i just don't think there was anything remotely outrageous about (contains Saturday night spoilers!)...

First topic message reminder :

...the decision to stop Groves last night.

I say that as someone who's been watching boxing for twenty years, is a big fan of both fighters, and who was obviously disappointed we didn't get to see another three rounds of what for me was one of the very best British fights.

Groves was fantastic, he beat Froch up, won six of the eight completed rounds and proved himself at home as a world-level contender, but he was taking some huge punches there, one concussive left especially where his eyes rolled back, and was protected for his own good. There was no way he'd have got through the round.

People need to differentiate between what was the better outcome for them sat at home in their armchair with a few beers, and what was the right decision. As crude and disappointing as Froch was on the night, one more big punch there and Groves would've been not only on the floor but could've been seriously hurt.

Ultimately, it comes down to the fact that people just like being offended, don't they? It's why they pick up the Sunday papers, it's why they watch sport, etc, etc.

In what round would you have stopped the first Gatti/Ward fight then Tunes?

The general consensus is that the fight was stopped too soon. If anything the referee should have given Groves a standing count.

Before the ref. stopped the fight it could be seen how eager the ref. was to stop the fight -- it looked like he was ready to stop the fight several seconds earlier while Groves was still swinging wildly. The Ref grabbed Groves while Groves was still in the fight and bundled him off, Groves only dropped his arms when the referee grabbed him.

It is possible that Froch could have finished Groves off during the next five / ten seconds if the referee hadn't intervened, but it wasn't certain, and Groves wasn't given the chance. Groves certainly performed much much better than most expected and based on that he should have been allowed to continue when he got into difficulties in the ninth.

My concern was that Groves seemed to have lost his composure, and though he was still standing and swinging he was getting caught flush by a far more composed (at the time) Froch.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:In what round would you have stopped the first Gatti/Ward fight then Tunes?

Both figters were landing shots... why stop it? did the reff stop it when Groves and Forch were scrapping hitting eachother?.. no. he did when Froch had him on the ropes and was landing repeatedly and Groves was not, Groves was also in trouble before that engagement where the reff pulled them apart and restarted... and Froch pounced again ...

the issue is how long the space of time of him doing this was permitted...

Groves was still landing, what fight were you watching?

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Groves was still landing, what fight were you watching?

what posts are you reading?

Did Froch land about 5 clean shots to Groves head? (not 1...not 2), yes ... did Groves hit him back. No, Groves pushed froch away and moved to the side as he turned, so some how people think maybe he was going to do a spinning back kick or something and manage to stop Carl from landing more.

Had Groves gone down, he may have been able to get up take a count and see the round out... but he was dead on his feet, although being very brave..

My dispute is not that the stoppage was not early.. as it was about 5 - seconds too early.

But that I do not think it was a robbery as I think Groves would have been stopped and was gassed... So on that note I do not feel the result is tainted by the decision, all be it a negative ending to a great fight...

Tunes is a bit of a wum when it comes to Groves so his opinion shouldn't really be taken seriously.

Groves wasn't in as bad a state as Froch was in the first, it's clear the ref made a bad judgement call. You can't stop a fight based on what might happen, it isn't fair.

Lumbering_Jack wrote:Tunes is a bit of a wum when it comes to Groves so his opinion shouldn't really be taken seriously.

Groves wasn't in as bad a state as Froch was in the first, it's clear the ref made a bad judgement call. You can't stop a fight based on what might happen, it isn't fair.

I have admitted that Groves has proved me wrong and will only get better... Im just telling it how it is... Just because he done so much better than amny thought it does not take away the ninth rounds..

Groves was in a worst state down to what Froch was doing to him while he was hurt. After Froch was knocked down he was able to get his jab going get his legs back and see the round out with out being repeatedly hit by Groves. In hind site that was Groves;s best opertunity and he should have jumped on Froch then which would THEN have made Froch in big trouble. But he did not.

Groves was on the ropes and took 5 shots to the head with out landing back, and pervious to that took a few clean shots as well..

You talk of being being bias against Groves when people are clearly bias against Froch when saying he was in the same trouble in Rnd 1. after taking 1 shot which knocked him down.

I watched the fight at my house with 7 friends, 3 of which I'd say were knowledgeable about boxing and the other 4 more casual fans. When the fight was stopped everyone in the room collectively was shocked and didn't see why it was stopped. The commentators agreed, the pundits agreed, journalists agreed, the crowd agreed and most on this forum agreed too. It was a premature stoppage so when people argue otherwise I'm not sure what they're watching.

Lumbering_Jack wrote:I watched the fight at my house with 7 friends, 3 of which I'd say were knowledgeable about boxing and the other 4 more casual fans. When the fight was stopped everyone in the room collectively was shocked and didn't see why it was stopped. The commentators agreed, the pundits agreed, journalists agreed, the crowd agreed and most on this forum agreed too. It was a premature stoppage so when people argue otherwise I'm not sure what they're watching.

I don't think anyone is saying it wasn't a premature stoppage. I just think that was Groves last round regardless of the ref stepping in.

seanmichaels wrote:

Lumbering_Jack wrote:I watched the fight at my house with 7 friends, 3 of which I'd say were knowledgeable about boxing and the other 4 more casual fans. When the fight was stopped everyone in the room collectively was shocked and didn't see why it was stopped. The commentators agreed, the pundits agreed, journalists agreed, the crowd agreed and most on this forum agreed too. It was a premature stoppage so when people argue otherwise I'm not sure what they're watching.

I don't think anyone is saying it wasn't a premature stoppage. I just think that was Groves last round regardless of the ref stepping in.

That is completely missing the point. Groves was robbed of the opportunity to continue based on what might happen.

seanmichaels wrote:

Lumbering_Jack wrote:I watched the fight at my house with 7 friends, 3 of which I'd say were knowledgeable about boxing and the other 4 more casual fans. When the fight was stopped everyone in the room collectively was shocked and didn't see why it was stopped. The commentators agreed, the pundits agreed, journalists agreed, the crowd agreed and most on this forum agreed too. It was a premature stoppage so when people argue otherwise I'm not sure what they're watching.

I don't think anyone is saying it wasn't a premature stoppage. I just think that was Groves last round regardless of the ref stepping in.

exactly.
its amazing how people hear what they want to hear...

Lumbering_Jack wrote:

seanmichaels wrote:

Lumbering_Jack wrote:I watched the fight at my house with 7 friends, 3 of which I'd say were knowledgeable about boxing and the other 4 more casual fans. When the fight was stopped everyone in the room collectively was shocked and didn't see why it was stopped. The commentators agreed, the pundits agreed, journalists agreed, the crowd agreed and most on this forum agreed too. It was a premature stoppage so when people argue otherwise I'm not sure what they're watching.

I don't think anyone is saying it wasn't a premature stoppage. I just think that was Groves last round regardless of the ref stepping in.

That is completely missing the point. Groves was robbed of the opportunity to continue based on what might happen.

We could say the same about people who win or lose close decisions.

While the stop was early, it was not a farce like some are claiming. Groves was being very brave but he was hurt, he had been hit several times by some big shots and was about to take more. that was the situation. Yes the reff should have given him time to take a fall and have a count, or to hold and grapple... but he did not. And with Groves having turned away to the side of Froch leaving him more vulnerable to the attack he did not help matters..

Tunes, you're clearly and probably deliberately missing the point.

It may well have been Groves last round but you cannot stop a fight on that basis.

Fair play Tunes... You obviously have an opinion which most logical people disagree with.

I think a man who scored the Degale vs Groves fight 120-108 shouldn't be taken too seriously though.

Lumbering_Jack, you are under arrest, you've just opened your car door and havent touched the seatbelt yet - based on this you were probably going to drive off without putting it on.

tunes666 wrote:

Lumbering_Jack wrote:It was a shambles. Never a stoppage and those who think it is are clearly stupid.

I think those who think Groves would have made it through the round are stupid. Besides it being an early stoppage.

No one is saying he would an dno one is saying he wouldn't, we are saying the stoppage was far too eary.

Reborn-DeeMcK-Reborn wrote:If you watch the reply when George looks hurt he lands 2 punches before the ref pulls him off!!!! He's still throwing back. The ref had made his mind up when Groves was on the ropes about 30 seconds before that. Froch was wobbled plenty of times in the beginning and was allowed to regroup, yet once Groves gets tagged he has to be saved.

It was all down to their reputations and Foster obviously is of the mindset that Groves is chinny. Watch a fight that Kenny Bayliss refs, he would wait until the second the other fighter stops throwing before jumping in....GROVES WAS STILL THROWING!!!haha. Really was ridiculous and leaves Matchroom with yet another bogus champion . Froch and Ricky Burns should become a tag team

Spot on reborn, this is exactly what Groves says as well.

Gutted for both Froch and Groves

Groves - Chance to win a world title
Froch - Robbed of a sensational come back win after taking a real beating