General UFC Chit Chat/News

Axwell

kearneybobs wrote: »

So he's guilty until proven innocent then.

Innocent? We are talking about what he did in the gym based in his own post on facebook. His own words..hard to find him innocent when its coming directly from him.

kearneybobs

mdwexford wrote: »

Why, is there a trial for the incident quoted above?

Any man who treats and talks to a woman like that for simply being in the wrong part of the gym seems pretty scummy to me.

Your comment quoted a post about him not being able to dispel his rep for beating women.
Just found it odd that you appeared to hold it against him and call him a scumbag (partly?) because of it when the charges were dropped.

Anyway, you cleared it up for me there with your reply. Nothing to see here.

ASOT

Bisping fights Whittaker at 193, should be a great fight cards shaping up nicely

John_D80

ASOT wrote: »

Bisping fights Whittaker at 193, should be a great fight cards shaping up nicely

Should be a good one. Can't see what's in this fight for Bisping though if he's serious about climbing the rankings again. Time isn't exactly on his side.

Paully D

ASOT wrote: »

Bisping fights Whittaker at 193, should be a great fight cards shaping up nicely

Terrible for Bisping really. Absolutely nothing to gain in terms of getting closer to the shot he craves. 36 years of age, coming off 2 wins in a row, I can't see him being too happy with that.

Speaking of 193..... :pac:

Wrongway1985

scudzilla wrote: »

Don't know how UFC are getting away with billing this as Hunt vs Silva 2 when technically the first one was deemed a NC

Technically it's only an NC for Bigfoot.

jcd5971

mdwexford wrote: »

You don't think a giant intimidating Cage fighter going over and throwing a woman's stuff away and then ranting and threatening her on social media is wrong.

It's not an opinion, if you think he was right you must have as little rearing as he does.

Of course it's an opinion... It's the very definition of an opinion.

My "rearing" was just fine, may I suggest you stick to the discussion without resorting to childish personal attacks.

And no while a little extreme what he did is not wrong, no crime was committed.

Dtp1979

jcd5971 wrote: »

Of course it's an opinion... It's the very definition of an opinion.

My "rearing" was just fine, may I suggest you stick to the discussion without resorting to childish personal attacks.

And no while a little extreme what he did is not wrong, no crime was committed.

Is threatening and being abusive to another person not a crime?

Zero-Cool

Paully D wrote: »

Terrible for Bisping really. Absolutely nothing to gain in terms of getting closer to the shot he craves. 36 years of age, coming off 2 wins in a row, I can't see him being too happy with that.

Speaking of 193..... :pac:

Aw man was looking at that for ages, thought you were just easily amused. Only saw the spelling now. Did Reebok make that poster? ? :pac:

Tazzimus

Hunt v Bigfoot 2 will be interesting.

We'll have a non trt'd Bigfoot vs a non kfc'd Hunt, should be a curious one.

TimRiggins

John_D80 wrote: »

Should be a good one. Can't see what's in this fight for Bisping though if he's serious about climbing the rankings again. Time isn't exactly on his side.

I think its a great fight for him lads, I think, after rounding up 2 decent wins if he wins this one he's in prime position for a title shot after Romero/Jacare.

jcd5971

Dtp1979 wrote: »

Is threatening and being abusive to another person not a crime?

Depends on the context and severity of what was said and to whom I'd imagine. In my opinion i definitely not a crime what happened here,

But again I'd stress that's just my opinion, not everyone is a nice person.

There's no denying it was a ****ty thing he did, and yes I can see myself doing the same thing in his position, but it would still be ****ty

dilapidating

TimRiggins wrote: »

I think its a great fight for him lads, I think, after rounding up 2 decent wins if he wins this one he's in prime position for a title shot after Romero/Jacare.

If Bisping couldn't get a title shot when Silva was champion, there isn't a hope of him getting one now when there's 5/6 realistic contenders.

scudzilla

Bisping had this special formula, was really very consistent

1. Win 2/3 fights
2. Fight a top contendor with winner getting possible title shot
3. lose said fight
4. Go back to 1 and repeat process

dilapidating

scudzilla wrote: »

Bisping had this special formula, was really very consistent

1. Win 2/3 fights
2. Fight a top contendor with winner getting possible title shot
3. lose said fight
4. Go back to 1 and repeat process

In fairness I felt bad for him after that decision against Sonnen.
Thought he won it.

ASOT

dilapidating wrote: »

In fairness I felt bad for him after that decision against Sonnen.
Thought he won it.

Also taught he won it but you have to clearly beat the light Heavyweight and two time middleweight champion clearly to get the win.

TimRiggins

scudzilla wrote: »

Bisping had this special formula, was really very consistent

1. Win 2/3 fights
2. Fight a top contendor with winner getting possible title shot
3. lose said fight
4. Go back to 1 and repeat process

He is getting older though, and the UFC usually will give a title shot to who the fans want to see rather then who deserves it. Especially if Weidman beats Rockhold, I can see them giving Bisping someone like Vitor and then giving him a title shot.

On the UFC193 Card, surely they'll add an Irish fighter or two, would help the ticket sales, though I do think they'll sell out.

CurryFlavoured

Too many contenders - Rockhold, Jacare and Romero waaaaay ahead of Bisping. Weidman wants a fight with JBJ too, plus he'd beat Mike with one arm anyway. I like Bisping but his time for a shot is gone, he got screwed in that Chael fight. Only way the judges were gonna give it too him is if it was very one sided. Mad to think some of the guys that got a shot at Silva in that time, and Mike didn't. Leites, Maia, Cote, Lutter...

Mellor

scudzilla wrote: »

Bisping had this special formula, was really very consistent

1. Win 2/3 fights
2. Fight a top contendor with winner getting possible title shot
3. lose said fight
3b. Post fight it comes out that said fighter was on TRT or PEDs
4. Go back to 1 and repeat process

Added a step there which how how it went for him in the most of the time.
Kennedy/Rockhold possible exceptions lately

TimRiggins wrote: »

On the UFC193 Card, surely they'll add an Irish fighter or two, would help the ticket sales, though I do think they'll sell out.

I think they'll sell out too, Melbourne has never had an event. They'll be all over it. And plus 1000s will fly down from Brisbane and Sydney

DrPhilG

WAR BIFGOOT!!!

martyos121

Such a shame about Giblert's suspension, he'd be perfect for the 193 card.
:pac:

Hoki

weemcd wrote: »

Uriah Hall fights Mousassi in Japan now as the Moose's opponent (who i never heard of before) dropped out. Much better fight, it was a waste having a legend in Japan fighting nobody. Huge step up in competition for Hall. There should be some tasty striking exchanges in this one as long as Uriah shows up.

Really looking forward to this one

Had to take issue with this post . Moussassi was due to fight Roan 'Jucao ' Carneiro who is far from a nobody . Hes had 6 fights in the Ufc going back to 2007 . He returned this year where he choked out Mark Munoz early in the first round. That fight would have been just as competitive as the fight with Hall.

mdwexford

jcd5971 wrote: »

Of course it's an opinion... It's the very definition of an opinion.

My "rearing" was just fine, may I suggest you stick to the discussion without resorting to childish personal attacks.

And no while a little extreme what he did is not wrong, no crime was committed.

jcd5971 wrote: »

Depends on the context and severity of what was said and to whom I'd imagine. In my opinion i definitely not a crime what happened here,

But again I'd stress that's just my opinion, not everyone is a nice person.

There's no denying it was a ****ty thing he did, and yes I can see myself doing the same thing in his position, but it would still be ****ty

I rest my case.

xtal191

Rousey vs Holm at UFC 195, Jan 2nd

https://twitter.com/danawhite/status/634693958661197824

Paully D

xtal191 wrote: »

Rousey vs Holm at UFC 195, Jan 2nd

Hahahahaha.

There's being out of your depth and then there's Holly Holm getting a shot at Ronda. She's nowhere near ready.

Davei141

Correia now Holm? next in line must be Pennington...

Saipanne

We're very close to this being boring. If not already there.

Ush1

What a farce.

Zero-Cool

What happened Tate? I knew it wasn't officially announced but WTF. Mmmmmm I wonder how this will go, Rousey will pummel Holm into oblivion in about 20 seconds and the Internet/Celeb World loses their $hit about the greatest athlete in the world.

I'm a big fan of Rousey, she's a beast but this is an absolute joke of a matchup.


*Reminder to self to quickly delete this post if Holly wins...

MrStuffins

xtal191 wrote: »

Rousey vs Holm at UFC 195, Jan 2nd

https://twitter.com/danawhite/status/634693958661197824

Wow!!