Originally Posted by Kreed
The thing is at worst it should have been a no contest..Look at the burns/johnson match for instance I mean what kind of judging criteria went into the decision to award burns the match on the heels of an eye poke??? it seems like the same situation here yet jones comes off the loser? I dont get that
It's a no contest if a fighter can't continue based on something out of the fighters hands. Such as in boxing when two fighters heads collide and one can't continue.
These were several intentional and illegal elbows. Hence it's a disqualification and not a no contest.
Jones would have won if he simply stuck with legal strikes. And the argument could be made that the fight should have been stopped before the strikes. But since it wasn't stopped earlier it was a fair decision to give it a DQ.