UFC FN113 - Glasgow: Nelson -v- Ponzinibbio

Its seems that more often than not, the person on the receiving end of a foul goes on to lose the fight.

That's just my perception/recollection, I don't know if there are any stats. For sure some fighters and teams are doing it deliberately because it's low risk (point deductions are rare) and can change the course of a fight.

ATT are full of proven steroid cheats and with USADA clamping down on PEDs it is inevitable that willing cheaters will turn to other avenues.

bmcc10

LollipopJimmy wrote: »

Gunni failed himself here by not raising his hand to the referee, very silly but also I understand the heat of the moment and trying to just plough on.

Think Gunni catching him at start of the round didn't help either. Was pointed out before but was always high risk low reward fight to take always seems when he's about to make next step up in the division there's a setback.

Call Me Jimmy

wonderfullife wrote: »

Ha sorry I read it as "hard to argue it was intentional"

I feel really bad for Gunni now. I'm confident in saying I don't think he gets dropped if it wasn't for that extended eye gouge in the finishing sequence. It clearly caused him to squint and take his eyes off the incoming strikes.

I'm not sure about that now yer man looked so dangerous even before the fight and his record was pretty amazing for someone who it seemed was well outside the top 10. I wonder will they make a rematch? Probably not, but I would not bet that gunni beats him sans eye pokes

Beersmith

Ponzinibbio by Sub

wonderfullife wrote: »

Disagree wholeheartedly.

4 eye pokes in under 60 seconds is not arguable.

It's clearly an intentional gameplan to swing and paw with the open hand. Gunni was failed by the ref and by his own willingness to let all of them go unreported.

Result should be appealed, if for nothing else than to make a point of highlighting it for Ponzinibbio's future fights.

Really he shouldn't appeal. He should have been appealing during the fight. Very dumb fight IQ. I didn't notice like most that he got poked. Explains why he got finished alright.

darced

Nelson by Decision

This post has been deleted.

Wrongway1985

Nelson by Decision

darced wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Chris.

darced wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Second one is a punch and the third is a punch, they are in no way intentional. First one is the classic eye poke, its a foul but not intentional, he is not even looking at him. How so much is being read into super slow-mo replays is amazing, this is all happening in the blink of an eye.[/quote]

Still in the blink of an "eye" with one example I saw he still had time to come in with a closed fist, open it, bury it into the eye and drag across the eye. 100% intentional. This was when gunni was against the cage and just before the knockout.

darced

Nelson by Decision

This post has been deleted.

Easy Rod

Wheeliebin30 wrote: »

Really?

Point still stands about the out of context screengrab. Kind of unnecessary to jump back at me a few days later.

The slowmo video definitely highlights more instances of eye pokes for sure but I still feel it's careless/reckless rather than malicious. It's a matter of opinion though, I don't know enough about Ponz's character/history to make that accusation.