[A Random Person]

Are you for or against rematch clauses?

They could make for some intersting fights but at the same time they keep other talent away from the titles.

I think that a champion who is beat has to EARN their rematch. I think that they should have an immediate condenders match rather than an immediate title shot.

 

[Toxic]

Never heard of a rematch clause that is a WWE gimick. It would make no sense when was the last time the LHW title was defended? We would have been robbed of countless fights.

 

[A Random Person]

Never heard of a rematch clause that is a WWE gimick. It would make no sense when was the last time the LHW title was defended? We would have been robbed of countless fights.

Penn/Edgar? less so Rua/Machida

 

[HellRazor]

In some cases, they're completely reasonable. Suppose Anderson Silva loses to the winner of 'he Ultimate Fighter'? Is there a fighter more deserving of a title shot than Silva at middleweight?

Obviously it shouldn't be automatic, but it isn't now.