UFC on ESPN 54 PBP/Discussion

[ReasonableMan]

What is the point of watching a replay if you aren't going to change the fight to a NC or DQ?

To determine if it was an accidental poke or a legal strike that led to the finishing sequence.

Former-->goes to cards for scoring

Latter-->TKO

 

[Oblivian]

To determine if it was an accidental poke or a legal strike that led to the finishing sequence.

Former-->goes to cards for scoring

Latter-->TKO

Fighters are punished for "accidental pokes" all of the time when it is a recurring foul, similar to fence grabs, groin kicks, etc. After several infractions and a fight ending double poke, how in the world is there no punishment there? At bare minimum, more points should have been deducted. If you have recurring "accidental" fouls that you are clearly warned about and can be prevented, at what point is the fighter "responsible for your weapons"?

 

[XociDe]

Fighters are punished for "accidental pokes" all of the time when it is a recurring foul, similar to fence grabs, groin kicks, etc. After several infractions and a fight ending double poke, how in the world is there no punishment there? At bare minimum, more points should have been deducted. If you have recurring "accidental" fouls that you are clearly warned about and can be prevented, at what point is the fighter "responsible for your weapons"?

Weidman was right tbh, Bruno falling over was the worst thing he could have done in that situation. If he had just backed off and held his eye like fighters normally do, the ref probably would've taken a point. It was a pretty bad situation all around but the better fighter won.

I ended up betting the over 1.5 instead of Weidman, but I can see why Bruno bettors would be a bit salty.

 

[Oblivian]

Weidman was right tbh, Bruno falling over was the worst thing he could have done in that situation. If he had just backed off and held his eye like fighters normally do, the ref probably would've taken a point. It was a pretty bad situation all around but the better fighter won.

I ended up betting the over 1.5 instead of Weidman, but I can see why Bruno bettors would be a bit salty.

His reaction is irrelevant once reviewed on a replay. I don't think he was finishing that fight either way. It just negates the entire purpose of using video.

 

[XociDe]

His reaction is irrelevant once reviewed on a replay. I don't think he was finishing that fight either way. It just negates the entire purpose of using video.

Can they go back and take a point once the fight is over? I don't think so. I think they have to just determine whether the foul was intentional or not and go from there. So his reaction is not irrelevant because that's what led to the fight being stopped. If you're arguing that it's stupid and should be changed, I agree. At the time I thought the best thing would have been to deduct a point and go to the scorecards.

 

[Oblivian]

Can they go back and take a point once the fight is over? I don't think so. I think they have to just determine whether the foul was intentional or not and go from there. So his reaction is not irrelevant because that's what led to the fight being stopped. If you're arguing that it's stupid and should be changed, I agree. At the time I thought the best thing would have been to deduct a point and go to the scorecards.

It's just crazy to me that a fighter can be warned so many times for what he is doing, and then he does a double foul with it to finish it and gets the win. Isn't that the entire point of warning the fighter and the replay? He literally had zero punishment.

 

[ReasonableMan]

Fighters are punished for "accidental pokes" all of the time when it is a recurring foul, similar to fence grabs, groin kicks, etc. After several infractions and a fight ending double poke, how in the world is there no punishment there? At bare minimum, more points should have been deducted. If you have recurring "accidental" fouls that you are clearly warned about and can be prevented, at what point is the fighter "responsible for your weapons"?

Yes, Gary Copeland is a very bad referee. He should have disqualified weidman after repeated pokes.

The commission doesn't warn/penalize/disqualify the fighters. That's the referee's job. Unless I'm missing something, it seems your issue is with Copeland.