Comments on: Rule Changes Possible Following Johnson-Burns Decision

By: Justin

Justin — Wed, 17 Sep 2008 02:25:15 +0000

Kris,
You’re welcome, and thanks for having the site.

By: Kris Karkoski

Kris Karkoski — Tue, 16 Sep 2008 23:03:52 +0000

@DolfanG and @Justin – Thanks. I’m trying to bring more original content to MMAFrenzy.com so your support is appreciated.

By: Dr Doom

Dr Doom — Tue, 16 Sep 2008 17:30:46 +0000

just call the bout a No Contest and move on already………. Accidents happen even though I saw that fight and it could have very well been intentional IMO .But thats about all you can do

By: Surfingk5

Surfingk5 — Tue, 16 Sep 2008 16:08:02 +0000

It should affect Kevin Burns career! It affected Johnsons! Burns is an mma that **** slaps. I’ve never heard of anything so absurd. Common you’re a freakin fighter. Too bad for Johnson but I’m sure the UFC will do him right. As for Burns, maybe he should switch to oil wrestling in a bar or something.

By: Justin

Justin — Tue, 16 Sep 2008 13:57:13 +0000

I don’t think we need instant replay, especially in a way that they would stop a fight and go to the replay, then get back to the action. Or even that they should use it for judging who won a fight. However, a means for reversing a bad call such as this, where a fight got stopped and gave one fighter a TKO victory via something that should have gotten him DQed is a good thing, but it should take place after the fight is over, much like the review process in some racing organizations. They take wins away after the fact if a fighter tests positive for drugs, they could take it away if they found that they won using an illegal strike/maneuver. We can all agree that we wouldn’t want to see a TKO stoppage for a groin shot (even though they wear a cup…), an eye gouging should be the same.

By: MMAFan

MMAFan — Tue, 16 Sep 2008 12:34:48 +0000

Instant replay in MMA is a BAD BAD BAD BAD idea! Instant replay in most sports is designed to overturn difficult calls to see (line calls in tennis, bad football spots, now determining home runs, etc). They are not used to undermine referee’s authority when it comes to determining inadvertent fouls vs intentional or repetitive fouls. I’ve met very few fighters that inentionally break the rules, but those that do do not last long in the sport. And guys… this is MMA… its FIGHTING. In the heat of battle things happen. And part of being a fighter is being able to put up with that and fight back and win anyway. I do think that the rules about DQ’s need to be more concrete and enforced. Taking several fingers to the eye in one round is pretty ridiculous. And I like the idea of judges being able to overturn a ref’s judgement. Ref’s (as good as UFC’s are) are human and can miss things. But instant replay… No, this isn’t the sport for that.

By: timcat

timcat — Tue, 16 Sep 2008 10:43:44 +0000

Yea but don’t this make the rematch that much more interesting?

By: DolfanG

DolfanG — Tue, 16 Sep 2008 03:39:16 +0000

I’m afraid this fight is in the books. It’s done and over with, but if they make the rule change, and they haven’t made one yet, then MAYBE that kind of mistake won’t happen in the future. I think the best solution would be for the fight to go to the judges at the point of the inadvertant foul and let them decide who was ahead up to that point… Don’t hate me if you disagree, it’s just my opinion. It means nothing more than that.

By: Justin

Justin — Tue, 16 Sep 2008 02:27:46 +0000

Maybe more along the lines of F1 where they review something after the fact and then decide that Ferrari should have won over Hamilton and take the win away later that week.

By: Chris L.

Chris L. — Tue, 16 Sep 2008 02:27:27 +0000

I don’t think it would reach that point this early B Free but, you do raise a valid point though. I would think it would apply only in TKO’s though because split decisions are inherently close and not decided by the referee. Also the Marquardt-Leites fight would actually fall under the old rule due to the aforementioned present criteria.