|
MMAForum Articles Members can write breakdowns of fighters, events or just articles on MMA related topics.
 |
|
12-11-2009, 08:33 AM
|
#31 (permalink)
|
|
Amatuer
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 146
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZZtigerZZ81
Not this one.
|
Then you should quit. If you do not have the fully support of your commission(s) you should find a different line of work. |
|
|
|
Sponsored Links
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
12-11-2009, 08:40 AM
|
#32 (permalink)
|
|
Amatuer
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 146
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by IronMan
He's entitled to stop a fight if the fighter is "unable to continue." But it is considered by the commission (and should be) very unseemly to stop the fight due to a cut without consulting the physician.
Of course, Mazzagatti didn't stop the fight because of the cut (which was caused by the elbow).
He stopped the fight because of Hamill stated that he could no longer continue (because of his arm, which was absolutely not caused by the elbow).
Mazzagatti was perfectly within his power to stop the fight. I'm glad he stopped the fight.
However, he's not entitled to declare the fight a DQ win for Matt Hamill without a justification that the injury which ended the fight was caused by an illegal strike (which it clearly wasn't).
I'm annoyed with this, because I've already made this argument in a handful of individual posts on this thread (as well as in the initial article) and you clearly didn't read it before commenting.
|
In a show with the level of scrutiny that the UFC receives you are correct, it would be very irregular to stop a fight due to a cut without consulting a physician. In smaller shows it happens fairly frequently, particularly for amateur fights. If a cut is inside the orbital socket, against the lines of the face you KNOW that fight needs to be stopped. You DON'T need a doctor to make that call. |
|
|
|
|
12-11-2009, 09:38 AM
|
#33 (permalink)
|
|
LEGEN...wait for it...DARY
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Georgia
Posts: 5,065
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by mma_official
In a show with the level of scrutiny that the UFC receives you are correct, it would be very irregular to stop a fight due to a cut without consulting a physician. In smaller shows it happens fairly frequently, particularly for amateur fights. If a cut is inside the orbital socket, against the lines of the face you KNOW that fight needs to be stopped. You DON'T need a doctor to make that call.
|
His point is that what you are talking about is completely irrelevant to this scenario. He stopped the fight because Hammill sId he could not continue. Hammill said that because of his shoulder. None of that had anything to do with illegal elbows or cuts around the eye.
Up to speed? |
|
|
|
|
12-11-2009, 02:24 PM
|
#34 (permalink)
|
|
True Grappler
Join Date: May 2006
Location: New York City, New York
Posts: 6,249
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by mma_official
In a show with the level of scrutiny that the UFC receives you are correct, it would be very irregular to stop a fight due to a cut without consulting a physician. In smaller shows it happens fairly frequently, particularly for amateur fights. If a cut is inside the orbital socket, against the lines of the face you KNOW that fight needs to be stopped. You DON'T need a doctor to make that call.
|
If you get into the medical details of the case, it becomes more and more clear that Mazzagatti's call was the wrong one.
The reason you call the ringside doctor (and smaller promotions don't do it because the fans don't have the same level of patience, but they should, because it's the smart way to handle the call) is to check out the cut, see if it's debilitating.
In the case of Hamill, the cut may or may not have been debilitating. It had nothing to do with Hamill's decision (and it was Hamill's decision) to concede the bout.
The problem is that Mazzagatti either did not know or did not exercise proper protocol in calling for an end to the fight. The only reason he needed to use the instant replay (which I'm for, but was excessive in this instance) was to reevaluate and retroactively upgrade his point-deduction to a disqualification, a decision that was not warranted based on the evidence I've already presented.
But, again, you've totally missed the mount.
Of course Mazzagatti has a right to stop the fight.
He does not have a right to issue that disqualification, because there was no connection between the illegal strike and Hamill's decision to give up.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZZtigerZZ81
His point is that what you are talking about is completely irrelevant to this scenario. He stopped the fight because Hammill sId he could not continue. Hammill said that because of his shoulder. None of that had anything to do with illegal elbows or cuts around the eye.
Up to speed?
|
^This.^
__________________
Sig by Toxic
Barnett - Toquinho -Werdum - "Nurmie"
Z. Gurgel - Morango - Rocha - Tiequan
|
|
|
|
|
12-11-2009, 02:48 PM
|
#35 (permalink)
|
|
Amatuer
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 146
|
I respectfully disagree. If you watch the fight again Steve stops the fight and deducts a point. He stands Jones up directs him to a neutral corner. All the while Hammill is flailing on the mat unable to regain his composure. Steve walks over to him looks at his eye and waves off the fight. Hammill did not say anything and did not indicate until after the fight was waved off that there was a problem with his shoulder. You are merely speculating after the fact that his shoulder was the issue when there was nothing in the course of the fight to indicate that his shoulder was injured.
You can say, if you wish, that Steve had no right to stop the fight or to DQ, but you'd be wrong on both counts.
Be that as it may, there is little or no cause for an appeal on the basis of Steve's actions, as already stated by Kizer.
If you want to speculate on a misstep by the referee, he should have assessed the fouled fighter's condition prior to deducting a point.
|
|
|
|
|
12-11-2009, 05:55 PM
|
#36 (permalink)
|
|
LEGEN...wait for it...DARY
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Georgia
Posts: 5,065
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by mma_official
I respectfully disagree. If you watch the fight again Steve stops the fight and deducts a point. He stands Jones up directs him to a neutral corner. All the while Hammill is flailing on the mat unable to regain his composure. Steve walks over to him looks at his eye, [ask matt if he can continue] and waves off the fight. Hammill [says no] and did not indicate until after the fight was waved off that there was a problem with his shoulder. You are merely speculating after the fact that his shoulder was the issue when there was nothing in the course of the fight to indicate that his shoulder was injured.
You can say, if you wish, that Steve had no right to stop the fight or to DQ, but you'd be wrong on both counts.
Be that as it may, there is little or no cause for an appeal on the basis of Steve's actions, as already stated by Kizer.
If you want to speculate on a misstep by the referee, he should have assessed the fouled fighter's condition prior to deducting a point.
|
There fixed ya story for ya so it was accurate. And it isn't speculation about why Matt said he can not continue when there was a post fight interview of Matt Hammill saying he could not continue because of his shoulder. |
|
|
|
|
12-11-2009, 07:24 PM
|
#37 (permalink)
|
|
True Grappler
Join Date: May 2006
Location: New York City, New York
Posts: 6,249
|
I've already explained why you're wrong, and you have yet to address a single point that I've made.
As ZZ has already pointed out, your facts are wrong.
Here's the video of the fight.
7:35 - Mazzagatti stands Jones up and calls for a point deduction.
7:42 - Steve approaches Matt and asks "Are you done? You done?"
7:46 - Mazzagatti stops the fight. (I have no problem with the stoppage; Hamill clearly couldn't continue)
7:48 - Hamill gestures clearly to his shoulder to communicate the injury to Mazzagatti.
The shoulder injury is the direct cause of the ending of the fight.
Whether NSAC is going to allow an appeal is irrelevant. Kizer has made it clear that he is going to cover Mazzagatti's ass, but that doesn't legitimize a terrible call.
Kizer claimed in an interview that "you have the illegal elbow that cut Hamill and that's why the fight was stopped." Well, as I've already demonstrated, that's just a lie.
Kizer seems to be trying very hard to justify keeping a referee who clearly sucks at his job. But that's a separate point altogether.
__________________
Sig by Toxic
Barnett - Toquinho -Werdum - "Nurmie"
Z. Gurgel - Morango - Rocha - Tiequan
|
|
|
|
|
12-11-2009, 07:37 PM
|
#38 (permalink)
|
|
LEGEN...wait for it...DARY
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Georgia
Posts: 5,065
|
Is there a union involved here? That would explain a lot.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
|
|
|
| Thread Tools |
|
|
| Display Modes |
 Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
On Behalf of Bones
