It wasn't the worst I've ever seen, but I was very shocked when that happened. I'm not a fan of either, but it annoys me when judges don't make any sense.
Uhm, I understand that the scoring system is round by round... In the first round, Lawlor landed more punches (as opposed to a big kick to the forearms), controlled the fight against the cage, and had a semi-decent guillotine attempt. On the virtue of activity, that puts him ahead.
Round two, we don't even need to talk about.
Round 3, Lawlor lands a lot more strikes unless you think forearms should be a scoring target. Neither fighter lands a takedown. They fell down for a second then popped back up. That don't count, y0!
EDIT: I'd actually probably make a great judge, since I've actually competed in MMA, boxing, kickboxing, and grappling. I actually know what's going on in there, which is more than Cecil Peoples can say.
Actually, this goes back to something roflcopter said about fights being scored round by round... Dropping someone once but getting completely outscored otherwise, and in two other rounds, doesn't get you a win. Unless you're a hometown favorite, apparently.
I know, I personally had it 29-28 for Barboza and the only thing I thought Pearson did was be aggressive, but I haven't watched the fight in a while I just remember thinking Barboza won a competitive fight.