. however the ref, as you rightly point out, should not be undermined in public like this it set a dangerous precedent, whereby a ref next time out might let a fight go too far as he is afraid of being admonished for stopping a fight too early. personally i'd rather take heat for stopping a fight early, than for letting a fight go on too long, which results in a fighter's health being badly damaged- mcclellan being a prime example

efb

nacho libre wrote: »

It was a premature stoppage. however the ref, as you rightly point out, should not be undermined in public like this it set a dangerous precedent, whereby a ref next time out might let a fight go too far as he is afraid of being admonished for stopping a fight too early. personally i'd rather take heat for stopping a fight early, than for letting a fight go on too long, which results in a fighter's health being badly damaged- mcclellan being a prime example

A lot of changes have been brought in since then

walshb

nacho libre wrote: »

It was a premature stoppage. however the ref, as you rightly point out, should not be undermined in public like this it set a dangerous precedent, whereby a ref next time out might let a fight go too far as he is afraid of being admonished for stopping a fight too early. personally i'd rather take heat for stopping a fight early, than for letting a fight go on too long, which results in a fighter's health being badly damaged- mcclellan being a prime example

This was my whole point. Though, in your view it was premature. Not everyone agrees. And for the IBF to come out with this and hang that man is disgraceful.

The man made a split second call during a very gruelling fight. A gruelling and tough exchange where one man was landing heavier shots on a fighter who was looking groggy.

walshb

efb wrote: »

Groves wasn't in trouble and no hyperbole will convince me otherwise.

I disagree. You can't know for certain and nor can I. The fighter won't admit it. Of course he won't. His body language IMO said he was hurt and in trouble. I will take the referee's view, who was right there in the ring and close, over an armchair viewer.

efb

walshb wrote: »

I disagree. You can't know for certain and nor can I. The fighter won't admit it. Of course he won't. His body language IMO said he was hurt and in trouble. I will take the referee's view, who was right there in the ring and close, over an armchair viewer.

And I will take the IBF's decision which overrode the refs

walshb

efb wrote: »

And I will take the IBF's decision which overrode the refs

Yes, armchair fans! Many probably of the same mentality as the baying mob!

And their decision overrode nothing. The official result is a win for Froch. All they have done is bring their organization into disrepute.

efb

walshb wrote: »

Yes, armchair fans! Many probably of the same mentality as the baying mob!

And their decision overrode nothing. The official result is a win for Froch. All they have done is bring their organization into disrepute.

They said the ref's decisions was incorrect and ordered a rematch