Matt-Hughes.com Official Forums

Matt-Hughes.com Official Forums (http://www.matt-hughes.com/forums/index.php)
-   MMA (http://www.matt-hughes.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=11)
-   -   Check out the new 'downed opponent' rule as written by Keith Kizer himself (http://www.matt-hughes.com/forums/showthread.php?t=10452)

VCURamFan 08-07-2013 04:35 PM

Check out the new 'downed opponent' rule as written by Keith Kizer himself
 
http://middleeasy.com/media/k2/items...c8395e18_L.jpg

From MiddleEasy.com:
Quote:

Gone are the days of touching the mat when you're pinned against the cage to prevent getting your skull smashed in from a knee. Herb Dean knew you were playing the game, and now Keith Kizer agrees that your days of stalling are over. I'm writing this as if I'm addressing some unnamed MMA fighter, but in reality I'm talking to you, reader. I'm tired of your hand placed craftily on the MMA canvas of life. Be bold, and stop going through your life like some timid...some animal that's timid. I don't know what is, but just don't be like it.

So the rumor we told you about this time last week is finally ready to be implemented, and Las Vegas Athletic Commission head wants to let you know about it in this official document written by the man himself.
Quote:

2013 ABC Convention
"Touching Down" in MMA
Suggested Referee Rules Meeting Language

Kicking or Kneeing the head of a grounded opponent is considered a foul. A grounded opponent is any fighter who has more than just the soles of their feet on the ground. For example, a fighter with one shin or one finger down is to be considered a grounded fighter.

One established deviation from this rule is that the referee may determine a fighter would be a grounded fighter but is not solely because the ring ropes or cage fence has held fighter from the ground, the referee can instruct the combatants that he is treating the fighter held up solely by the cage or ropes as a grounded fighter.

Recently, some concern has arose over fighters who are taking punishment (usually thru knees) while both fighters are standing. The fighter then begins to bring his or her finger(s) down and up again, and then down again as a strike is being delivered. In certain situations, it appears as if the "touching down" fighter is attempting to draw a foul and benefit from the foul.

The ABC recommends that assigned referees discuss the following additional deviation at future rule meetings:

Referees should instruct the fighters that they may still be considered a standing fighter even if they have a finger or portion of the hand (or entire hand) on the canvas. In the discretion of the referee, a fighter who has a finger or hand on the canvas may still be legally struck in the head with knees and kicks. The referee may decide that the downed fighter is placing his or her finger or hand down without doing so for an offensive or countering maneuver in an attempt to advance or improve their position. The referee may decide that the downed fighter is instead simply trying to draw a foul. If the referee decides that the fighter is "touching down" simply to benefit from a foul, the referee may consider that fighter a standing fighter and decide that no foul has occurred.

Additionally, a referee may penalize, via warning or point deduction, the offending fighter for timidity.
--Written by Kizer, Lembo and Profato
Now only if they implemented yellow cards when wrestlers stalled then we could truly have something that's reminiscent of Pride FC.

TENNESSEAN 08-08-2013 02:25 AM

Good change. Thanks for posting Ben.

County Mike 08-08-2013 12:41 PM

I agree that the finger touching shouldn't count as a downed opponent but leaving it to the referee's discretion is a bad idea. They won't be consistent and fighters won't know what is or isn't allowed. Force the fighter to defend himself and take away the finger tip rule. Make it full palm or lower on the arm (ie: rested on elbows), something exact so there's no "discretion" involved.

I also believe head strikes should be allowed if the fighter delivering the strikes is on his back, ie: upkicks, even if his opponent has taken a knee or is otherwise "downed" as well.

Bonnie 08-08-2013 04:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by County Mike (Post 201272)
I agree that the finger touching shouldn't count as a downed opponent but leaving it to the referee's discretion is a bad idea. They won't be consistent and fighters won't know what is or isn't allowed. Force the fighter to defend himself and take away the finger tip rule. Make it full palm or lower on the arm (ie: rested on elbows), something exact so there's no "discretion" involved.

I also believe head strikes should be allowed if the fighter delivering the strikes is on his back, ie: upkicks, even if his opponent has taken a knee or is otherwise "downed" as well.

I agree, define the rule clearly as to what is and isn't "downed" rather than leave it to a human's discretion.

If your opponent is on his back, why would you take a knee or be downed other than being on top of him, like straddling him or side control? Why would you be in such a position?

VCURamFan 08-08-2013 04:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by County Mike (Post 201272)
I agree that the finger touching shouldn't count as a downed opponent but leaving it to the referee's discretion is a bad idea. They won't be consistent and fighters won't know what is or isn't allowed. Force the fighter to defend himself and take away the finger tip rule. Make it full palm or lower on the arm (ie: rested on elbows), something exact so there's no "discretion" involved.

I also believe head strikes should be allowed if the fighter delivering the strikes is on his back, ie: upkicks, even if his opponent has taken a knee or is otherwise "downed" as well.

Strong points. I like 'em!

County Mike 08-08-2013 10:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bonnie (Post 201274)
I agree, define the rule clearly as to what is and isn't "downed" rather than leave it to a human's discretion.

If your opponent is on his back, why would you take a knee or be downed other than being on top of him, like straddling him or side control? Why would you be in such a position?

Sometimes, when a fighter is on his back, his opponent may be on one knee trying to throw punches down. If the fighter on his back delivers an upkick to that opponent, he's charged with kicking the head of a downed opponent. I don't like that rule. If you're on your back, you should be allowed to kick upwards regardless of your opponents position. (in my opinion)

Chuck 08-09-2013 01:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by County Mike (Post 201272)
I agree that the finger touching shouldn't count as a downed opponent but leaving it to the referee's discretion is a bad idea. They won't be consistent and fighters won't know what is or isn't allowed. Force the fighter to defend himself and take away the finger tip rule. Make it full palm or lower on the arm (ie: rested on elbows), something exact so there's no "discretion" involved.

I also believe head strikes should be allowed if the fighter delivering the strikes is on his back, ie: upkicks, even if his opponent has taken a knee or is otherwise "downed" as well.

This. :)

Bonnie 08-09-2013 03:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by County Mike (Post 201277)
Sometimes, when a fighter is on his back, his opponent may be on one knee trying to throw punches down. If the fighter on his back delivers an upkick to that opponent, he's charged with kicking the head of a downed opponent. I don't like that rule. If you're on your back, you should be allowed to kick upwards regardless of your opponents position. (in my opinion)

Okay, got it, thanks for explaining. :)


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:03 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.