The Curious Case of Carl Froch

I totally agree Ben. Carl Froch is an intelligent, educated man with a strong genuinely tough no nonsense northerner mentality to the core - look at his investments - no bling for this man. He is a throwback to the 15 rounder era, and we should be embracing him wholeheartedly instead of picking holes in his self assured parlance.

Unfortunately that is the shadow side of British mentality. His fight with Taylor was "interpreted " as exposing him, yet I saw a man come back from being outboxed and floored once in the first half to gradually take over and do the business in the 12th. This was NOT lucky. This was toughness and mental strength hewed from something not often seen in an age where excuses and lack of personal responsibility seem to be the norm.

Carl Froch, good as he is, is probably not the most technically talented boxer in this division, but other stirling qualities will tip the balance in his favour. Long live the man in a world of mostly boys!

Froch is fantastic and his risk-taking should be cherished. Despite his loss to Ward, Kessler "away" is still one tough test. Good piece.



As for 'But the curry-loving, beer-swilling Hatton played the "man of the people" card to a tee' - well he wasn't half helped by the journos who covered his fights.

Any guesses which BBC reporter wrote this after Hatton beat Paulie Malignaggi and had an open house for the press: 'That's why we love him. He claims to be one of the lads, and he is'?

I've never understood why Froch doesn't get the respect he deserves.

I thought when he finished a woefully under prepared Robin Reid (great champion in his day)people would sit up and take note. He beat a hard punching, tough Pascal to win the title, in what was one of the best fights of the year. Beating Jermaine Taylor in his own back yard showed his incredible heart. He obviously found it tough fighting away from home, but came back to win in incredible fashion and he hasn't ducked anybody in his career to date.

This fight is definitely a defining moment for Carl. Again fighting away from home, against a very dangerous fighter. Kessler is tough and hard punching, like a certain Jean Pascal, and fighting on home territory, which probably makes him the favourite. This is Carl's moment to silence his critics, and I for one hope he does.

I will be offshore in the Russian Black Sea on Saturday, so wont see the fight, but wish him well.

Great blog. I wouldn't call myself a 'fan' of Froch per se, but I do not understand the malice and hatred he seems to generate around the country. His fight with Taylor left me more thrilled than any other bout in recent memory - the last ten years at least - and ultimately, a man who is prepared to go and fight in the manner that Froch does, exposing himself to far greater risks than many of his contemporaries but willing to trade punch for punch, deserves respect. It may not be tactically perfect (though as long as he is winning who are we to comment on tactics?) but its good viewing.

Strange that in the Premier League Arsenal can be praised to the rafters for the entertainment they offer without winning a thing, yet an English WC who tries to offer the same level of entertainment in a different sport is viewed with suspicion that often verges on outright hostility. I realise that not every Froch fight is entertaining, but I genuinely think that he believes boxing is about landing punches and taking risks in doing so. Sometimes he can be stifled by his opponent (and sometimes he just may not be on form) but I welcome that approach.

Come on Carl hope you smash him!!!

Firstly, I want to say I really hope Froch wins on Saturday night and agree that the end of the Taylor fight was some of the best few rounds of boxing I can remember.

However, I still have major reservations. If Taylor had moved around a bit more and held on for another minute, we would be looking at a very different fighter from the one we are looking at today. Yes, it was great to see him turn the fight on it's head but he was, for the most part, out-boxed for the majority of the fight. Surely these grandstand finishes can't be repeated every fight? If Kessler is able to settle himself and get into a rhythm for the first few rounds, I think he will be prepared for the late onslaught and won't be caught by surprise.

Winning on Saturday would go a long way to silencing his critics, as Kessler is still a good fighter, but he would need to tempt Calzaghe out of retirement to finally put and end to all the doubters.

The reason people don't like Carl Froch has nothing to do with his boxing and everything to do with his mouth. Endless whinging does not endear himself to boxing fans. The Hatton comparison is spot on and you can add Batty McGuigan to the list. Hatton would not fight Junior Witter, McGuigan would not fight Azuma Nelson but it did not stop them becoming the 'people's champion'. Froch refused to fight Calzaghe and there is a TV documentary where it is plainly shown that Calzaghe would fight Froch but Hennesey wouldn't put the money up. For some reason Froch stays per-occupied with Joe and needs to get on with his career instead. He could learn a lot from those who have gone before.

I don't think he's a great boxer and I'm afraid I do sit in the "He'll get found out one day camp". HOWEVER, Froch's fights are amazing to watch, probably among some of the most entertaining fights i've seen in boxing! His fights always seem to descend into slug fests, his tear up with Jean Pascal was a cracker.

I think his slating of Calzaghe is a show of desperation for a big payday, a bit sad really. He should just forget Calzaghe.

Hopefully he'll win Saturday, Kessler is a tough guy but win lose or raw it should be entertaining!

Froch's unpopularity is based on his relentless slagging off of Calzaghe while the Welshman was still fighting and ignoring him. At the end of his career Joe probably more than trebled his following in the UK within three or four fights, and the nature of Froch's challenges meant he kind of polarised himself from that. Personally I think Froch is brilliant - nowhere near the skills of Calzaghe but hard as nails and such a determination to win. He is basically Rocky Balboa but minus the humility. I reckon someone who does what he does in the ring should be allowed to say what he wants outside it, but Calzaghe fans don't agree.

The thing is, many people will never forgive Carl Froch for not being Joe Calzaghe.

I'm not so sure that even beating Kessler would silence his critics (they didn't stop when he dropped Taylor onto his home canvas, after all), but here's hoping we get to find out.

Why dont people like Mr Froch? His complete arrogance, and unbelievably unrealistic belief in his abilities alienate a lot of people. It wasn't long ago he said he would have KO'd the likes of Hagler, Hearns and Sugar Ray Leonard, and his constant tiresome noise regarding how he would have beat Calzaghe top it off.
All of the above would have 'schooled' Froch, who's greatest defence is his face!
Dont get me wrong, I like to support British champions, but ones so delusional? No thanks. He scraped a victory over Taylor who simply ran out of gas in the last round, and was extremely lucky to get the split decision in his last fight with Dirrell, who ran rings around him and made him look like the slow, mechanical plodder his is.
Sooner or later he WILL be found out, and with a defeat to his name, maybe a more humble, honest man might just get the fan backing he wants.

The British can be a peculiar breed at times. The annals of the UK's boxing lore are littered with admiration for gallant failures and near misses at world title level. From Driscoll and Moran getting sawn off against Abe Attell, through agonisingly close decision losses for men such as Charnley, Winstone, Bomber Graham and Colin Jones, not to mention desperately unlucky KO losses when seconds away from the ultimate prize (Graham again) and gallant and heroic failure against legends of the game (Cowdell v Sanchez, Finnegan v Foster), we adore the litany of woe that has passed down the ages. That's without considering the outright myths that are unquestioningly accepted as fact (Farr was within a hair's breadth of beating Louis; Cooper was robbed by a break between rounds that lasted five minutes and so on).
Enter a man who has the priceless knack of actually getting the job done, whether at home or away, against really tough operators, and out come the boo-boys. You couldn't make it up. Froch's performances at world level already demand his inclusion among the top 40 or so British boxers of all time, in my opinion. Let's stretch the imagination to suggest that he might beat Kessler, Abraham, Ward and maybe Dirrell again during the course of this Super 6, probably fighting away as often as in Nottingham. If that does come to pass, there wouldn't be more than a dozen British fighters ever who could then claim a better CV. In this sport, more than any other, style points don't count. It's how many, not how, that matters.

Froch has always looked like he will get found out one day as he is far too easy to hit. He was losing against Pascal, and was getting soundly beaten by the skillful Taylor, before coming back to win. What he has shown in those fights is tremendous strength, heart, conditioning and a good chin. I think these qualities could possibly bring him through again against Kessler, but I think Andre Ward may have the beating of him.
He may have been first in line for a challenge to Calzaghe if the Welshman were boxing today, but the fact is that Froch was calling out Calzaghe and accusing him of avoiding the fight before he had fought anyone of note himself, which was ridiculous.

"If Taylor had moved around a bit more and held on for another minute, we would be looking at a very different fighter from the one we are looking at today."

If my auntie had balls she'd be my uncle. There's no point going on about what ifs, as they didn't actually happen hence why they are what ifs. Just strap in and enjoy the rollercoaster that Froch seems to provide in most of his fights.
Such a shame this fight is hidden away on a channel I can't get access to as it has the potential to be a cracker, just hope I can find a way of seeing it live.

Craig, I'm not denying that Froch deserved to win the Taylor fight; anyone who comes back like that shows a lot of heart and it was great to see. My point is, that surely this can only happen so many times and there has to come a time when his opponents know what to expect and train accordingly.

He was outboxed over 12 before that impressive knockout of JT. He lost to Dirrell in my opinion, he isn't technically good, he's just got a good chin, stamina and decent power. Against superiour opposition, calzaghe, Berto etc they would have too much for him. As for his embarrasing lack of support and coverage, by his persistant calling out of retired boxers, and tired, sad moanings about his lack of support outside nottingham he will lose fans. And by calling calzaghe a 'fat old welsh kid' he has alienated 3 million people, who are all now hoping he gets sparked asap.

GONK

@ 14, Craig, well summed up.

I'm amazed by the anti-froch crew, sure he's put the boot in a few times but often in defence of comments made about him, and as for a bit of confidence about him what's wrong with that! when you are on ppv and seemingly under the radar (astonishingly bad press coverage of the fight this week in national press), it's a no brainer to stir it up a bit.

Re the Kessler fight imo it's a 50/50 , the hands down approach from froch has worked up to now but it does seem high risk if Kessler is able to get back to his previous form. Looking forward to seeing it and boarding a flight tomorrow for the pleasure, Ben are you out there? Is Herning as exciting as it looks?

Kessler is a tough cookie but I think Froch can take him so long as his head is on straight. All this volcano palava will not have helped that. It'll need to be a domination or a knockout though, if it's a close fight he can't expect any favours (just as Kessler wouldn't here).

Froch is just generally not interested in playing to the crowd or building up a 'man of the people' image. He'll never be a Hatton because he's just not that kind of person.

I don't particularly like Froch, his fights can be exciting though.

Ben you make the point about Hayes arrogance enough, the thing with David Haye is that he actually seems like a nice bloke. Has banter, great skills and people can actually take to him. It seems a number of his comments are said tongue in cheek and he has admitted as much after fights.

Froch however, comes across as genuinely arrogant. He was outboxed by a past it Taylor despite a stunning comeback knockout and Dirrell was defo unlucky to lose that last fight.

I think he will be found out sooner or later to be honest.

He always talked smack about Calzaghe. Whatever you want to say about Joe, Froch used his name for years to try and build his own rep.

He doesn't receive the attention now through his own doing

Been a Froch fan all the way. He doesn't need the adulation that is afforded to other British boxers. He is 'understated class', a couple of British exports may do well to note his anti-press approach to boxing combined with his down to earth approach, and tally this to his record.

Hatton played the typical English 'lad' for his career, and it did the job in terms of fan base, but covered up alot of his flaws in his technique.

Kahn is a talent, but has been afforded too much le-way in terms of opponents. He won a world title after what was basically a head-butt, and is running round claiming to be the best ever. He is paying his way to the top with Freddie Roach, which sums up the money that is being thrown at him.

Frochy is pure class, up there with any of the best. His time will come. He has never ducked any boxer in his career (unlike Calzaghe...see Tocker Pudwill, Byron Mitchell...with many of these "fights" at "home").

9/10th round KO on sat.

COME ON THE COBRA!!!

As a Nottingham boy myself, I will be hoping that Froch does the business this weekend. Having only seen one of Frochs fights (his victory against Taylor) he didnt come across to me as a great boxer, and from what I read he was lucky in his next fight. However he does seem to be just a man who can take a punch, and one who has great heart. I think he will lose this weekend, but I hope he proves me wrong

One point though, I wish hed shut up about Calzaghe! Its so easy to have a pop at someone once they're retired. I never much cared for Calzaghe much but I respect his record. Froch just needs to get on with this tournament and then if he wins perhaps hes earned the right to shoot his mouth off. If he gets knocked out by Kessler this weekend, all his talk will have been for nothing

Oh dear Ben, you are going to open up a can of worms with this one!

Froch deserves plaudits (as do the other 5 fighters in the S6) for taking on the best that is around at present (Bute is the only admission from the lineup but fancy he'll move north to fight Dawson at light heavy).

Big question to you though chap - If Froch wins through the tourny undefeated, would his career then rank above JCs? I personally think it would.

I quite like looking at the post-fight-form of defeated fighters as a gauge:

Lacy: Hyped. Found out time and again since JC.
Kessler: Hyped. Never beaten an elite fighter. Found out by Ward since.
Hopkins: Fights since suggest he's showing his age (and almost beat JC)
Jones Jr: Should have retired years ago

As opposed to Frochs:

Pascal: 3 wins on the bounce against rated oppo. Taking on #1 LHW Dawson.
Taylor: Dropped out of S6, mark down on record
Dirrell: Beat the favourite for the tourny

Personally can't wait for the fight vs Kessler though. Neither guy will take a backward step and think both guys could hit the canvas, fancy Frochs' power to tell around the 8-10 mark. Kessler's too straight lined and limited to box like a Dirrell/Ward and Froch won't have to go looking for him, could be a Fight of the Year contender in my opinion...

good piece as usual ben but i have to admit to not being a froch fan.

he was soundly beaten by taylor who for some reason doesn't quite know how to see out a fight. His technique's not good enough to go undefeated, he's a brawler which i understand leads to exciting fights and he's got bags snd bags of heart which i admire, but you do get the nagging feeling he's gotten away with too many fights almost to the point where he's been flat out lucky.

this and his constant boring whining means that although i want to see british boxers succeed and will cheer him on against kessler, he will never go down as a favourite for me.

The one big thing Froch and his supporters dont realise is that a good boxer beats a good fighter. So far he's been lucky in the Taylor/Dirrell fights, I even expect him to beat Kessler as he's of the same 'fighter' mould, but against the likes of Ward, Abraham or a rematch with a more confident Dirrell? He'll be found out easy.

I have to admit I don't think Froch is that good but he is amongst the best out there. Its just the era is a bit weak and before Taylor, he hadn't fought a stand-out name (forget Pascal). This is easily his biggest test and I am looking forward to it immensely.

To Coxy0001

You obviously know what you're talking about but think you're being a tad unfair on Hopkins. Since Calzaghe, he easily beat a very highly rated (at the time Kelly Pavlik) so hes not quite finished yet.

But I agree with you, if Froch was to win this he will have earned the right to be compared with JC

For me though, he doesnt have a chance, not if his lucky victory against Taylor and his performance against Direll are anything to go by. Kessler will beat him this weekend

I always cheer on the brits and want them to win, and what ever anyone here says kessler is on the decline and Froch is on the way up, so instead of arguing who is better, lets all hope for a good fight on saturday that is entertaining! It is a good warm up to the fmj v ssm fight which has had very little coverage on the BBC.

I hadn't heard of Froch before turning over to ITV late one night and catching the first round of the fight against Pascal. I'd grown bored of boxing in recent years with even the 'big' fights largely proving to be tedious affairs.
60 seconds later I was hooked and watched all 12 brutal rounds completely engrossed. That was boxing as I remember it from some of the great fights of 80's (not old enough to remember before that!) and from old fights I've watched back. Froch and Pascal were two 'proper' fighters who moved, boxed and knocked lumps out of each other.
I've followed Froch ever since - he's not afraid to fight anyone and I think he's brilliant. Quite happy if he doesn't make Sky as I don't have it, but I wish ITV would start showing his fights again. He's the best fighter I've seen for a long time - much better than Hatton in my view and as much as I admire Calzaghe, I think Froch might be better.
Also must confess to liking Haye - he might have a stupid mouth and say some ridiculous things, but you know he doesn't mean/believe it - he says whatever needs to be said to drive publicity and interest in his fights and who can blame him for that? I didn't see anyone else volunteering to fight Valuev who had any skill in the ring so good for him. I hope he has enough to show up the Kitschko's - I have a feeling he might. He might have a big mouth, but he's prepared to risk losing and put his body on the line so good luck to him.

Ben
i am a huge fan of Froch and always have been, he IS the real deal and
messien, if you knew anything about boxing, you would know it only takes one punch!
good luck Carl

I think the thing that fuels the "Anti-Froch" brigade is the fact that Froch just won't let Calzaghe go he should just forget it and make his own name instead of being the man who never fought Calzaghe

I think Froch is a worthy world champion and has certainly done everything that has been asked of him. I just dont personally warm to the guy, perhaps its his personality it what puts people off.

He tries the bragging but doesnt have the charm and glint in his eye that Haye, Mayweather and to a certain extent Eubank had (after all the British people did start to warm towards him), when he talks he sounds very sure of himself and aloof with more than a hint of arrogance - Yes Eubank did that but with more style and showmanship - Froch sounds forced, unnatural and feels like he is alwyas trying to prove a point.

But I think he has a tough task V Kessler but I think he will win possibily by late stoppage or points, I think he may just wear him down with his sheer will to win.

Messien you must be blind !! Direll ran away from him the whole fight ....how could he have won ??? Direll had lots of talk before the fight but when got in the ring he had the fear !!

#26 - Toby I agree with a few of your comments but I don't think Hopkins win against Pavlik was that good. Don't forget Pavlik was fighting for the first time at a higher weight and he was so poor in that fight. It wasn't that Hopkins was spectacular, he fought a good fight yes but Pavlik looked lost in there right from the start. But I can't really say much about the Hopkins v Calzaghe fight as my digi box lost the setanta signal before the fight so I had to settle for listening to it on the radio.

Personally I think Froch will win this one, just. I think he's shown he's got a great heart and will keep going and I think he'll be too much for Kessler. It's just a shame none of the "proper" channels have picked it up.

I'm not a huge fan of Froch but I'm certainly not anti-Froch either. He's a good British Champion who's putting himself in the ring against the best in his division, surely that's something to be admired. Does anyone honestly think Calzaghe would have done a similar thing when he was champion? I like Calzaghe, loved watching him fight but no way would he have done what Froch has done with the Super 6. Calzaghe's career wasn't based on fighting the best around it was based on money-making. No harm in that at all, it's a dangerous game and I have nothing but admiration for almost anyone that steps into the ring (I see almost as the example of Audrey Harrison and his obsession with cuddling springs to mind - that I don't admire!). But special praise has to be reserved for those who want to go up against the best to prove themselves rather than for those who took the easier options to cash in as much as possible. Froch is doing that and that's one of the reasons why I'll be cheering him on this weekend.

#33 Lee, you obviously have superior boxing knowledge than me! I must admit ive only become interested in the sport over the last couple of years, but now im hooked

I should state I am like you in that I dont like Froch, but I dont hate him. I hope he beats Kessler. I just think Kessler will have too much for him, especially having a point to prove like he does. I actually think Froch has been a little lucky to date and will get found out

However, I also agree with #33 - you cant fault a man testing himself against the best. Fair play to him

Hi Ben,

I enjoy all your blogs and posts but must take exception to:

- - And Amir Khan, though undeniably gifted, is a triumph of man-management - rinsed in 54 seconds in September 2008, fighting for a world title less than one year later, a turnaround that points to friends in all the right places. - -

I think your assessment of khan here is really bad. I always wonder why there are so many anti-khan posters on the message boards and now think it might be because of such influence coming down from the journalists!

The defeat to prescott was terrible - especially after seeing what Mitchell did to him - but Freddie Roach is the best trainer in world boxing and with him, only the absolute harshest of critics could deny his impressive progress. I wish barrera hadnt been cut because even in the first two rounds you could see khan was swarming him and it was gonna get ugly, fast. Kotelnik was a very classy show and as for that poor armenian dude... I bet he rates Khan if you were to ask!

For you to pass it off as knowing the right people is pretty poor form I should think, he deserves more credit and a knowledgable type like yourself should perhaps know better and re think your position? ;)

No offence as I say, you and fordyce will always be heroes for that world cup winnebago stint in '07.

In addition I do realise that you were trying to make the comparison with Froch's career path, which is a point to be made, but just perhaps a bit fast n loose with the assessment of young Amir.

I enjoy Froch's fights, but I think part of the reason he doesn't have the huge fan base here is because he seems dull in interviews and the majority you see or read about his interviews, he mentions Calzaghe. Build your own legacy. I'm not his biggest fan but I'd have more respect if he beat Taylor, Dirrel, Kessler, Abraham / Ward (or Both), then went no to beat Bute, Dawson, Williams or Martinez, rather than beat Calzaghe at the tail end of his career.

So he's a little arrogant. What fighter isn't? You have to fight other guys your size who are skilled, you'd have to have some self belief to do that.

The only criticism I can see about Froch is he really isn't the most talented or silky boxer and is far too easy to hit. So far, he's found ways to win, which says something about him really. He's not the quickest or silkiest boxer but so far has still managesd to find ways to win against the last 3 opponents, who were all a step up in class from what he'd fought before. Marciano is considered a great and he was similar in this respect.

#33 post - Calzaghe's brittle hands pretty much dictated when he fought. No way would he have been able to compete in a Super 6 when he was champ. Would he have still done it if his hands were in tip top shape? I'm unsure, possibly though.

Don't really agree (if that's the point you were making) that Calzaghe didn't fight the best. Reid (in his prime and not years past it like when Froch fought him), Eubank (granted past his best but still durable), Lacey (who was a much more dangerous come forward fighter until Calzaghe schooled him), Kessler (better in 2007 than in 2010) & Hopkins (who when fought Calzaghe I think would've beaten a 2010 Froch). There's always going be somone else people think you should've fought.

Mayweather is considered P4P best but you could argue that since he moved up to light welterweight he's not fought the best at light welterweight, welterweight or light middleweight. Did Cotto fight the best at light welterweight? Did PacMan fight the best at lightweight? More than likely you could argue they didn't but there's no doubting they're great fighters.

RE Loftus Mac Hoop

Are YOU blind??

Watch the fight again and count how many shots Froch landed, you won't need to use both hands! He constantly lunged in amateurishly every time, had no gamelplan while Dirrel boxed and moved (Mayweather is a genius when he does it, but Dirrell is said to be 'running'??)

It was a poor fight, but for Froch to call it a 'world class' performance by himslef, shows how deluded he is.

Froch is poorly thought of not because he lacks ability, but because he felt it necessary to try to build his career off the back of badmouthing those above him in the food chain. He has shown disrespect to most fo his opponents, not just in the customary buildup to fights but also afterwards. Of course his constant sniping of Calzaghe wound up a lot of people, he felt the need to try and belittle the champion qwhen he still had a lot to prove himself to even get to that level.

Respect is the key, for all the percieved arrogance of David Haye, Ricky Hatton and co before a fight, they always came out afterwards and set the record straight, they also only ever really targetted those who they would fight. Froch has consistently failed to show any respect to anyone.

# Hackjack, how about Froch has built his career on the back of the best triplet of wins achieved by any british boxing world champ. (the words of Steve Bunce last week in his radio show who's a pretty good judge).

I'm a big Calzaghe fan and the sniping between him and Froch has always seemed 2 sided, maybe genuine dislike, if it ends up in them climbing in the ring then it can only be a good thing to raise the profile of boxing.

Ben thanks for link to sportschippers bbc man in herning. in a previous post you were going to seek a bit of feedback from on high re why the BBC aren't showing any live boxing at the moment - apologies if there has already been a post on that but if so i missed it, and at the risk of banging the drum too loudly was there any feedback on that?

I totally agree. I remember Steve Bunce being interviewed on TV and he asked why Froch isn't on Sky Sports or any of the terrestial channels. He was the only world champ at the time and was going about his business with no complaints. Remember Hennessey wanted to pull Froch out of the Pascal fight becusse Froch had a busted rib. Froch wasn't having any of it and went ahead. Glad he did as I was ringside for that one. Mental fight and night had by all! Went to the Dirrel fight also. Dirrel is hugely underrated (by Dirrel himself also) though I reckon he did feign injury when Abraham did clip him on the deck. Abraham is a blown up middleweight who will walk into Froch's shots and, unlike when Dirrel clipped Abraham and put him on the seat of his pants, with Froch's shots he will not be getting up - rendering him unconcious is something I've heard from the cobra before! Remember, Froch is probably the most heavy handed boxer around at the minute and when he hits (which Dirrel realised he had to and did avoid at all cost - thats boxing skills for you), he gives us boxing fans that explosive fight we all crave for. Kessler is a fantastic boxer and think his style will suit Froch even more. He's another man in the grown up world. Doesn't take a step backwards. Respect. Long left jabs followed by a right uppercut to end the fight in Froch's favour.

I saw Froch in one of his first fights at the York Hall in Bethnal Green. He showed then he has what it takes though Carl should reduce the macho stuff a bit and not take any unnecessary hits. Longevity is the key as one day all those shots will catch up with him (but not too early I hope).

I think Froch should be given more credit as he hasn't got a high profile promoter and hasn't had a staged managed career. He fights whoever is in front of him so I reckon all Cobra knockers should at least give him that. Whats wrong with a honest, tough boxer who happens to be fairly eloquent in his interviews? Nothing really. Reckon we should all get behind Froch for this one. It'll be a ding dong affair and don't think it'll last too long....

Do it for England Carl!

"Are YOU blind??

Watch the fight again and count how many shots Froch landed, you won't need to use both hands! He constantly lunged in amateurishly every time, had no gamelplan while Dirrel boxed and moved (Mayweather is a genius when he does it, but Dirrell is said to be 'running'??)"

With all due respect, I suggest you go and watch the first 9 rounds again yourself. No doubt Froch didn't land much, but Dirrell didn't even throw anything. He didn't "box and move", he just moved. Dirrell definitely had the talent to beat Froch that night, but he didn't have the heart or the gameplan. Slipping punches is great, and if you do it as well as he was doing that night you really only need to land one or two crisp counters to take a round on my card, but he wasn't doing that, no matter what the revisionists would have us believe. Froch has to take the fight simply by virtue of being the only one fighting for the first three-quarters of it.

I suspect it would be a tough night for Froch if they fought again, however. It wouldn't need much of an adjustment to Dirrell's attitude for him to take it on points at a canter.

I like Carl Froch but he needs to tone down t'Nottinghamshire arrogance a bit. I can't believe he actually said he would have beat Hagler. Watch any of the Marvellous one's fights and where's his left hand? Exactly where it should be. How many times did Marvellous Marvin get knocked out in his career? All it'll take is that one punch that rattles Carl's brain against his skull the right way and he'll be twitching on t'canvas like Hearns against Barclay. It can happen to any fighter. Arthur Abraham has sufficient power to do it. Froch has got no excuse for his poor defensive skills, he gets paid a mint and months to train. When my Grandfather Tom Cowley lost a twelve round split decision in Sheffield to former flyweight world champion Emile "Spider" Pladner in the 1930's (Pladner won it on the inside) he got three days paid leave from his job as a Collier to prepare for it!

Good fighter. Froch. Undefeated WBC champ. Full respect to that & look at his last three fights (Pascal, Taylor, Dirrell). All victories. Tough opponents. Full respect to that. You can't ask for anything more from a champion.
Some may say Dirrell was a poor fight but if the other guy is running (& more to the point not landing anything), it's not your fault. Froch was coming forward & throwing. Dirrell was running & not landing anything. Froch wins the fight.

Great write up, Ben - I absolutely agree with you. People can keep saying that Carl will get found out all they like; until it happens, he's undefeated and has a genuine claim to being the true champion at Super Middleweight. I'll be supporting him all the way - the guy makes for great fights, takes on the top challengers and doesn't just mess around saying that he's the best, he actually goes out there to try and prove it.

Stavrosian wrote
With all due respect, I suggest you go and watch the first 9 rounds again yourself. No doubt Froch didn't land much, but Dirrell didn't even throw anything. He didn't "box and move", he just moved. Dirrell definitely had the talent to beat Froch that night, but he didn't have the heart or the gameplan. Slipping punches is great, and if you do it as well as he was doing that night you really only need to land one or two crisp counters to take a round on my card, but he wasn't doing that, no matter what the revisionists would have us believe. Froch has to take the fight simply by virtue of being the only one fighting for the first three-quarters of it.
-----------------
Ive watched that fight along with my friends a couple of times, and dirrell may not throw many punches each round but he when he did he hit froch, where as froch was missing constantly. i feel froch only won that fight due to being at home and looking aggressive, thou being aggressive with out actually having successful punches shouldn't win rounds never mind the fight.

thou i will say, i think froch always puts on a damn good fight and is a good boxer. i think he will knock out kessler around rounds 8-10 and i actually hope he goes on to win the whole thing.

I think there are two separate points and two different arguments here. There is the argument over Froch's likability and there is the question over whether he is good enough to have a lasting career at the top.

Personally, I never enjoy hearing anyone referring to themselves in the third person and agree with the numerous posters above who take issue with his constant bating of Calzaghe. I would still like to see him have a successful career though, he is after all still a British boxing champion.

However, the second question over whether he is actually good enough is wide open to debate. Most of the posts on here seem to be about who will be supporting him on Saturday, rather than if he is actually likely to do it.

Ben, do you genuinely believe that Froch can not only win on Saturday, but but also manage to beat Ward, Abraham et al who are waiting around the corner? I would love to be proved wrong, but I just can't see it.

Retrospect is a fine thing. If only Taylor hadn't run out of gas, if only Dirrell had thrown more punches.....

Joe was a smart man, he out worked B-Hop and beat up a knackered out Roy Jones and stayed well away from Froch. Funny that out of the supersix series contestants Joe only fought Kessler. Apparently there was "noone left to fight", yet a year or so down the line and here we are with 5 hungry fighters (MINUS TAYLOR, ADD BUTE) Joe didn't fight. Joe was a great boxer but it's a shame he spent his time against the old men instead of all of these live challengers. Maybe he couldn't take the "stay at home Joe" abuse anymore.

Froch should be called the mail man, HE ALWAYS DELIVERS. He'll walk through Kesslers storm and knock him out in the championship rounds cos he's a champion.

Excellent blog Ben. He is a conundrum indeed. I am a fan of Carl's and go along with his claim that he ducks no-one. I was elated when he levelled Taylor, and thought the Pascal fight to be a classic of sorts. I think the animosity he attracts is down to way in which he presents himself verbally. There's something unattractive about it. The Calzaghe stuff is poor & they should take a step back and hear themselves - unless they really are thinking about fighting. Anyway, should be a belter on Saturday.

"Against superiour opposition, calzaghe, Berto etc they would have too much for him"

for starters Berto is a Welterweight (147 pounds) so try at least having a bit of boxing knowledge before posting, as for calzaghe he dropped the WBC title like a hot sheep, when Froch was WBC number one ranked challenger to fight at the time a 43 year old man - thats fact -when he could have filled the millenium stadium 3 times if he fought froch and take 60% of the cut.

coxy0001 probably summed it up as well as any one could so the only thing I'LL add is

the thing that really grinds the Froch hatters is the fact that he is so highly regarded in the states, his wins against pascal and Talylor have made him a cult star a thing calzaghe never had or will in fact he is wrongly thought of as a tainted champion,

good luck Carl, hopefully you wont need it but kessler is a good fighter so keep them hands ready for his straight right....

by the way I was and still am a calzaghe fan- just a realistic one.

peace

Makes me laugh how the tables have turned..Now Froch has forgotten about Cocaine Calzaghe the welshman seems to want to play with the media now. I would love to see Calzaghe come-back and fight him. Would be great action I think Froch would win it would be close though. I would love it if Carl Froch got through the Super Six unbeaten that would be a mammoth task. This would surely be better than Calzaghe's fights.

Peace Out!

To all of those who wish to complain about the quality of any of the current British holders of World Titles: It is one thing to say and another thing entirely to do! Hay, Froch and Khan have all done it, would any of their gainsayers dare to get into the ring with them to express their point of view, or are they afraid to be found out? Maybe its a case of put up or shut up ;)

I always want Froch to win. Not because I'm fan but because he's English, and we should always support our own.

That said, fellow Englishman Calzaghe, is by far an away a better boxer than Froch. Personally speaking, I'd like to see Joe come out of retirement, leave his cockyness behind and beat the heck out of Froch. Until Froch doubles his win count, similar to Joe's, he should just keep quiet and show some respect.

That said, I still hope he wins at the weekend and flys the flag for the UK.

Re Pynne

A Typo doesn't mean that i lack boxing knowledge, if you knew anything about boxing, you would know that Berto did actually fight the other night, so his name was on my mind. for clarification i meant ward.

anyway, you talk up froch and actually point to jt and pascal as credible opposition. who else has pascal fought? and isn't everyone aware by now that jt always runs out of gas by the end of fights? BTW, didn't the 'old' Hopkins school Pavlik after losing to Calzaghe?

messien

Yup, Bhop schooled Pavlik. That was after the latter had moved up 2 weight classes to meet him, has also since been found out a bit by Martinez @ MW. I'm prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt for the latter fight as he's been struggling and looked very rusty early on, came back into it only for cuts to partially get in his way. The Bhop fight was a step too far in terms of weight. One thing is for certain he needs to get shot of his trainer Jack Loew and get with someone reputable, Naz Richardson or Manny Steward spring to mind in terms of being suited to him.

Re: 52 missing_linc

The Super 6 breakdown at the time of Calzaghe's giving up the title reads last as Kessler (fought), Froch (wouldn't put the money up - wise move by Hennessey), Taylor and Abraham (middleweights), Ward and Dirrell (a dozen fights each). Of those, only a Kessler re-match was a viable option. Please don't label your opinions as facts.

I rated froch highly to start with but, then he started mouthing off to a proven fighter to get more publicity. I aint been impressed witn him at all lately. He got outboxed by taylor and luckyily won at the end. He got out boxed by dirrel i have re-watched the fight over 5 times and i had him losing that fight by 2 rounds but, he got the win cause he was home. so in my eyes he shouldnt even be champion.

Excellent post as usual captaincarrantuohil - are you on sabbatical from the board.

-----------
I think there are a couple of reasons why froch is not more popular but a lot of it has to do with the way he has been promoted or should I say hasn't been promoted. Warren is often critized but his fighters get the attention their talents warrant. Khan is not really the media savy "man of the people" Hatton was but Warren built on Khan's olympic success and now Khan is a household name. I think Froch envies the attention the Haye's, Calzaghe's and Hatton's get. In the past I'm sure captain has suggested that some of the bizare things Froch says are borne out of the frustration he feels about being overlooked by the British public.

The other problem I see for Froch is that he comes across as a little bit cold. When he delivers his prophecies he just appears too serious and he speaks in a manner that conjures up images of the dark broodings of a nihilisit existentalist. Essentially he could do with lightening up. He has a degree in sport and this may inform his rational academic delivery.

Ok that's the public perception of him out of the way. In terms of fighting what's not to like? he takes on all comers and he comes to fight and brawl. He is as strong as an ox and has the heart of a lion. he can never be ruled out as Taylor knows.

On the down side Dirrell made him look a bit one-dimensional and Taylor out-boxed him for large portions of their fight. Kessler I feel has got the fundamentals down better than Froch and if the fight goes the distance I have a feeling the Dane will get the nod, being at home won't hurt the judges scoring. I think Froch will have to stop his man.

Keep in mind that of the 4 fights in the Super 6 so far nobody has won away from home so if Froch wins it will be very impressive.


Ben: On a point of trivia The Beat only recorded one single on Two Tone the Smokey Robinson cover - Tears of a Clown. As someone who was at school when it was essential to declare youself either a mod or a rudeboy I never really considered The Beat a Two-Tone band. A bit like Madness who were always a Stiff Records band even though The Prince was on Two-Tone.

All I can say to Froch is good luck on Saturday I hope he knocks Kessler out as I don’t think he’ll win on the judges scorecard being on home turf. As regards to the whole JC comparison. I have to put my hands up and admire Froch he hasn’t shunned away from any fighter and not afraid to leave home soil to do so. My respect to JC was lost when he announced he was fighting Peter Manfredo (Who didn’t even win the Contender tv show) at the same time I remember Froch was calling out JC for a fight and he picked the latter.
what a low point in his career.

I speak on behalf of approx 3 million 'fat old welsh kids' who are hoping the robot gets knocked out tomorrow night.
Oh, but he has a fantatsic chin though.

"The aim of Boxing is to hit and dont get hit, aint nothing cool about getting punched in the face" - Roger Mayweather

We all love an underdog in this country and thats how boxers get into the hearts of the brittish people. CF lacks the career defining fight of a RH or JC. JC beat Lacey as a huge underdog and not only beat completely outclassed. Ricky beat Tszu when nobody gave him a chance and both of them gained huge support after them wins. Lets look at CF's last 3 fights:

JP - If you ask the general public how many do you think ever heard of him before the fight

JT - A marquee name yes but a career Middleweight had only had one fight at Super Middle ironicly against Lacey. Moveing up in weight against a brawler the difference in strengh will always show in the later rounds.

AD - I agree dirrell was under rated for this fight but the peeps who claim he ran away is jus crazy. Did David Haye run away from Valuev or fight the "Perfect" fight as many pundits wrote. In my opinion Dirrell won the fight by a bigger margin than haye beat valuev.

And whoever tries to slag off Bhop as being the "easy" fight for JC go look on every single boxing website includeing ring magazine he is ranked in the top 5 P4P still by pretty much everyone in boxing...is Froch even in the top ten after the 3 wins jus mentioned?? not a chance.

Joe finished his career with fights to build his legacy. Nobody in america knew Carl Froch and Joe had nothing to gain from the fight. He retired ranked by most as no. 3 P4P in the world behing FMJ and pacman, not bad going. Those who claim Froch is bigger in the states than Calzaghe watch the Kessler fight with the american commentary and listen to Emmauel Stewart and Max Kellerman talk about him as one the best fighers around giving a "beyond perfect" performance.

Lets be honest here Taylor lost twice to pavlik. Taylor schooled Froch, lost in the last 10 secs. Calzaghe beat hopkins who schooled pavlik (JC moved up to light heavy to fight Bhop nobody has mentioned that)!

Against Joe Froch would has been schooled, very similar to the way lacey did.

Froch is fighting on Primetime not box office mainly due to his attitiude towards one of the best brittish boxers of all time but he still lacks that fight were he does what we english love and win as a big underdog against a marquee name regardless of his boxing ability.

re messien

"if you knew anything about boxing, you would know that Berto did actually fight the other night"

ACUALLY i know andre Berto and his career todate very well, in fact I SAW HIM FIGHT AT THE 2004 Olympic's when he lost to french man Xavier Noel in the first round, he impressed me that must that I got one of the photo's blown up, went to where the Hati team stayed and got him to sign it, if you really want to see a bit more of him check out his my space page,

any way it was interesting that you never mentioned the fact that Calzaghe dropped the WBC belt rather then fight Froch.....

and as for the other comments coxy0001 blew you away again apart from the Pascal comment (current WBC light heavy champ, rated #3 by ring magazine ) not really worth repling to that jibberish, I suppose.
...............................................................

As I stated I am a Calzaghe fan but I think that Froch's career to date is better then Calzaghe's was at that stage (eg after 26 fights), will Froch better Calzaghe after he hangs up his gloves I doubt it, in fact I very much doubt he'll retire with out a loss.

But right now as a boxing fan i'm glad that he is British, fighting at the highest level, a world champ to boot and I wish him luck because it will be a hard fight.

From what i've seen on utube and other websites they both look in great shape (the injury seems to be a bit of kidology)and should be a great fight, again good luck Carl....

Pynne - "Calzaghe dropped the WBC belt rather then fight Froch....."

Are you serious??? Carl Froch was at the time a nobody and Joe was looking to cement his legacy. He ditched the belt to move UP in weight to fight Bhop who was and still is in the top 5 P4P boxers in the world.

also, would i not be right in assuming you guys are getting Lucian Bute (super middle IBF champion) mixed up with andre berto a welterweight?

Chris read before you post

1) As messien already stated he meant Ward
2)Calzaghe dropped the WBC belt rather then fight Froch -it don't matter who he fought next - he had 90 days to arrange the fight or lose the belt under WBC rules - he dropped it.
3) I'm Calzaghe fan - i'm just trying to show my opinion and base it on the way I intepret the facts in front of me.
4)finally there's a few nobodies on JC's record so why not add another one?

I agree Calzaghe fought nobodies in uk for far too long and defo should have fought roy jones ealier, wot a fight that would have been. But he was at the twilight of his career looking to secure his legacy.

Look at Mayweather, Pacman, Marquez. Do you think any of these fighters would entertain a mandatory defence? The money is in superfights they are never no. 1 contender Vs world champ anymore. Its about unifications or stepping up weights. Look at Ricky Hatton he moved up and down in weights and gave up his titles to fights Floyd Jnr at Welter. Valuev should have fought ruiz not haye but the money was with haye.

Lets not forget the Calzaghe Bhop fight was set up after the pair met in vegas for Hatton Mayweather. Mabe it was jus a few years too late for carl to get his fight but i wouldn't have given Froch the payday if i was Calxaghe he didnt deserve it!

It comes down to this. IF Calzaghe fought Froch would Froch have won?? in my opinion he would have been embarresed similar to Lacey and dissapeared from the world boxing scene. Clazaghe was bigger & stronger than taylor and wouldn't have got tierd. So ironicly we should probly be glad he didnt fight joe or we wouldnt be looking foreward to a what could be a classic fight tomorrow night.

I think Froch will prob beat Kessler, i've only seen him fight twice he looked good against Calzaghe but poor against Ward.

What is your opinion the fight? & How do you think a Calzaghe Froch 2008 showdown would have played out?

I really hope I'm wrong but Carl Froch doesn't look or sound like a man who believes he can win this fight.

Nice post Chris,

How do I think a Calzaghe Froch 2008 showdown would have played out, well I think you were pretty much spot on,

there is some great comments from ring mags Doug Fischer and his friday mail bag on this fight and the Calzaghe Froch question, his best quote I thought on Froch was,

"He finds a way to win against supposedly better fighters. He finds a way to get in their heads, he finds a way to disrupt their rhythm or game, and eventually, he gets in that ass…"

Which is true in my opinion his stlye looks crude but it seems that their is something else to it, that cause's his oppents to lose their rhythm, whether he could do that to an upright fighter like Kesseler
in a must win situation, i'm not to sure to be honest,

must also agree with King Salomon kalou from the pictures and sound bites i've been seeing and hearing since Froch got to Denmark he looks like a rabbit in the headlights, his body language is all wrong it, he sounds like he is trying to convence himself he can win every time he speaks,

he looked and sounded like that against Talyor bit worrying for us British fight fans and I wouldn't be suprised if Kesseler got a UD, but i'll still be putting a score on a Froch late KO, because if he can disrupt Kessler in the early rounds he might be able to break his heart later on. Ward did it and Froch hits a lot harder then him in my opinion.

again good luck carl....I will be watching if showtime doesn't breakdown

I agree, I don't understand the anti-Froch feeling, and the really pro Calzaghe brigade, lets actually face up to how over rated Calzaghe was.....anyone with eyes and a knowledge of boxing saw him LOSE to Hopkins.....but he got a ridiculous decision on what was a nothing fight in the first place, partly because he was our man at the time and the press latched onto the one big boxer we really had as everyone knew Hatton would get found out against anyone with talent and wouldn't even make it to a points decision before being laid out on the canvas.....I'd love to see Froch V. Calzaghe......and I don't know who'd win, I really don't, but boxers should fight, that's what they're about, not call each other names like little kids in a playground.....put up, shut up and sort it out!!! (that's if you're allowed a fair fight against golden boy Calzaghe.....something I doubt)

Re:73 Hammer_78

Are you kidding. Hopkins v Calzaghe was in America, with an American referee and American judges. How could Joe get a decision because he was 'our man at the time'?

The anti-Froch feeling is more to do with his interviews than his fights. I enjoy going to watch him box live but can hardly stand listening to him talk. I'm sure that most casual boxing fans just choose to ignore him. In my view, his management should have arranged some schooling on interview techniques. Boxing is as much about selling tickets and TV rights as it is about fighting.

Froch is exciting and unpredictable. I love watching his fights, even more so than Joe Calzaghe's and he is fighting at the elite level of the sport, so anyone who does not give Froch credit is a loon.

If you dont like his personality that is fine, I don't particularly like David Haye's personality, but I am easily able to seperate that from rating his boxing ability, and I thought Haye's performance against Ruiz was the by far the best by a British fighter since Hatton Vs Tszyu.

Congrats to Kessler on dethroning another phony Brit "champion".

Haye next.

I have always watched Carl Froch's fights however i missed his latest because i thought it was a rip off! £14.95 to watch ONE fight - no build up, no under card fight. I was bitterly disappointed and think we viewers deserve a little more for our money.
(i did think that he did not stand a chance against Kessler)