Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

UFC 204 - Bisping v Henderson 2 (Event Discussion)

12346»

Comments

  • #252
    wonderfullife
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,924 ✭✭✭wonderfullife


    Mellor wrote: »
    The media are pretty split on the that one. Hard to make a case with that.

    A judge missing a round is crazy obviously, but that round went to Santos on the other two cards. He seen most of rd2 so that score will probably stand.

    Best he can hope for is to void the first score and go with a 19-19 for a split draw.

    In a vacuum, that's true.

    But in reality they should declare the whole result a no-contest.

    Even though he didn't miss much of Round 2, he may have missed a knockdown. Maybe 2 knockdowns.

    As it transpires, he didn't. But he can't fairly score a round based on 4 minutes of action he did see.

    The fight should be a no-contest.

    Which, funnily enough, describes the fight. It was dull as ditch-water, even Goldberg was about to fall asleep.


  • #253
    hendo11
    Registered Users Posts: 7 ✭hendo11


    I almost cried watching it saying to myself here we go a card of boring decisions cue 9 finishes in a row and the main event.


  • #254
    Mellor
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 39,615 ✭✭✭✭Mellor


    Bisping via Submission
    wonderfullife wrote: »
    In a vacuum, that's true.

    But in reality they should declare the whole result a no-contest.

    Even though he didn't miss much of Round 2, he may have missed a knockdown. Maybe 2 knockdowns.

    As it transpires, he didn't. But he can't fairly score a round based on 4 minutes of action he did see.

    The fight should be a no-contest.

    Which, funnily enough, describes the fight. It was dull as ditch-water, even Goldberg was about to fall asleep.
    They should review the rounds in question before they overturn imo.

    But the awkward question is who are "they"? There's no commission involved was there?


  • #255
    wonderfullife
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,924 ✭✭✭wonderfullife


    Mellor wrote: »
    They should review the rounds in question before they overturn imo.

    But the awkward question is who are "they"? There's no commission involved was there?

    The UK, as far as i am aware, is still in a weird position. IMMAF was linked to sanctioning some events and i know they shadowed some of the earlier BAMMA events.

    But as far as i know there is no sanctioning body. It's up to the Promoters if they want to follow the Unified Rules or not.

    When Paddy Pimblett missed weight by 7lbs for Cage Warriors 77 (i think, maybe 76) 20% of his forfeited purse went to charity and 40% to his opponent.

    I know there's steps being taken in Ireland to evolve the sport and hopefully the UK get their act together with a National Commission.

    As for this particular fight, the onus would be on the Promoter to annul the victory into a no-contest. I think?

    That doesn't sit too well with me because a Promoter will always have a vested interest in who they'd prefer to win.

    Imagine it was McGregor v Siver and a Judge missed a couple of rounds. The Massachusets Athletic Commission might conceivably turn it into a no-contest. But if it was left up to Dana White/UFC they'd much prefer let McGregor keep the win to keep his record neat and tidy.


  • #256
    Mellor
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 39,615 ✭✭✭✭Mellor


    Bisping via Submission
    wonderfullife wrote: »
    As for this particular fight, the onus would be on the Promoter to annul the victory into a no-contest. I think?

    That doesn't sit too well with me because a Promoter will always have a vested interest in who they'd prefer to win.
    That's what I was think. So they'll most likely be best to leave it alone.
    Imagine it was McGregor v Siver and a Judge missed a couple of rounds. The Massachusets Athletic Commission might conceivably turn it into a no-contest. But if it was left up to Dana White/UFC they'd much prefer let McGregor keep the win to keep his record neat and tidy.

    That's why I think a review is a lot better. You can't punish a fighter for a judges mistake. Martins deserves to have the full fight objectively scored. But other than that, it's not right to make it an automatic NC.

    Using McGregor v Holloway as an example (as it was a decision). There's no way that Holloway won, regardless of a judge missing.


Advertisement