• Xenforo Cloud has scheduled an upgrade to XenForo version 2.2.16. This will take place on or shortly after the following date and time: Jul 05, 2024 at 05:00 PM (PT) We may experience a temporary downtime. Thanks for the patience.

*** UFC 297: Sean Strickland vs. DDP - Who Did You Think Won Mega Thread ***

Who did you think should have won the fight?

  • Dricus

    Votes: 196 48.9%
  • Strickland

    Votes: 205 51.1%

  • Total voters
    401
Wrong rules. Knees were illegal.

Sorry everyone. As long as he was touching the ground, he's downed. I think it's dumb, but that's the Ontario Athletic Commission. They go by the old rules
That’s ridiculous to me. Crazy that having fingertips on the mat as the knee lands is illegal.
 
Was a robbery as if it wasn't stopped Arnold would of Tkod him . On score was close 1st rd could go either way no roberry in that respect.
 
I had Allen winning a close fight but not a fan of Allen's style.
 
That’s ridiculous to me. Crazy that having fingertips on the mat as the knee lands is illegal.
The problem is that you need to write something down for a thing everyone who rolls knows in their brain. ANYONE who has grappled knows the concept of grounded, but if you have to define it pen to paper, people will try to really ride the lines of that definition. I imagine it was something like, "Well, feet means standing, if you're not on your feet, or on anything else, then you're not standing" and it was as simple as that.

A grounded opponent is any fighter who has more than just the soles of their feet on the ground. (i. e. could have one shin or one finger down to be considered a downed fighter)

Then someone went all Greek Philosopher and went
finger-touching-on-ground-isolated-260nw-173010299.jpg

"So am I grounded then?"

Definitely doesn't help that Joe kept reciting ad nauseum his "three points of contact" bullshit which was never the rule either. Now it's like no one knows what the history is anymore.
 
Back
Top