What would Froch have to do...

for people to be satisfied that he has beaten Groves fair and square? Okay, we all know about the first fight, and the controversy has been discussed to exhaustion. He knocked Groves cold in the rematch and I have just watched an interview with Groves (with iFilm TV) where he states that Froch has been lucky twice and he landed a punch "from the gods" to knock him out. He also went on to say he would knock Froch out in the rematch. A lot of Groves's fans share these sentiments, so I ask you this: what would Froch have to do to get a legitimate win. A unanimous points win? A sustained beating? What?!

I'd also like to add that I was destroyed on here in the aftermath of the second fight for calling Groves delusional. If he is being serious, I believe he is very much delusional, and I stand by it.

Beat him in the ring, twice, and at scrabble. Then maybe I'll believe he's on Groves' level

Im still waiting for Froch to beat Arthur Abraham legitimately. Frochs law states that unless you win by presenting your chin and slugging it out then it isnt a real win. Frochs refusal to stand and trade with Abraham shpud have reulted in immediate disqualification.

The obvious answer is beat Andre Ward. I didn't read the article, but I assume that's the answer for any "What must Froch do" question

kingraf wrote:The obvious answer is beat Andre Ward. I didn't read the article, but I assume that's the answer for any "What must Froch do" question

It wasn't, but I agree, he must avenge that defeat to be elevated up with the greats.

Nobody has said that Froch hasn't beaten Groves fairly or legitimately as far as I can see. They might have said that they think Groves could still beat Froch if he got another shot at him, or that he'd have gone on to win the first fight had Foster not intervened, but that's not the same thing. Groves wasn't outclassed in either fight and probably won more rounds than Carl over the two contests. In no way does that mean Froch got lucky at Wembley, because he didn't, but it at least suggests that Groves would be in with a shout.

He needs to let go of the whole Froch thing now, but come on, it's just that usual, cheap fighter talk. Nobody can ever beat them at their very best and there is always some kind of mitigating factor in their defeats, no matter how small. Froch is no different, albeit the fact he's never been totally flattened like Groves was in May means that people have an easier time believing that he could "batter" Ward (as he said after the Bute fight) than they do Groves' own claims.

First fight was a bit early stoppage but Groves was about to be stopped and Froch coming back into the fight. But ok, people wanted a rematch, they got one. Froch fought much better and controlled the temp more. Groves started to aply him self more and turned it into a close fight. Then low and behold, we get to the latter stages and Froch starts to pressure Groves and push him, and lands a knock out punch.

Bottom line Groves does not fight 12 rounds well using the strengths he has, and Froch always comes good in the late part of fights, Froch 2 - 0 Groves. Simple as that.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5wwkwjGXb6Q

Some of Froch's bitterness must have rubbed off by the sounds of things.

Grow ginger pubes

Bit over the top this article............Not up to Sug's usual high standards....

I thought Froch won twice and I think the majority agree with me......If anything the second fight dispelled the myths of the first...

You'll always get idiots that think different.......

But whilst I'm not a fan of Froch he's the best fighter to come from these shores since Calzaghe disappeared..

Sign a contract which prevents him ever talking about himself again?

The change in public opinion for him would be surreal.

The Boss wrote:Sign a contract which prevents him ever talking about himself again?

The change in public opinion for him would be surreal.

Would help If Froch was......born in the USA .......

Just going off topic for a sec...

Hannah from S club 7.

looking HOT AND SHE'S 33!

never noticed her before but now I would..

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

The Boss wrote:Sign a contract which prevents him ever talking about himself again?

The change in public opinion for him would be surreal.

Would help If Froch was......born in the USA .......

Doesn't help him being from this hard land, Truss

The Boss wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

The Boss wrote:Sign a contract which prevents him ever talking about himself again?

The change in public opinion for him would be surreal.

Would help If Froch was......born in the USA .......

Doesn't help him being from this hard land, Truss

Don't think some will ever get Froch, Bossy....Some people will always be ...Blinded by the light !

ONETWO are you suggesting Froch needs to do a chick from S club 7 to get more respect ??

I don't get him myself. Him and tony Bellew must have the same PR person.

Are people still disputing it?

Thought it was fairly clear cut now, even if the first result was disregarded. Not like he was losing the second only to get the glory punch with seconds to spare (e.g. Taylor).

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:Just going off topic for a sec...

Hannah from S club 7.

looking HOT AND SHE'S 33!

never noticed her before but now I would..

Why shouldn't she be hot at 33 ???

When I was 16 I would have loved to bang a 33 year old as a badge of honor !!!....

Now I'm 39 .........I'd still love to bang a 33 year old.......But I'd probably fail the physical..

The woman that plays Agent Mae in the Marvel: Agents of Shield series is 51 and absolutely smoking hot!!

Groves had froch doing the e street shuffle in the first fight. It was a shocking stoppage. The result of the second doesn't alter that, or mean that because froch landed a ramrod wrecking ball in an evenly contested second fight, it meant he would definitely have won the first.

He won the second fight decisively, so groves can have no complaints, but the while the record books show 2-0, its 1-0 in my book. Shame, I had high hopes for groves.

Tyson only beat Ruddock once..........Weaver never lost to Dokes.........Taylor never lost to Chavez.....

That what your saying ???...........

Groves like these guys was in trouble..........

Ref stopped it........ 2 -0 end of !!

2-0 Milky. Referees don't influence results

kingraf wrote:2-0 Milky. Referees don't influence results

Ha ha. Got me bang to rights on that one raf! But dId I not cite groves froch as the exception that proves the rule?

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Tyson only beat Ruddock once..........Weaver never lost to Dokes.........Taylor never lost to Chavez.....

That what your saying ???...........

Groves like these guys was in trouble..........

Ref stopped it........ 2 -0  end of !!

Let's call it 2-0, that would have been 1-0 with goal line technology.

You can call it what you want......Respected posters call it 2-0 !!

[quote="TRUSSMAN66"][quote="ONETWOFOREVER"]Just going off topic for a sec...

Hannah from S club 7.

looking HOT AND SHE'S 33!

never noticed her before but now I would..[/quote]

Why shouldn't she be hot at 33 ???

When I was 16 I would have loved to bang a 33 year old as a badge of honor !!!....

Now I'm 39  .........I'd still love to bang a 33 year old.......But I'd probably fail the physical..[/quote]

She's the "sort" who it wouldn't be slow, gentle and loving with.... she's a massive pocket rocket and I would know from experience.

Groves was losing the fight (marginally on the cards) before getting KTFO. You can't use ifs/buts/maybes in sport - you can't rewrite history so anything he does say is just ginger pube eating rubbish.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:You can call it what you want......Respected posters call it 2-0 !!

So, both respected posters and you then truss!

Captain Kirk wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:Just going off topic for a sec...

Hannah from S club 7.

looking HOT AND SHE'S 33!

never noticed her before but now I would..

Why shouldn't she be hot at 33 ???

When I was 16 I would have loved to bang a 33 year old as a badge of honor !!!....

Now I'm 39  .........I'd still love to bang a 33 year old.......But I'd probably fail the physical..

She's the "sort" who it wouldn't be slow, gentle and loving with.... she's a massive pocket rocket and I would know from experience.

Groves was losing the fight (marginally on the cards) before getting KTFO. You can't use ifs/buts/maybes in sport - you can't rewrite history so anything he does say is just ginger pube eating rubbish.

So you probably wouldn't be boldly going where no man had been before, then?

What would Froch have to do for people to be satisfied that he has beaten Groves fair and square?

Go round and kill everyone who says differently leaving only an army of Froch fans blindly subservient to their master and utterly convinced that Ward is ducking him

Maybe the fight looked different on tv, but live I had GG ahead going into the 8th of FG-II with FG-I even clearer.

Think you read the question wrong Davey. It clearly states "What would Froch have to do", you seem to have read "What would the 667KILLER do"

TopHat24/7 wrote:Maybe the fight looked different on tv, but live I had GG ahead going into the 8th of FG-II with FG-I even clearer.

I had it even, many across the pond had groves well up. Jim watt and his yes man halling had froch pitching a shut out.

[quote="TopHat24/7"]Maybe the fight looked different on tv, but live I had GG ahead going into the 8th of FG-II with FG-I even clearer.[/quote]

Two up for Froch via TV.

Ifs. Buts. Maybes. Groves got knocked out badly. The peoples champ came through for us all, we should be happy rather than speak foul of his highness.

And if someone can explain why the Frak quote function isn't working please effing enlighten me!!!!!!

milkyboy wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:Maybe the fight looked different on tv, but live I had GG ahead going into the 8th of FG-II with FG-I even clearer.

I had it even, many across the pond had groves well up. Jim watt and his yes man halling had froch pitching a shut out.

Well, to be fair, a round or two later. Froch landed a shutout.

I'm enjoying the Bruce Springsteen references in this thread.

Personally I though Groves was headed to a tenth avenue (shut)out in the first fight. In total agreement with Milky, we can't jump to conclusions about the first fight due to the emphatic ending of the second. We were robbed of the end of the first, no matter what that may have been. Although, that's what led to the second being such a huge event. 1-0.

Also, Truss' 'respected posters' comment is laughable. Respected posters? No food chain on an Internet forum, mate. Think you need to bring yourself back down to earth.

Think you need to understand that I've been swapping banter with Milky for six years Mate..

Well in that case, I've made myself look like an utter trumpet.

Thunder road.

Truss was born in the USA, dipper, the promised land, its point blank no surrender with him. You're dancing in the dark with this one, he has no human touch.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Think you need to understand that I've been swapping banter with Milky for six years Mate..

It was all just banter? What a brilliant disguise.

I don't know mate. I've got reason to believe he's actually from Macclesfield not the streets of Philadelphia. This American persona is just a....brilliant disguise!

Maybe Carl could tell us again (and again) how George Groves lost via "devastating knock aarrrt" cos I'm not sure anyone heard him the first (or 34,998th) time

milkyboy wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:Maybe the fight looked different on tv, but live I had GG ahead going into the 8th of FG-II with FG-I even clearer.

I had it even, many across the pond had groves well up. Jim watt and his yes man halling had froch pitching a shut out.

Even? After 7 rounds and know kd??

I had Frocch ahead by two but only because it looked like he was forcing the fight...

But Watt had picked Froch so maybe I was taken in a little.

Froch beat Groves fair and square in the second fight. Doesn't matter if anyone had Groves winning every round. Froch hit him with a fair punch and Groves was unable to answer the count. Simple!!!!!!

TopHat24/7 wrote:

milkyboy wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:Maybe the fight looked different on tv, but live I had GG ahead going into the 8th of FG-II with FG-I even clearer.

I had it even, many across the pond had groves well up. Jim watt and his yes man halling had froch pitching a shut out.

Even? After 7 rounds and know kd??

Never heard of a 10-10 round toppy?

Groves blew it twice in all honesty..

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Groves blew it twice in all honesty..

A little more circumspection in the first fight (when he dropped his hands and goaded Froch on looked great but he should have been picking his shots better) and he may have got the job but wouldn't say he blew it given Foster's intervention and the second fight was tight, I had Groves ahead slightly and he got caught with a peach having landed a nice right of his own in the previous round.

Didn't blow either fight

Thing is Mate...........Froch would have been level or better on the cards had Groves survived with a 10-8 round...

He was taking over the fight............So I can't see how Groves wins anyway........

Froch was robbed of a clean win If anything.