Was George Groves robbed? NO. Here's Why:

First topic message reminder :

Ok, so. Last night Groves starts like a house on fire. He’s holding the centre of the ring, looking fast with great timing, working a great jab and making Froch look slow and cumbersome. Then BANG! He puts Froch down with a great shot and Froch looks wobbly. This carries on for the next 4 rounds, Groves is out thinking and out fighting Froch. By the end of the 5th he’s 5 up plus a knock down, it’s 50-44 in Groves favour.

In the 6th he starts to deviate from his gameplan a bit, he engages Froch in a brawl. But no problem, Groves is beating Froch at his own game, for the first half of the round he can’t miss with the right hand. The second half of the round he shows the first signs of fatigue. Groves gameplan thus far has required a lot of nervous energy. He spends the last minute of the ournd backed up, trying to avoid Frochs shots. Under the radar of Jim Watts ridiculous commentary a Froch right hand went through and hurt Groves. It’s now 50-45.

Groves takes the 7th off, he works the jab but doesn’t engage Froch as much, but Froch doesn’t offer much either, Groves does enough. 51-45 Groves.

Froch has more success in the 8th, he lands with more telling shots for the first time in the fight, and Groves is very clearly starting to slow down. Frochs round, 51-46.

The 9th round comes, Froch appears to be growing into the fight a bit, his superior conditioning and durability are beginning to favour him. He lands a good right which hurts Groves. This is followed up by an attack on the ropes where he lands several more flush shots. The ref stops it. Now, make no mistake, Groves had the right to carry on and show his mettle, he wasn’t staggered or knocked down. It was definitely a premature stoppage and very, very harsh on Groves. But was it a robbery? Because a robbery means a fighter was denied CERTAIN VICTORY by poor reffing/judging. Was Groves on course for certain victory? Let’s consider it;

Froch was on course to win the 9th, which would’ve made it 51-47 with 3 rounds to go. Is it unfeasible that Froch, now looking the stronger and fitter of the two could’ve won the last 3 rounds? Is it unfeasible that he could’ve put Groves down during those rounds? Experience would’ve made Groves take a knee at the point of the stoppage. Froch could certainly have taken it to a very close decision. He could also have knocked Groves out. Froch had taken Groves best shots and was still there, growing into the fight. Groves was slowing down, Froch had him in trouble and it’s certainly not unfeasible that Froch could’ve forced a more legit stoppage in the 9th.

I wanted Groves to win. I was outraged when the ref stopped it. It was harsh on Groves who’d boxed so well in the first half. I wanted to see if Groves could weather the storm and see the fight out, I wanted to see what he was made of. He was harshly stopped, but I wouldn’t say he was robbed as he was NOT on course for certain victory. The fight was swinging back into the balance and his opponent is a very hard, durable man with superior conditioning and knock out power, it was gonna be a tough last 4 rounds for Groves, there’s every chance he wouldn’t have survived or that he’d have been clawed back on the cards. Harsh decision? YES. Poor reffing? ABSOLUTELY. Robbed of certain victory? DEFINITELY NOT.

Also just to conclude, for those saying there won’t be a rematch because Groves has Frochs number and Froch/Hearn will bottle it, I dispute that. Anyone calling the fight would’ve said Groves would start better and rack up the early rounds, with Froch – a known slow starter – coming into it later. That is exactly what happened. What we didn’t expect was just how well Groves would box in the first half or that he would deck Froch. But Froch is a very durable, very well conditioned fighter who will outlast Groves down the stretch and give him nightmares as he slows down. Also Groves may now have played his aces and lost the element of surprise that stunned Froch last night. I’d love to see Groves turn him over, but if there was a rematch I’d bet on a similar (but hopefully more satisfying) outcome.

Shoot me down in flames at will…

Even Eddie Hearn was shaking his head last night at that stoppage.

Mayweathers cellmate wrote:

Izzi wrote:

Mayweathers cellmate wrote:I'm not sure what fight some people watched. Froch got hammered before being gifted the stoppage by probably the biggest fix ever in top level British boxing. Does Groves even need to rematch Froch? everybody knows who really won that fight.

Clearly didn't watch the fight then as it wasn't a one sided beat down and Froch was starting to come on massively strong.

And there's a rough consensus that Froch had him in real trouble and the end was nigh.

Wait for it to come out on YouTube and then feel free to comment.

Oh... I saw the fight alright. I saw Carl Froch get smashed in that first round. I saw Froch's clumsy come forward attempts where he landed virtually nothing. I saw Groves winning almost every round going onto an inevitable comfortable points decision. I saw the ref robbing him and witnessed everybody in the pub and the MEN arena (or whatever it's now called) deriding the decision.

Like I said it was such a disgrace it doesn't even really need a rematch.

Can you imagine if they were both on Ringside next time, Froch really would start crying.

Ahh so you did not see how despite knocking him down in the first round and landing some flush shots in the first 6, by the 8th you did not see Froch start to walk through his shots and start landing his own?, and in the ninth did you not see Groves being dragged into a fight where Froches punches were hurting him? ..

so clearly the fight was over up till that point and the rest of rnd 9 where he would manage to keep getting caught flush repeatedly and 10,11,12 was going to be where Groves suddenly got his speed and power back and won the rounds...

of course, the early stoppage meant that Groves would not have been stopped and would have danced his way to the finish line.  

Lumbering_Jack wrote:Even Eddie Hearn was shaking his head last night at that stoppage.

BBC Radio 5 live
Fight promoter Eddie Hearn: "Both fighters put everything on the line tonight. George was sensational - he shocked everyone with his performance. I've never seen Carl down like he was in the first round, a rematch makes sense.

"There's always the argument you should be given every opportunity but, for me, George was hurt late on. He looked like he was out on his feet to me. If it went on another five seconds, I'm not too sure if George could have done anything. You have to think of the safety of the fighters. I expected the fight to be more technical, but it was clinical in the end."



Beautifully summed up by Eddie.

Quite agree, Nore Staat. Froch has comparatively few options now and not a lot left to prove. Ward has conclusively shown himself to be a better fighter (the venue for a proposed rematch is, and always has been, a red herring) and Froch has taken care of almost everyone else who matters. The last piece of unfinished business is now to establish whether or not he has the beating of Groves without the benefit of a premature stoppage.

I find it very hard to call for a couple of reasons. When I look back at controversial fight endings of the past, particularly Chavez-Taylor I, it is difficult to quantify just how much has been taken out of a fighter by disappointment at having the cup dashed from his lips. Granted, Groves never had to absorb the physical punishment that Meldrick did, but the impact on his psyche can only be seen in the ring. Add to that the fact that Froch is now forewarned about the threat that George provides and it's possible that Groves' task in a rematch will be even tougher.

In Groves' favour, on the other hand, are two equally powerful factors - he seems to be a remarkably level-headed character, who will be able to cope with disappointment, and Froch will not be getting any younger during the gap between the two fights. I wouldn't want to bet on the outcome of a second fight at this stage, but, win or lose, I also hope that it will provide a fitting swansong for Carl's terrific career.

Strongback wrote:

Izzi wrote: "natural conclusion"

Could say one more freeby left hook from Froch rendering Groves unconscious was the reason a ref doesn't let all fighters get their senses scrambled in a dangerous way when in trouble. That's why the likes of Castillo got stopped on their feet, the ref didn't want to see a "natural conclusion" as you rather animalistically allude to.

And I'm not comparing refs, am comparing refs who see something and make an instinctive call. Last nights wasn't right, but then if Froch had landed something big and hurt him we'd be crying blue murder. It's all ifs, buts and maybes and it's not a refs job to take a chance on that if he thinks the guy is in serious danger of getting hurt.

Natural conclusion is one fighter being "unable to continue".  That is what the ring announcer says at the end of the fight when giving the result.  Was George a Groves "unable to continue"? Clearly Groves was able to continue as he was still throwing punches.

Boxing isn't a tickling contest as Hatton said.  Carl Froch took more brain trauma in that fight than Groves. At the end of the fight Froch said he could not remember being knocked down, is it barbaric he was allowed to continue fighting in this state?

If Groves in no longer defending himself intelligently the ref must stop the fight.  Groves was still bobbing and weaving and throwing punches.  

It was the worst stoppage in a world title fight I have ever seen.  It's that clear cut to me.  That ref will be on every Matchroom card for the next 20 years.

Worst stoppage? That's taking it a bit far to say the least. Chavez Taylor? Tyson Ruddock? JC vs Manfredo?!

Think before speaking please.

Eddie the summarizer claimed Burns beltran was a close fight.

He said it was close, but that Beltran had won by 2 rounds in his opinion.

No he said burns had won a close fight after building up a lead after the knockdown - then later on after the fallout he changed his mind and said Beltran won it.

The Chavez stoppage of Taylor was nothing compared to yesterday Izzi, you can't compare the two, Groves was fine, Taylor was not.

Izzi wrote:

Strongback wrote:

Izzi wrote: "natural conclusion"

Could say one more freeby left hook from Froch rendering Groves unconscious was the reason a ref doesn't let all fighters get their senses scrambled in a dangerous way when in trouble. That's why the likes of Castillo got stopped on their feet, the ref didn't want to see a "natural conclusion" as you rather animalistically allude to.

And I'm not comparing refs, am comparing refs who see something and make an instinctive call. Last nights wasn't right, but then if Froch had landed something big and hurt him we'd be crying blue murder. It's all ifs, buts and maybes and it's not a refs job to take a chance on that if he thinks the guy is in serious danger of getting hurt.

Natural conclusion is one fighter being "unable to continue".  That is what the ring announcer says at the end of the fight when giving the result.  Was George a Groves "unable to continue"? Clearly Groves was able to continue as he was still throwing punches.

Boxing isn't a tickling contest as Hatton said.  Carl Froch took more brain trauma in that fight than Groves. At the end of the fight Froch said he could not remember being knocked down, is it barbaric he was allowed to continue fighting in this state?

If Groves in no longer defending himself intelligently the ref must stop the fight.  Groves was still bobbing and weaving and throwing punches.  

It was the worst stoppage in a world title fight I have ever seen.  It's that clear cut to me.  That ref will be on every Matchroom card for the next 20 years.

Worst stoppage? That's taking it a bit far to say the least. Chavez Taylor? Tyson Ruddock? JC vs Manfredo?!

Think before speaking please.

Are you trying to say Groves was in anywhere near the trouble Taylor was. Taylor was knocked down, he got up and was out on his feet. He gave no indication to the referee he was able to or wanted to continue.

That stoppage is not controversial because Taylor wasn't in a bad way it was controversial because it was 2 seconds from the end of the fight.

As I said I have never seen a fighter bobbing and weaving and throwing punches like Groves was getting stopped in a world title fight.


Think before you use Google please.

mobilemaster8 wrote:

Lumbering_Jack wrote:Even Eddie Hearn was shaking his head last night at that stoppage.

 BBC Radio 5 live
Fight promoter Eddie Hearn: "Both fighters put everything on the line tonight. George was sensational - he shocked everyone with his performance. I've never seen Carl down like he was in the first round, a rematch makes sense.

"There's always the argument you should be given every opportunity but, for me, George was hurt late on. He looked like he was out on his feet to me. If it went on another five seconds, I'm not too sure if George could have done anything. You have to think of the safety of the fighters. I expected the fight to be more technical, but it was clinical in the end."



Beautifully summed up by Eddie.

Every other impartial pundit completely disagrees including boxers themselves who know it was a ridiculous decision.

The JC Manfredo stoppage was probably on a par with this one. Both JC and Froch in my opinion were going to win but the timing of both stoppages was a complete shambles.

Strongback wrote:

Izzi wrote:

Strongback wrote:

Izzi wrote: "natural conclusion"

Could say one more freeby left hook from Froch rendering Groves unconscious was the reason a ref doesn't let all fighters get their senses scrambled in a dangerous way when in trouble. That's why the likes of Castillo got stopped on their feet, the ref didn't want to see a "natural conclusion" as you rather animalistically allude to.

And I'm not comparing refs, am comparing refs who see something and make an instinctive call. Last nights wasn't right, but then if Froch had landed something big and hurt him we'd be crying blue murder. It's all ifs, buts and maybes and it's not a refs job to take a chance on that if he thinks the guy is in serious danger of getting hurt.

Natural conclusion is one fighter being "unable to continue".  That is what the ring announcer says at the end of the fight when giving the result.  Was George a Groves "unable to continue"? Clearly Groves was able to continue as he was still throwing punches.

Boxing isn't a tickling contest as Hatton said.  Carl Froch took more brain trauma in that fight than Groves. At the end of the fight Froch said he could not remember being knocked down, is it barbaric he was allowed to continue fighting in this state?

If Groves in no longer defending himself intelligently the ref must stop the fight.  Groves was still bobbing and weaving and throwing punches.  

It was the worst stoppage in a world title fight I have ever seen.  It's that clear cut to me.  That ref will be on every Matchroom card for the next 20 years.

Worst stoppage? That's taking it a bit far to say the least. Chavez Taylor? Tyson Ruddock? JC vs Manfredo?!

Think before speaking please.

Are you trying to say Groves was in anywhere near the trouble Taylor was.  Taylor was knocked down, he got up and was out on his feet.  He gave no indication to the referee he was able to or wanted to continue.

That stoppage is not controversial because Taylor wasn't in a bad way it was controversial because it was 2 seconds from the end of the fight.

As I said I have never seen a fighter bobbing and weaving and throwing punches like Groves was getting stopped in a world title fight.


Think before you use Google please.

You didn't explicitly say why it was the worse stoppage you'd seen, did you? You can't make revisionist statements afterwards.

And yes, I've never watched the Taylor fight. Or the documentary that lists stuff like Taylor being distracted by The mentalist trainer Duva (wife Kathy runs a promotions company, the name which alludes me) barking orders... Steele not noticing the red light flashing for 10s left in the corner of the ring behind Taylor.

Poor comeback. In 50 years time people will still remember the stoppage and furore surrounding the Taylor stoppage, this pales in comparison. Fact is both refs didn't think they were in a position to continue for their own reasons, and both got it wrong to a certain degree. Taylor would've won the fight, Groves would've been lucky to survive the next punch. Which is why your original statement doesn't hold water.

Will have to take a look at your past posts but am sensing a biased agenda

Lumbering_Jack wrote:The JC Manfredo stoppage was probably on a par with this one. Both JC and Froch in my opinion were going to win but the timing of both stoppages was a complete shambles.

JC wasn't even landing was he?! Manfredo wasn't even hurt either

There's a case for Steele making the right call as Taylor was in no condition to continue having taken a sustained beating before getting knocked down. There is no case for saying the referee made the right call last night, absolutely none.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:There's a case for Steele making the right call as Taylor was in no condition to continue having taken a sustained beating before getting knocked down. There is no case for saying the referee made the right call last night, absolutely none.

Taylor had out boxed Chavez and was comfortably going to win the fight. He'd landed more, Chavez had started to get to him though. As I said that far will be remembered for being far more contentious than last nights. By a mile.

Izzi wrote:Poor comeback. In 50 years time people will still remember the stoppage and furore surrounding the Taylor stoppage, this pales in comparison.

The Taylor-Chavez stoppage will forever be debated because there is actually a case to be made either way, hence it will always be discussion-worthy. The reason the Froch-Groves stoppage won't still be being fiercely debated more than two decades later is because, essentially, there really isn't much debate to be had. The stoppage was a shambles and an overwhelming majority of observers seem to agree.

This is getting ridiculous now.

88Chris05 wrote:

Izzi wrote:Poor comeback. In 50 years time people will still remember the stoppage and furore surrounding the Taylor stoppage, this pales in comparison.

The Taylor-Chavez stoppage will forever be debated because there is actually a case to be made either way, hence it will always be discussion-worthy. The reason the Froch-Groves stoppage won't still be being fiercely debated more than two decades later is because, essentially, there really isn't much debate to be had. The stoppage was a shambles and an overwhelming majority of observers seem to agree.

This is getting ridiculous now.

Agreed. But Froch was still going to relieve him of his senses in the next 10 seconds, so stoppage doesn't quite phase me as much. That and I had a nice little double on NZ in the league semi and Froch inside 1-12, lost the 4-6 rnd group bet though.

Off to the pub to catch the second half of the rugby, in a bit ladies

Just caught it again on box office. It is clearly a poor decision. You only need to look at the embarrassed look on the refs face to see that.

The Taylor stoppage is still discussed because of the magnitude of the fight Izzi and the fact it involved a bonafide great in Chavez. That Taylor was winning is irrelevant, he was winning but at a huge physical cost, look at the pair at the end and he was done no two ways about it but there's always the two second argument.

Aye - Strange that 20000 people in the stadium can see that yet the referee can't. BBBOC come out to proterct their ref yet again. Dopey Kumquat

Izzi wrote:Agreed. But Froch was still going to relieve him of his senses in the next 10 seconds, so stoppage doesn't quite phase me as much.

He was going to relieve Groves of his senses in your opinion. Someone could just as easily opine that Groves was going to weather the storm and fight back, as he did against Anderson and as Kessler did in round twelve against Froch six months ago.

A stoppage call should be made based on a fighter's condition at that moment. Nobody knows what would have happened in the coming moments, just as nobody can say for sure that Groves would have definitely finished Froch off had he had another twenty seconds or so in the first round.[/quote]

The annoying thing is we're not debating the awesome performances of both fighters, the speed and accuracy of Groves and the sheer resolve of Froch.

Izzi wrote:

Strongback wrote:

Izzi wrote:

Strongback wrote:

Izzi wrote: "natural conclusion"

Could say one more freeby left hook from Froch rendering Groves unconscious was the reason a ref doesn't let all fighters get their senses scrambled in a dangerous way when in trouble. That's why the likes of Castillo got stopped on their feet, the ref didn't want to see a "natural conclusion" as you rather animalistically allude to.

And I'm not comparing refs, am comparing refs who see something and make an instinctive call. Last nights wasn't right, but then if Froch had landed something big and hurt him we'd be crying blue murder. It's all ifs, buts and maybes and it's not a refs job to take a chance on that if he thinks the guy is in serious danger of getting hurt.

Natural conclusion is one fighter being "unable to continue".  That is what the ring announcer says at the end of the fight when giving the result.  Was George a Groves "unable to continue"? Clearly Groves was able to continue as he was still throwing punches.

Boxing isn't a tickling contest as Hatton said.  Carl Froch took more brain trauma in that fight than Groves. At the end of the fight Froch said he could not remember being knocked down, is it barbaric he was allowed to continue fighting in this state?

If Groves in no longer defending himself intelligently the ref must stop the fight.  Groves was still bobbing and weaving and throwing punches.  

It was the worst stoppage in a world title fight I have ever seen.  It's that clear cut to me.  That ref will be on every Matchroom card for the next 20 years.

Worst stoppage? That's taking it a bit far to say the least. Chavez Taylor? Tyson Ruddock? JC vs Manfredo?!

Think before speaking please.

Are you trying to say Groves was in anywhere near the trouble Taylor was.  Taylor was knocked down, he got up and was out on his feet.  He gave no indication to the referee he was able to or wanted to continue.

That stoppage is not controversial because Taylor wasn't in a bad way it was controversial because it was 2 seconds from the end of the fight.

As I said I have never seen a fighter bobbing and weaving and throwing punches like Groves was getting stopped in a world title fight.


Think before you use Google please.

You didn't explicitly say why it was the worse stoppage you'd seen, did you? You can't make revisionist statements afterwards.

And yes, I've never watched the Taylor fight. Or the documentary that lists stuff like Taylor being distracted by The mentalist trainer Duva (wife Kathy runs a promotions company, the name which alludes me) barking orders... Steele not noticing the red light flashing for 10s left in the corner of the ring behind Taylor.

Poor comeback. In 50 years time people will still remember the stoppage and furore surrounding the Taylor stoppage, this pales in comparison. Fact is both refs didn't think they were in a position to continue for their own reasons, and both got it wrong to a certain degree. Taylor would've won the fight, Groves would've been lucky to survive the next punch. Which is why your original statement doesn't hold water.

Will have to take a look at your past posts but am sensing a biased agenda

[/quote]


Now the Chavez Taylor fight. Also Froch against Jermaine Taylor is more similar to Chavez v Taylor than Froch v Groves.





Steel asked Chavez if he is ready to continue and gets a thousand yard stare as a response. Nothing verbally or physically to suggest Taylor either wanted to or was able to continue.


Look at the gif and tell me Groves didn't have his hands up and was not throwing punches.

If you get the original broadcast strongy - immediately after the fight you'll hear them discussing it with Lederman, the full broadcast is up on youtube 1hr 40 mins or so. Taylor doesnt answer and turns his head to the side because Duva climbed up onto the canvas.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CVQD8VkGePU

there you go 1 hr 15 mins onwards

Terrible stoppage. Disastrous decision. Would Froch have taken Groves out over the next 4 rounds? Maybe. Was Groves merely taking a breather in this round and would be coming back in the next? Maybe.

Should Froch have been docked points for persistent fouls? Yes
Was Froch in worse state and not stopped? Yes

Will a rematch be the same? No. If a rematch is granted - I suspect Froch will not, under any circumstances, come out slow. He will not be caught cold and will box a bit better.

Certainly, it was worrying for Froch fans how easily he was outboxed last night. I may be wrong - but Groves, a man who sneaked past the mighty deGale, has not yet shown me anything to suggest he is p4p material in terms of his skillset.

So - in summary:
1. Bad refereeing decision, which spoiled a British classic matchup
2. Did Froch take Groves lightly, or does Groves have a skillset that Froch doesn't matchup against. A rematch would answer

On the plus side - at least people are talking about boxing again - although a shame that its not for the right reasons.

ShahenshahG wrote:If you get the original broadcast strongy - immediately after the fight you'll hear them discussing it with Lederman, the full broadcast is up on youtube 1hr 40 mins or so. Taylor doesnt answer and turns his head to the side because Duva climbed up onto the canvas.

I've heard that argument before but the ref is in Taylor's face counting. Taylor is badly hurt and can't focus. The controversy for me in this fight is that Taylor only needs to continue to win as there is only 2 seconds on the clock. Chavez does not have time to land another punch, Taylor wins.

By comparison Groves is intelligently defending himself and responding to Froch's attack.

It's a disgraceful stoppage and has an element of underhandedness to it in my view. Calling it a soft stoppage does not do justice to how bad it was.

Actually I'm agreeing with you, he didn't respond after being given a full count so the fight had to be stopped groves wasn't even given a chance.

Good original summary, and everyone seems to be on the same wave length.

The problem, and a lot of the pundits mentioned it as did Groves, was that it was one rule for Groves and entirely different one for Froch last night.

If the ref thought he was right to stop it in the 9th Round then by all accounts it should have been stopped in the 1st, 4th or 5th when Groves had Froch rocking. Yes Froch may have taken the shots better after the initial knockdown but from Rounds 1-5, Groves caught Froch with multiple flush shots which had Froch. We all know what Froch is made of but if you look at those first 5 rounds last night, I have never seen him hurt so badly and on so many occasions in one fight.

Groves comes out of the fight the real winner and sadly Froch last night did everything which people hated him for 5 years ago. In the last half decade I had grown to really like him but last night all those horrible traits came back which made myself and so many others despise him to begin with.

He was classless, lacked any kind of humility and gave Groves minimum respect (the little he did, he did so through gritted teeth). Even today he has come out and said that the ref saved Groves career last night...obviously he took one too many shots to his head last night because I have watched the fight 3 times today (go down as an all time classic for me, especially here in Britain) and even when Groves was stopped he didn't look that hurt. 

Given in the build up Froch said that Groves didn't belong in the ring with him, he was shown up a treat. Young George made him look like a novice for almost all of that and I don't think he will want any part of a rematch.

I would imagine that Hearn will chase the Ward fight for Froch as a big final pay day, can't see him risking a rematch as he now has his next Super-Middleweight charge in the wings when Froch does retire which will be in the next 12 months I think.

I just hope that the defeat doesn't take to much out of Groves because, and I don't think anyone has touched on this, that is the type of defeat that can sole crushing to a fighter.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:The Taylor stoppage is still discussed because of the magnitude of the fight Izzi and the fact it involved a bonafide great in Chavez. That Taylor was winning is irrelevant, he was winning but at a huge physical cost, look at the pair at the end and he was done no two ways about it but there's always the two second argument.

The referee also saw red lights flashing behind him and rushed his appraisal.......Look at how long he gives other fighters in other fights.........

Whether or not he was fit to continue........Chavez was a King fighter and with the referees previous history of King-butt licking I don't buy the stoppage..

Hearns was half dead when he got the go ahead......against Barkley...............

Complete bollox...............the referees decision..............Poor old rosario was nearly killed by JC ..........Didn't have much COMPASSION for him....The towel came in.

people say you shouldn't care how long thee is left in a round and that's right!! But Steele did.......If Taylor was decked with two minutes left he continues............

ShahenshahG wrote:Eddie the summarizer claimed Burns beltran was a close fight.

it was, Beltain won it yeah but it was by no means a shut out.

Strongback wrote:

As I said I have never seen a fighter bobbing and weaving and throwing punches like Groves was getting stopped in a world title fight.


Think before you use Google please.

bobbing and weaving is all well and good, but if you are still getting smashed in the face then its not really relevant.

oxring wrote:Terrible stoppage.  Disastrous decision.  Would Froch have taken Groves out over the next 4 rounds? Maybe.  Was Groves merely taking a breather in this round and would be coming back in the next?  Maybe.

a breather?, he was scrapping for his life, he was throwing desperate hopeful punches trying to keep Froch off and was missing while taking heavy shots...

In no way was Groves taking a breather and if he was then it was a very demented way of taking a breather.... if you take a breather you smother someones work, or move back and avoid getting caught up..

tunes666 wrote:

Strongback wrote:

As I said I have never seen a fighter bobbing and weaving and throwing punches like Groves was getting stopped in a world title fight.


Think before you use Google please.

bobbing and weaving is all well and good, but if you are still getting smashed in the face then its not really relevant.

Yes it is as it shows you are still in possession of your mental faculties

owen10ozzy wrote:
If the ref thought he was right to stop it in the 9th Round then by all accounts it should have been stopped in the 1st, 4th or 5th when Groves had Froch rocking.

Froch was not rocked apart from the knock down. When he was rocked, but if Groves wants the reff to stop it then he needs to make him make that decision by following up, which Groves did not do...

At no stage in the fight was Froch ready to be stopped. apart from possibly in rnd 1 when he was floored, Groves could have maybe stepped on the gas at that point, but he didn't so we wont know.

However, despite people deciding to ignore it, Groves was in big trouble in rnd 9, despite the reff jumping in too quick. Groves lost.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:The Taylor stoppage is still discussed because of the magnitude of the fight Izzi and the fact it involved a bonafide great in Chavez. That Taylor was winning is irrelevant, he was winning but at a huge physical cost, look at the pair at the end and he was done no two ways about it but there's always the two second argument.

The referee also saw red lights flashing behind him and rushed his appraisal.......Look at how long he gives other fighters in other fights.........

Whether or not he was fit to continue........Chavez was a King fighter and with the referees previous history of King-butt licking I don't buy the stoppage..

Hearns was half dead when he got the go ahead......against Barkley...............

Complete bollox...............the referees decision..............Poor old rosario was nearly killed by JC ..........Didn't have much COMPASSION for him....The towel came in.

people say you shouldn't care how long thee is left in a round and that's right!! But Steele did.......If Taylor was decked with two minutes left he continues............

The King/Steele axis always appeared strong and no doubt this was in Steele's mindset whenever he refereed. It saying that Taylor was hurt and many argue he was never the same after that night.  

At least Taylor was badly hurt. Groves was still fighting and defending himself. As I was debating further up the thread there is no comparison between these stoppages except favourable refereeing.

Rowley wrote:

tunes666 wrote:

Strongback wrote:

As I said I have never seen a fighter bobbing and weaving and throwing punches like Groves was getting stopped in a world title fight.


Think before you use Google please.

bobbing and weaving is all well and good, but if you are still getting smashed in the face then its not really relevant.

Yes it is as it shows you are still in possession of your mental faculties

Yes it is as it showed that Groves was still in possession of his mental faculties

Don't encourage tunes - not even by accident. I suppose though it could have been groves who paid off the ref to make sure he lost so everyone would hate froch. Revenge for Froch calling him out on his bad breath - even khan can come up with some great ideas.

Is it just me or were you watching a different fight strongback?!

I saw Groves take 3 of maybe 10 punches in the last 30 seconds of that fight. Yes he took 2 heavy shots but he was still getting out of the way of punches, rolling his shoulder away from the left of Carl and clearly had all his senses in tact.

If anyone comes on saying the ref was right to stop the fight at that moment or that by doing so he only stopped the inevitable; then by your view of things the fight should have been stopped in the 1st, 3rd, 4th or 5th round all in favour of Groves!

Your joking right? Froch wasn't rocked at any other point bar the knockdown. Yes he was! Numerous times he was backed up badly and hurt. For a start he was jarred right back and lost his legs momentarily when Groves landed the huge straight right down the middle (cant remember the round)...that's just 1 example of where he looked visibly hurt..I could point out many more but don't have the patience or time to be honest!

Tunes had Degale pitching a shutout against Groves. The guy clearly has an agenda.

Gingerist probably

owen10ozzy wrote:Is it just me or were you watching a different fight strongback?!

I saw Groves take 3 of maybe 10 punches in the last 30 seconds of that fight. Yes he took 2 heavy shots but he was still getting out of the way of punches, rolling his shoulder away from the left of Carl and clearly had all his senses in tact.

If anyone comes on saying the ref was right to stop the fight at that moment or that by doing so he only stopped the inevitable; then by your view of things the fight should have been stopped in the 1st, 3rd, 4th or 5th round all in favour of Groves!

Your joking right? Froch wasn't rocked at any other point bar the knockdown. Yes he was! Numerous times he was backed up badly and hurt. For a start he was jarred right back and lost his legs momentarily when Groves landed the huge straight right down the middle (cant remember the round)...that's just 1 example of where he looked visibly hurt..I could point out many more but don't have the patience or time to be honest!

It's not just you, we were watching the same fight and for once we are in agreement.

I think either you are now conditioned to argue with me no matter what I say or you mixed up somebody else's comment for being mine.

Strongback wrote:

owen10ozzy wrote:Is it just me or were you watching a different fight strongback?!

I saw Groves take 3 of maybe 10 punches in the last 30 seconds of that fight. Yes he took 2 heavy shots but he was still getting out of the way of punches, rolling his shoulder away from the left of Carl and clearly had all his senses in tact.

If anyone comes on saying the ref was right to stop the fight at that moment or that by doing so he only stopped the inevitable; then by your view of things the fight should have been stopped in the 1st, 3rd, 4th or 5th round all in favour of Groves!

Your joking right? Froch wasn't rocked at any other point bar the knockdown. Yes he was! Numerous times he was backed up badly and hurt. For a start he was jarred right back and lost his legs momentarily when Groves landed the huge straight right down the middle (cant remember the round)...that's just 1 example of where he looked visibly hurt..I could point out many more but don't have the patience or time to be honest!

It's not just you, we were watching the same fight and for once we are in agreement.

I think either you are now conditioned to argue with me no matter what I say or you mixed up somebody else's comment for being mine.

 He probably meant Tunes

One thing last night did show was just how tough Froch is. He ate several massive shots and just kept coming. The knockdown in the first round was very heavy and I fancied Groves to stop him. Wish he had seized the opportunity.

Yeah - think he held back because of inexperience - got a bit more succesful than he was expecting and ended squandering his chance for an early stoppage.

The whole show was a farce, which happens regularly. The UK has become a no go zone between Warren and Hearn and the fans are mugged off time and time again.

You just need take a look at the refs performance not just in the stoppage which was one of the worst I can remember seeing, but also his general performance. How many times did he let Froch away with just a warning? Then look at the scorecards. Two of them had it 4 rounds each. Laughable. There was nothing on the level. Groves was going to lose regardless because even had he survived and taken the last three rounds the cards were not going to allow him. He would have to KO Froch.

Ridiculous how many psychics out there "know" what was going to happen. The ref actually stopped the fight with Gorves MOVING AWAY from danger on his own accord. He didnt step in and prevent him taking shots. He grabbed Groves from behind.

Groves was absolutely robbed. Robbed of the chance of winning a fight he was clearly winning. Robbed of the chance to continue. The funny thing is I watched this same Howard Foster clown ref one of Anthony Joshuas fights and he allowed some hopellessy outclassed journeyman to be literally battered and continue after a heavy knockdown in what was a mismatch. Then you get a great fight with all to play for in front of a huge audience and he cant wait to stop it.

People go on about conspiracy theories, corruption etc but too many of Hearns card stink and he wins big again on this one with a big rematch where he promotes both fighters on ppv. Perfect opportunity now to avoid Ward again as even if they do make him an offer now he will never come over here with such blatant hometowning. Which is probably what Hearn wanted.

Howard Forster lets this continue......

The score cards were a disgrace I agree. As Jim Watt pointed out he really didn't know what fight they had been watching.

The ref was clearly looking after Froch who, as you've pointed out, was allowed to pretty much behave as he wanted.

Butlin was obviously in a better state than Groves, according to the blind ref.

People make mistakes that will always happen. But I think what really annoys boxing fans is the lack of accountability. Robert smith came out jabbering on above Foster being 'world class' and justified the decision. Morons the lot of them.

Its the old reliable. Have one "normal" scorecard and then two judges who have "an off night" when the SD comes in. Then say "these things happen".