McGregors two UfC belts "Watered down history" - Irish Times

Lukker-

Putting them in a cage was probably the biggest misstep in the sports history.

John_D80

Lukker- wrote: »

Putting them in a cage was probably the biggest misstep in the sports history.

Ironically though the 'cage' is in itself a vital safety feature. There are a lot of coaches out there who won't let their athletes fight in a traditional boxing style ring for safety reasons.

John_D80

.ak wrote: »

Because begrudgery is an Irish pastime.

A past time?? You can't be serious. We've led the world at it for generations. We're professionals at it at this stage.

Typical begrudgery from you

Blackthorn Fight School

I think the whole ground part from what I am reading comes back to lack of education in the sport. Now I understand people dont like to see someone on the floor getting hit especially after getting KOd the Bisping V Hendo 1 is a good example. But how many times have we seen a downed fighter land a sub or up kick etc and win a fight?

Even most casual fans have no idea about grappling and I have had a few occasions where people ask me to explain whats going on. So to a regular Joe I can understand it looks rough but its why I say do not comment if you dont understand and if you dont like it dont watch it.

Barry McGuigan is actually a perfect example of how the general public's opinion of MMA is so very messed up Barry did kill a man in the ring and this was never viewed as some horrific indecent that should have the sport banned unlike what happened to Carvalho.

frink

wonderfullife wrote: »

RTE.ie finally bit the bullet and introduced an MMA tab in their sports section of the website in June.

Yes but RTE's section only covers McGregor and nothing else in relation to UFC/MMA.

Mellor

badabing106 wrote: »

They implied that because the feather weight belt was only around since 2008, and the Lightweight since 2001?

I.e , that the sport is so young, that the achievement is not as high? Would anyone agree? Is that fair?

Actually the lineal MMA champion goes back to 1992 for featherweight.
And 1990 for lightweight .

Conor holds both titles

wonderfullife wrote: »

Bruce Buffer introduced Jose Aldo as the "Undisputed Featherweight Champion of the World" in his fight against Conor.

I tweeted Bruce Buffer on the night saying "Surely an interim title means it is, in fact, DISPUTED?"

Conor will be introduced as "undisputed" in both weight divisions as well, even if LW introduce an interim title for Khabib v Ferguson.

It's nonsensical.

That was 100% another Buffer mistake.
He added the words Undisputed to Aldo's intro at 194.
It was also his mistake to add it to Conor's intro at 205.

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

I was clearly talking about knees and elbow strikes to the head:

Will here be knees and elbows in olympic karate?

zuutroy

My brother covered the previous 2 McGregor fights for the Times and did a good job of writing about it without any histrionics and just reporting on it as a sport:

http://www.irishtimes.com/sport/other-sports/conor-mcgregor-defeats-nate-diaz-in-las-vegas-rematch-1.2763329

I thought they might be coming around but sadly they dropped him in favour of Hanigan this time and went back to the moral outrage line.

CatFromHue

wonderfullife wrote: »

They are also missing out in a big way.

UFC 205 did 14 billion impressions on social media on saturday night/sunday morning. The Superbowl did 4.4 billion impressions.

RTE.ie finally bit the bullet and introduced an MMA tab in their sports section of the website in June.

To this day, BBC.com does not have a tab for MMA. Weirdly, it does have tabs for sporting giants such as Modern Pentathlon and Taekwondo.

In the social media age we live in, the only explanation for this is absolute pig-ignorance. You'd have to be a complete fool to run any major news organisation and not capitalize on the sheer volume of interest that MMA generates.

I'm not for one minute suggesting or expecting RTE or BBC to start covering Bellator or WSOF - but to not cover the UFC given the undeniable traffic it brings is borderline criminal. Both RTE and BBC sell advertising space on their website. Nobody in their right mind can tell me someone will pay more for to advertise on the Modern Pentathlon page on BBC.com.

It'll slowly change over the years but they're using editorial snobbery to deprive themselves of advertising revenues.

Your post has put me in the bizarre position of defending the media :eek: which isn't one I ever thought I'd be in.

You point out about how the UFC205 and Superbowl did on social media impressions. A point to note here though is that social media impressions aren't everything. According to Wikipedia, I know, the Superbowl had a total of 167 million US viewers (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Super_Bowl_TV_ratings). So now we're into the fine details of how each stat is collected.

What I do know though is the social media is still a young persons game, and its the younger generation who use social media the most, but the Superbowl is all ages.

RTE's covership of the UFC is probably McGregor centric and the PPVs for non McGregor fights, and I suppose also the non Rousey fights, in the UFC don't do great numbers, nor have an Irish interest. So why would they cover them? We should also be aware there are plenty of Conor McGregor story's on RTE.

The BBC has started dabbling in the UFC with Dan Hardy vids for UFC 200 so they are aware, whether they got enough interest to go more heavier in the sport is another matter.

JohnMc1

Tommy Kelly wrote: »

I hope Neeson and the rest of the Rugger crowd fail to win the right to host the world cup.

Hey now. Don't take it out on rugby fans. I want to watch Rugby World Cup in Nowlan Park.

steveydon

On the second episode of their coverage Ken early asks if Irish people would care so much for McGregor if he had a union jack tattoo on his chest rather than a gorilla. So that's the kind of stuff we're dealing with, with the Irish times crowd.

callaway92

steveydon wrote: »

On the second episode of their coverage Ken early asks if Irish people would care so much for McGregor if he had a union jack tattoo on his chest rather than a gorilla. So that's the kind of stuff we're dealing with, with the Irish times crowd.

But he's spot on, Irish people would hate him. Actually - Irish people wouldn't even know him if he was British bar ones that were already MMA fans.

It's only now that Irish people are coming around to Michael Bisping but nobody outside of the sport knows him.

Too Tough To Die

callaway92 wrote: »

But he's spot on, Irish people would hate him. Actually - Irish people wouldn't even know him if he was British bar ones that were already MMA fans.

It's only now that Irish people are coming around to Michael Bisping but nobody outside of the sport knows him.

Of course they'd know him, he'd be all over the British media.

Head Wreck

Conors biggest fan base is USA and Russia, so to say he's only liked because he's Irish is rubbish really.

steveydon

callaway92 wrote: »

But he's spot on, Irish people would hate him. Actually - Irish people wouldn't even know him if he was British bar ones that were already MMA fans.

It's only now that Irish people are coming around to Michael Bisping but nobody outside of the sport knows him.

People would also not care for Shane Long if he scored the winner against Germany for England. What's your point? Mcgregor isn't British nor is Shane Long, it's a stupid non relevant point.

callaway92

Head Wreck wrote: »

Conors biggest fan base is USA and Russia, so to say he's only liked because he's Irish is rubbish really.

Ireland vs England is a diff story

callaway92

You know what? The whole question is ridic anyway. He's Irish and that's the way it is. None of this "if he was English" shít . . .