MMA Forum - UFC Forums - UFC Results - MMA Videos - View Single Post - Jon Jones's Management to Protest Loss

View Single Post

Old 12-09-2009, 02:45 AM   #1 (permalink)
thrshr01
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 439
thrshr01 has much to be proud ofthrshr01 has much to be proud ofthrshr01 has much to be proud ofthrshr01 has much to be proud ofthrshr01 has much to be proud ofthrshr01 has much to be proud ofthrshr01 has much to be proud ofthrshr01 has much to be proud ofthrshr01 has much to be proud ofthrshr01 has much to be proud ofthrshr01 has much to be proud of
Jon Jones's Management to Protest Loss

Quote:
Dec 8, 2009 - Jon Jones' management posted on The Underground Forums that they intend on protesting the loss to Matt Hamill at The Ultimate Fighter Finale this past Saturday. Here is the post:

Let's be clear, Jon is not "unhappy" he feels as all things happen for a reason. We are protesting the L because we felt that Jon's opponent could not effectively communicate why he could not continue.

The rules state that an intentional foul and that the fighter cannot continue based on injury sustained from the foul. Hamill could not contnue due to a broken shoulder.

Jon should have been deducted a point for the accidental illegal blow. Matt should have been treated like we treat the Brazilians and given 5 minutes to regroup and offered a translator so the ref could make the right call and understand Matt could not continue due to his shoulder injury not the blow.

This should be a NC for both fighters but not a loss. Hammil continued with an injured Shoulder and only complained once the action was stopped (warrior) but the fight was stopped based on the shoulder injury in our opinion.

While he may have a valid case I don't see any way they overturn this result. It's too hard to go back and try and make a decision on if Hamill would have been able to continue with that cut which did result from the illegal elbow. Not to mention that this was the first time the commission used the new instant replay rule. I don't see them taking a shot at their own new rule's effectiveness.

http://www.sbnation.com/2009/12/8/11...loss-to-hamill

The writer seems to think that it's a difficult fight to overturn but I must disagree. They are correct that it was difficult to communicate with Hammil because of his disability, but the writer thinks the cut happened from the illegal blow. Someone correct me if I'm wrong but I think the cut happened before Jones threw the 12-6 strikes and the only way I see him getting the shoulder injury is from Jones's throw.
thrshr01 is offline   Reply With Quote