Froch Vs Groves

[BoyBlue_1985]

Groves could've taken a knee to give himself a break which would've made the round a 10-8 and put Froch ahead on the cards anyway. Froch was coming on strong at that point and starting to take control, he would've either sparked Groves out (which likely would've happened at the time of the stoppage) or he would've won by 2-3 points on the cards with a late rally.

You put far too much stock into Adam Booth.

Sorry mate, but that's bollocks.

You sound like a Froch fan with the tinted glasses on.

Groves was the aggressor for most of the fight, he beat Froch to almost every punch. He made Froch looked like a piss head on a Saturday for most of the fight.

Not to mention he put him on his arse.

I'll give you that Froch looked to be recovering. I think Groves was beginning to feel the pace, and he was definitely hurt at the time of the stoppage, but it was entirely premature.

The idea that Groves was only a point ahead at the time of the stoppage is complete and utter nonsense. Besides the dodgy judges, I doubt you'd find any impartial boxing fans that would agree with that scoring.

Which bit of the bolded is bollocks exactly? Two of the judges had Groves 1 point up at the time, a 2 point swing would've put Froch ahead. Froch was starting to grind Groves down in the previous 2 rounds and was definitely the one coming on strong.

The fight wasn't anywhere even close to the 1 sided fight that Jim Watt made it out to be, nowhere near. Froch was landing punches in bunches in the majority of exchanges, with Groves landing single clean shots here or there. It's was hardly Mayweather-Gatti. Go on a boxing forum or twitter, literally thousands of people will tell you the same. That was a fight in the balance at the time of the stoppage.

Yeah he put an off balance Froch down with a flash knockdown in round 1. Completely different circumstances to a tired fighter taking multiple flush punches in the championship rounds. As I've said, Froch was denied a clean KO win there.

Jim Watt and the rest of Sky were doing my fucking head in. It was so clear they wanted a Groves win so that they would have a new PPV hero to laud all over the place. Froch was going to put Groves down and once he did it was going to be over anyway, ref should not have stopped it still imo but someone said "its better to see a fight stopped one punch too early than one punch too late."
If anyone still thinks Groves bossed the match entirely I would suggest having a look at his face as it looks like he has been twatted with a spade

 

[johnmc]

Jim Watt and the rest of Sky were doing my head in. It was so clear they wanted a Groves win so that they would have a new PPV hero to laud all over the place. Froch was going to put Groves down and once he did it was going to be over anyway, ref should not have stopped it still imo but someone said "its better to see a fight stopped one punch too early than one punch too late."
If anyone still thinks Groves bossed the match entirely I would suggest having a look at his face as it looks like he has been twatted with a spade

Thing is if you say its better to stop it early you are predicting what is going to happen and thats near impossible. If a fighter was on the wrong end of most of the shots for the whole fight you can almost prevent the inevitable as you say. However here Groves had not been in trouble the whole fight up to that point, he was wobbled but not as much as Froch earlier. Froch was also constantly punching on the break and threw at least two illegal shots. Groves should have took a knee but that could have highlighted an even more worrying issue on the judges cards.

If you judge a fight on whose face is more marked then you are doing it wrong. Its totally irrelevant.

 

[Kippaxstreetheadache]

Groves could've taken a knee to give himself a break which would've made the round a 10-8 and put Froch ahead on the cards anyway. Froch was coming on strong at that point and starting to take control, he would've either sparked Groves out (which likely would've happened at the time of the stoppage) or he would've won by 2-3 points on the cards with a late rally.

You put far too much stock into Adam Booth.

Sorry mate, but that's bollocks.

You sound like a Froch fan with the tinted glasses on.

Groves was the aggressor for most of the fight, he beat Froch to almost every punch. He made Froch looked like a piss head on a Saturday for most of the fight.

Not to mention he put him on his arse.

I'll give you that Froch looked to be recovering. I think Groves was beginning to feel the pace, and he was definitely hurt at the time of the stoppage, but it was entirely premature.

The idea that Groves was only a point ahead at the time of the stoppage is complete and utter nonsense. Besides the dodgy judges, I doubt you'd find any impartial boxing fans that would agree with that scoring.

Which bit of the bolded is bollocks exactly? Two of the judges had Groves 1 point up at the time, a 2 point swing would've put Froch ahead. Froch was starting to grind Groves down in the previous 2 rounds and was definitely the one coming on strong.

The fight wasn't anywhere even close to the 1 sided fight that Jim Watt made it out to be, nowhere near. Froch was landing punches in bunches in the majority of exchanges, with Groves landing single clean shots here or there. It's was hardly Mayweather-Gatti. Go on a boxing forum or twitter, literally thousands of people will tell you the same. That was a fight in the balance at the time of the stoppage.

Yeah he put an off balance Froch down with a flash knockdown in round 1. Completely different circumstances to a tired fighter taking multiple flush punches in the championship rounds. As I've said, Froch was denied a clean KO win there.

Your claim that Groves was only 1 point ahead on the cards, that is bollocks. As I highlighted.

Pointing to the bizarre scoring of the judges doesn't qualify your opinion. If, for some strange reason, you thought the Mayweather Canelo fight was a close one, would pointing to CJ Ross' card give your opinion any credence?

No.

"An off balance Froch", yawn. Your bias is shining through. He was caught flush and clean, he could've been stopped there and then or early in the second if Groves didn't favour relative caution.

That said, I recognise the stark differences is being rocked early in a fight to later in the fight when fatigue is a consideration. Some are disregarding that totally, but that's huge, and I agree there entirely.

Then again, we'll never know if Groves could've held out til the end of the round. To say that Froch was denied a KO is pure speculation, and flies in the face on the general concensus that Groves fought the better fight, was well ahead on the cards, and was denied by a premature call from the ref.

However, I could really see that Groves was tiring. And Froch seemed to be coming on stronger by those later rounds, and had gone from being on the back foot to becoming the aggressor. If that had continued Froch would've been in the driving seat given the way Groves appearing to be tiring.

We'll never know how that fight would've progressed though, all we can do is speculate.

What we all know, as a fact, is that Groves was ahead on the cards when the ref intervened. We can argue by how many, but he was ahead.

He fought the better fight, and made Froch look past it for most of the fight - my opinion.

I don't get what your gripe is Jim Watt, I'm capable of forming my own opinion, I'm not influenced by commentators. That said, I largely agree with his assessment of the fight.

Maybe you should take off the tinted glasses?

 

[the goats backside]

Groves was one punch away from sleeping for a week, the ref stopped a potentially horrendous outcome

 

[johnmc]

Groves was one punch away from sleeping for a week, the ref stopped a potentially horrendous outcome

As was Froch and any boxer that gets in the ring. If thats your worry then no boxing would be allowed.

 

[conormcfc]

Sorry mate, but that's bollocks.

You sound like a Froch fan with the tinted glasses on.

Groves was the aggressor for most of the fight, he beat Froch to almost every punch. He made Froch looked like a piss head on a Saturday for most of the fight.

Not to mention he put him on his arse.

I'll give you that Froch looked to be recovering. I think Groves was beginning to feel the pace, and he was definitely hurt at the time of the stoppage, but it was entirely premature.

The idea that Groves was only a point ahead at the time of the stoppage is complete and utter nonsense. Besides the dodgy judges, I doubt you'd find any impartial boxing fans that would agree with that scoring.

Which bit of the bolded is bollocks exactly? Two of the judges had Groves 1 point up at the time, a 2 point swing would've put Froch ahead. Froch was starting to grind Groves down in the previous 2 rounds and was definitely the one coming on strong.

The fight wasn't anywhere even close to the 1 sided fight that Jim Watt made it out to be, nowhere near. Froch was landing punches in bunches in the majority of exchanges, with Groves landing single clean shots here or there. It's was hardly Mayweather-Gatti. Go on a boxing forum or twitter, literally thousands of people will tell you the same. That was a fight in the balance at the time of the stoppage.

Yeah he put an off balance Froch down with a flash knockdown in round 1. Completely different circumstances to a tired fighter taking multiple flush punches in the championship rounds. As I've said, Froch was denied a clean KO win there.

Your claim that Groves was only 1 point ahead on the cards, that is bollocks. As I highlighted.

Pointing to the bizarre scoring of the judges doesn't qualify your opinion. If, for some strange reason, you thought the Mayweather Canelo fight was a close one, would pointing to CJ Ross' card give your opinion any credence?

No.

"An off balance Froch", yawn. Your bias is shining through. He was caught flush and clean, he could've been stopped there and then or early in the second if Groves didn't favour relative caution.

That said, I recognise the stark differences is being rocked early in a fight to later in the fight when fatigue is a consideration. Some are disregarding that totally, but that's huge, and I agree there entirely.

Then again, we'll never know if Groves could've held out til the end of the round. To say that Froch was denied a KO is pure speculation, and flies in the face on the general concensus that Groves fought the better fight, was well ahead on the cards, and was denied by a premature call from the ref.

However, I could really see that Groves was tiring. And Froch seemed to be coming on stronger by those later rounds, and had gone from being on the back foot to becoming the aggressor. If that had continued Froch would've been in the driving seat given the way Groves appearing to be tiring.

We'll never know how that fight would've progressed though, all we can do is speculate.

What we all know, as a fact, is that Groves was ahead on the cards when the ref intervened. We can argue by how many, but he was ahead.

He fought the better fight, and made Froch look past it for most of the fight - my opinion.

I don't get what your gripe is Jim Watt, I'm capable of forming my own opinion, I'm not influenced by commentators. That said, I largely agree with his assessment of the fight.

Maybe you should take off the tinted glasses?

I'm not using the judges cards to quantify anything, I was just pointing out the facts in what I had said originally which were that Froch would've been up on the official cards if Groves had taken a knee. I wouldn't look to that scoring in the Mayweather fight no, because it was poor scoring in a fight where he won virtually every round. Different scenario to this close fight.

I scored the fight on my phone and this is how I had it at the time of the stoppage:

Froch Groves
8...............10
10...............9
9...............10
9...............10
10...............9
9...............10
10...............9
10...............9

Nothing biased about it as I am no more a Froch supporter than I am a Groves one. Froch was landing way more shots than Groves as the fight progressed and by about the 4th round he had established his jab (despite what the commentators were saying). I have no doubt Froch would've won that on points if a tiring Groves had somehow survived the onslaught in the 9th round.

'Flash knockdown' was the wrong phrase to use in hindsight. Froch was certainly standing way too square on to Groves when he was knocked down though, probably due to him underestimating Groves' power.

 

[conormcfc]

Jim Watt and the rest of Sky were doing my head in. It was so clear they wanted a Groves win so that they would have a new PPV hero to laud all over the place. Froch was going to put Groves down and once he did it was going to be over anyway, ref should not have stopped it still imo but someone said "its better to see a fight stopped one punch too early than one punch too late."
If anyone still thinks Groves bossed the match entirely I would suggest having a look at his face as it looks like he has been twatted with a spade

Thing is if you say its better to stop it early you are predicting what is going to happen and thats near impossible. If a fighter was on the wrong end of most of the shots for the whole fight you can almost prevent the inevitable as you say. However here Groves had not been in trouble the whole fight up to that point, he was wobbled but not as much as Froch earlier. Froch was also constantly punching on the break and threw at least two illegal shots. Groves should have took a knee but that could have highlighted an even more worrying issue on the judges cards.

If you judge a fight on whose face is more marked then you are doing it wrong. Its totally irrelevant.

Another part of the commentary that annoyed me. Plenty of times both of them would throw an illegal punch and then Jim Watt would conveniently overlook what Groves had did and focus solely on Froch.

Here's an example. Groves is holding and loading up at the back of Froch's head, Froch then retaliates and gets a couple of his own in and Watt is calling for points to be taken from Froch. What?

 

[Blue Til Death]

Froch deserved to win, no question about it, he was hurt a good few times but he stayed in there and got his reward in the end. Massive credit to Groves though, I for one underestimated him as did Froch.
He deserves a rematch and Froch being the warrior he is will give him one, I suspect that this was Groves chance though and in a second fight I could see Froch winning without the mega battle he had this time.
They are both a credit to boxing and despite the hype, I think they must both respect each other big time now.

 

[Kippaxstreetheadache]

Which bit of the bolded is bollocks exactly? Two of the judges had Groves 1 point up at the time, a 2 point swing would've put Froch ahead. Froch was starting to grind Groves down in the previous 2 rounds and was definitely the one coming on strong.

The fight wasn't anywhere even close to the 1 sided fight that Jim Watt made it out to be, nowhere near. Froch was landing punches in bunches in the majority of exchanges, with Groves landing single clean shots here or there. It's was hardly Mayweather-Gatti. Go on a boxing forum or twitter, literally thousands of people will tell you the same. That was a fight in the balance at the time of the stoppage.

Yeah he put an off balance Froch down with a flash knockdown in round 1. Completely different circumstances to a tired fighter taking multiple flush punches in the championship rounds. As I've said, Froch was denied a clean KO win there.

Your claim that Groves was only 1 point ahead on the cards, that is bollocks. As I highlighted.

Pointing to the bizarre scoring of the judges doesn't qualify your opinion. If, for some strange reason, you thought the Mayweather Canelo fight was a close one, would pointing to CJ Ross' card give your opinion any credence?

No.

"An off balance Froch", yawn. Your bias is shining through. He was caught flush and clean, he could've been stopped there and then or early in the second if Groves didn't favour relative caution.

That said, I recognise the stark differences is being rocked early in a fight to later in the fight when fatigue is a consideration. Some are disregarding that totally, but that's huge, and I agree there entirely.

Then again, we'll never know if Groves could've held out til the end of the round. To say that Froch was denied a KO is pure speculation, and flies in the face on the general concensus that Groves fought the better fight, was well ahead on the cards, and was denied by a premature call from the ref.

However, I could really see that Groves was tiring. And Froch seemed to be coming on stronger by those later rounds, and had gone from being on the back foot to becoming the aggressor. If that had continued Froch would've been in the driving seat given the way Groves appearing to be tiring.

We'll never know how that fight would've progressed though, all we can do is speculate.

What we all know, as a fact, is that Groves was ahead on the cards when the ref intervened. We can argue by how many, but he was ahead.

He fought the better fight, and made Froch look past it for most of the fight - my opinion.

I don't get what your gripe is Jim Watt, I'm capable of forming my own opinion, I'm not influenced by commentators. That said, I largely agree with his assessment of the fight.

Maybe you should take off the tinted glasses?

I'm not using the judges cards to quantify anything, I was just pointing out the facts in what I had said originally which were that Froch would've been up on the official cards if Groves had taken a knee. I wouldn't look to that scoring in the Mayweather fight no, because it was poor scoring in a fight where he won virtually every round. Different scenario to this close fight.

I scored the fight on my phone and this is how I had it at the time of the stoppage:

Froch Groves
8...............10
10...............9
9...............10
9...............10
10...............9
9...............10
10...............9
10...............9

Nothing biased about it as I am no more a Froch supporter than I am a Groves one. Froch was landing way more shots than Groves as the fight progressed and by about the 4th round he had established his jab (despite what the commentators were saying). I have no doubt Froch would've won that on points if a tiring Groves had somehow survived the onslaught in the 9th round.

'Flash knockdown' was the wrong phrase to use in hindsight. Froch was certainly standing way too square on to Groves when he was knocked down though, probably due to him underestimating Groves' power.

Yes, and I totally disagreed with your scoring, as would most impartial boxing fans. Hence why I thought it was nonsense to claim Froch would have been up on the cards if Groves had taken a knee.

My point re the Canelo fight was that a judge's scoring can't always be used to legitimise your own.

The scoring of two of the judges on the Groves Froch fight was shocking, IMO.

Absolutely no idea how you gave the second to Froch. The others are debatable.

Again, you can't make any proclamations on the outcome of the fight had the referee not intervened. All we can do is speculate.

I didn't like the way the fight was stopped. But you can look at it two ways;

Groves saved face as he was feeling the pace at that stage, was rocked and Froch was growing into the fight. The stoppage may have actually been great for him, as it allows him to claim the "what if", when it appeared he was fading.

Groves was robbed, he was ahead on the cards, fought the fight of his life, and while tiring, and then rocked, he hadn't been given the same benefit of the doubt Froch had been given by the ref when he was hurt. The referee intervened way too quickly and robbed him of the opportunity to prove that he could ride out the storm, to a points win on the cards.

Personally, I think the truth lies somewhere in between.

 

[Kippaxstreetheadache]

Froch deserved to win, no question about it, he was hurt a good few times but he stayed in there and got his reward in the end. Massive credit to Groves though, I for one underestimated him as did Froch.
He deserves a rematch and Froch being the warrior he is will give him one, I suspect that this was Groves chance though and in a second fight I could see Froch winning without the mega battle he had this time.
They are both a credit to boxing and despite the hype, I think they must both respect each other big time now.

[bigimg]http://wallgood.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Jackie-Chan-Meme-Template.jpg[/bigimg]<br /><br />-- Mon Nov 25, 2013 5:16 pm --<br /><br />

Jim Watt and the rest of Sky were doing my head in. It was so clear they wanted a Groves win so that they would have a new PPV hero to laud all over the place. Froch was going to put Groves down and once he did it was going to be over anyway, ref should not have stopped it still imo but someone said "its better to see a fight stopped one punch too early than one punch too late."
If anyone still thinks Groves bossed the match entirely I would suggest having a look at his face as it looks like he has been twatted with a spade

Thing is if you say its better to stop it early you are predicting what is going to happen and thats near impossible. If a fighter was on the wrong end of most of the shots for the whole fight you can almost prevent the inevitable as you say. However here Groves had not been in trouble the whole fight up to that point, he was wobbled but not as much as Froch earlier. Froch was also constantly punching on the break and threw at least two illegal shots. Groves should have took a knee but that could have highlighted an even more worrying issue on the judges cards.

If you judge a fight on whose face is more marked then you are doing it wrong. Its totally irrelevant.

Another part of the commentary that annoyed me. Plenty of times both of them would throw an illegal punch and then Jim Watt would conveniently overlook what Groves had did and focus solely on Froch.

Here's an example. Groves is holding and loading up at the back of Froch's head, Froch then retaliates and gets a couple of his own in and Watt is calling for points to be taken from Froch. What?

Yeah, I'll give you that. Didn't get that at all. Even whizzed it back to see what he was on about.

 

[dannyboy29]

To me this “he was one shot away from death” is bullshit. It’s the same for every boxer when they get in the ring. It should have been stopped when / if Groves was in no fit state to continue i.e cant defend himself and he cant throw punches back. Groves was doing both. He got caught with a couple of good shots….so what, that’s boxing! if the shots were that good and clean he would have gone down. Also if he had been under this pressure 3 4 5 times then yeh maybe have a look at stopping it but it was the first time Groves had been under that pressure. I remember one of the Morrales and Barrera fights where they had each other bouncing off the ropes for 12 rounds.

 

[conormcfc]

I'm not using the judges cards to quantify anything, I was just pointing out the facts in what I had said originally which were that Froch would've been up on the official cards if Groves had taken a knee. I wouldn't look to that scoring in the Mayweather fight no, because it was poor scoring in a fight where he won virtually every round. Different scenario to this close fight.

I scored the fight on my phone and this is how I had it at the time of the stoppage:

Froch Groves
8...............10
10...............9
9...............10
9...............10
10...............9
9...............10
10...............9
10...............9

Nothing biased about it as I am no more a Froch supporter than I am a Groves one. Froch was landing way more shots than Groves as the fight progressed and by about the 4th round he had established his jab (despite what the commentators were saying). I have no doubt Froch would've won that on points if a tiring Groves had somehow survived the onslaught in the 9th round.

'Flash knockdown' was the wrong phrase to use in hindsight. Froch was certainly standing way too square on to Groves when he was knocked down though, probably due to him underestimating Groves' power.

Yes, and I totally disagreed with your scoring, as would most impartial boxing fans. Hence why I thought it was nonsense to claim Froch would have been up on the cards if Groves had taken a knee.

My point re the Canelo fight was that a judge's scoring can't always be used to legitimise your own.

The scoring of two of the judges on the Groves Froch fight was shocking, IMO.

Absolutely no idea how you gave the second to Froch. The others are debatable.

Again, you can't make any proclamations on the outcome of the fight had the referee not intervened. All we can do is speculate.

I didn't like the way the fight was stopped. But you can look at it two ways;

Groves saved face as he was feeling the pace at that stage, was rocked and Froch was growing into the fight. The stoppage may have actually been great for him, as it allows him to claim the "what if", when it appeared he was fading.

Groves was robbed, he was ahead on the cards, fought the fight of his life, and while tiring, and then rocked, he hadn't been given the same benefit of the doubt Froch had been given by the ref when he was hurt. The referee intervened way too quickly and robbed him of the opportunity to prove that he could ride out the storm, to a points win on the cards.

Personally, I think the truth lies somewhere in between.

I agree with you Re: using judges scorecards to try and validate my own and that's not what I was trying to do.

The 2nd round as I saw it and what I can remember of it was a feeling out round. Neither of them landed anything meaningful with Froch winning it based on activity level.

 

[Malty]

Froch is a Nottingham legend.

Groves probably deserves a match if I'm honest. And I think Froch will want to shut him up pissing on his legacy.

 

[Anonymous]

To me this “he was one shot away from death” is bullshit. It’s the same for every boxer when they get in the ring. It should have been stopped when / if Groves was in no fit state to continue i.e cant defend himself and he cant throw punches back. Groves was doing both. He got caught with a couple of good shots….so what, that’s boxing! if the shots were that good and clean he would have gone down. Also if he had been under this pressure 3 4 5 times then yeh maybe have a look at stopping it but it was the first time Groves had been under that pressure. I remember one of the Morrales and Barrera fights where they had each other bouncing off the ropes for 12 rounds.

Well said, if this is the standard of refereeing we're going to see going forward then the sport will die. It's supposed to be stopped if a boxer is in serious danger or he can't defend himself, not after 2 good shots from his opponent.

The ref couldn't wait to give it Froch.

 

[tidyman]

Froch is a Nottingham legend.

Groves probably deserves a match if I'm honest. And I think Froch will want to shut him up pissing on his legacy.

I don't think Froch will give a flying fuck about that. It's on his record as a TKO and that's all he will care about.

My initial thought was Froch probably wouldn't to risk it with him again. With him been six months or a year older and Groves the same amount more experienced. But money talks and if they think they can sell out a stadium plus PPV, that's the sort of money he's unlikely to get fighting anyone else. So it will probably happen, would be my guess.

 

[bluemoon27]

Having been in the boxing game for a while I can honestly say that the ref was right to stop the fight IF he genuinely thought that groves was in a position as to where he could not defend himself then he was right,he would not have wanted it on his conscience if one more punch could have led to very severe consequences.Dont get me wrong I think he jumped in to soon but he had a split second decision to make.Groves now as another chance to make his mark on the world stage which im sure he will,but he possibly might never have had that chance

 

[Kippaxstreetheadache]

I'm not using the judges cards to quantify anything, I was just pointing out the facts in what I had said originally which were that Froch would've been up on the official cards if Groves had taken a knee. I wouldn't look to that scoring in the Mayweather fight no, because it was poor scoring in a fight where he won virtually every round. Different scenario to this close fight.

I scored the fight on my phone and this is how I had it at the time of the stoppage:

Froch Groves
8...............10
10...............9
9...............10
9...............10
10...............9
9...............10
10...............9
10...............9

Nothing biased about it as I am no more a Froch supporter than I am a Groves one. Froch was landing way more shots than Groves as the fight progressed and by about the 4th round he had established his jab (despite what the commentators were saying). I have no doubt Froch would've won that on points if a tiring Groves had somehow survived the onslaught in the 9th round.

'Flash knockdown' was the wrong phrase to use in hindsight. Froch was certainly standing way too square on to Groves when he was knocked down though, probably due to him underestimating Groves' power.

I've just watched the fight back again in HD. Even more convinced your scoring is totally biased. No way in a million years did you give the 7th to Froch, that was Groves' most convincing round, he was teeing off on Froch's head for shits and giggles.

My scoring:

Froch - Groves

1st 8 - 10
2nd 9 - 10
3rd 9 - 10
4th 9 - 10
5th 10 - 9
6th 9 - 10
7th 9 - 10
8th 10 - 9

5 points up on the cards at the time of the stoppage.

Full fight;

<a class="postlink" href="http://youtu.be/F8qon7UC_A0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://youtu.be/F8qon7UC_A0</a>

 

[RadcliffeRick]

So it was a PPV fight on Sky, the re-match will generate a lot of interest and will also be a PPV (probably) event on sky, selling many more subscriptions than the first fight. If I was cynical I would say it may be a marketing ploy for the re-match.

Just wait for the hype and the hard sell for subscriptions from sky!!

Just Saying............ IMHO

 

[TCIB]

Not a skilled boxing buff but it did seem a little early to call it off.

That said Froch had just caught him hard twice and if the ref saw tweety birds in his eyes then i can see why he called it.

 

[stony]

Not a skilled boxing buff but it did seem a little early to call it off.

That said Froch had just caught him hard twice and if the ref saw tweety birds in his eyes then i can see why he called it.

Ref saw his bet at Paddy power going up in smoke if it went another round.