Originally Posted by sg160187
To be fair as much as rules are rules, it's just the weigh in and both fighters will be fighting well above the 170 limit anyway come fight night. Saying that it's 100% shady the way the whole situation was handled doesn't paint the sport in a positive light. The fact the ufc took down the video just makes it look worse.
As for NoYards speech about how Diaz should have been DQ offence for striking out after the bell. UFC rules state it is at the referee discretion. Also saying that changing a rule set in stone e.g. weigh in limits is the same as something that should be at the referees discretion is not the same no matter how you try and spin it...
As for the rules grabbing the fence/gloves/shorts is also in the same bracket of offence and you always see it happen at least twice before they get a warning.
@NoYards... Serious question do you just defend GSP till the death, or do you detest Diaz because of his unique form of 'stand up lay and pray'?
Okay, first, the weigh-in rules are NOT 'set in stone' .. I posted the rules which clearly allow the commission to make modifications to those rules, that's not "spinning", that's an 'advanced and complicated method of determining the facts' called "reading the rules" ... it allows a 'catch-weight', and while many people believe that a 'catch-weight' fight can not include a championship fight, there is no such rule .. it is 'traditional' not to do so, but if we are talking about rules, then you'll need to show me the rules that state this.
Second, I actually think it was the proper decision not to DQ Diaz, and the ref used the proper discretion ... just as the commission did in modifying the weigh in rules (IF they actually did that, and it actually came into play for either GSP or Diaz.) The point is not that all rules need to be strictly adhered to, the point is if you're going to whine about minor discrepancies in how you believe the rules should be adhered to, then let's talk about ALL the rules and how strict or lenient there are adhered to.
Third, I'll defend GSP when the argument against him is BS, as are 90% of the "boring fighter' arguments I've seen so far.
I'll admit to liking GSP more than Diaz. I don't play into all the 'anti-hereo' bullshite, Diaz is an anti-socoal punk, a whiner, and a bully, whose whole shtick is to 'break the rules' so so-called "rebels" can identify with his nonsense. I don't put up with people like him in my real life, and I see no need to support someone like him just because he's a UFC fighter.
If you feel GSPs fighting style is boring, that's fine, that is your opinion, and you are welcome to it whether it is based on solid evidence, emotional reactions, or ignorance of MMA ... but in case you haven't noticed, I don't just post a bunch of simple emotional opinions, I post data to back up my opinions and try to explain why I have those opinions (if you disagree with the 'facts' as, or how, I present them, then fine, present your own 'facts' and we can debate their validity and meaning, but don't simply ignore that I am posting actual data and claim it is just opinion) ... such as Diaz's 'stand up L&P' ... which I clearly explained as someone using a single technique they are very strong at in order to 'play safe' (ie: Diaz is usually under no more 'risk' using his 'walk forward with his iron chin stuck out in front of him until he can wear down his opponent', than GSP is using his TD and G&P technique. You may find Diaz doing the same thing over and over again exciting, and I may find GSP doing the same thing over and over again exciting .. but both fighters are basically doing the same thing .. doing what they are best at to limit risk (or as you would call it: "playing it safe".)