Matt-Hughes.com Official Forums

Matt-Hughes.com Official Forums (http://www.matt-hughes.com/forums/index.php)
-   UFC (http://www.matt-hughes.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=10)
-   -   Lesnar wishes Dean was his ref against Mir the first time around (http://www.matt-hughes.com/forums/showthread.php?t=192)

Hughes_GOAT 02-01-2009 07:18 PM

Lesnar wishes Dean was his ref against Mir the first time around
 
GSP didn't do anything i didn't think he would against Penn, except for the action on top. GSP takes anyone down but last time he just laid there against Penn. i'd like to know how the ref can warn GSP 3 times for shots to the back of the head and not do anything? what's worse is, he said he'd stand them up, no point deduction.

this is what the Lesnar fans were talking about when we said it was a BS stand up. where is the line drawn, 2 warnings? 3 warnings? and what's the deal with telling them you'll stand them up? what happened to point deduction? thank you UFC for once again showing there are no real set of rules.

bradwright 02-01-2009 07:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hughes_GOAT
GSP didn't do anything i didn't think he would against Penn, except for the action on top. GSP takes anyone down but last time he just laid there against Penn. i'd like to know how the ref can warn GSP 3 times for shots to the back of the head and not do anything? what's worse is, he said he'd stand them up, no point deduction.

this is what the Lesnar fans were talking about when we said it was a BS stand up. where is the line drawn, 2 warnings? 3 warnings? and what's the deal with telling them you'll stand them up? what happened to point deduction? thank you UFC for once again showing there are no real set of rules.


what does it really matter,,he could have stood them up and took a point away at the same time,,BJ still gets a good thrashing and loses the fight anyway.

MMeh 02-01-2009 08:19 PM

I thought Dean handled that well. It didn't alter the course of the fight, and he maintained control of the action. Better than having a ref interject themselves and become the story any day of the week, imo

rockdawg21 02-01-2009 08:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hughes_GOAT
GSP didn't do anything i didn't think he would against Penn, except for the action on top. GSP takes anyone down but last time he just laid there against Penn. i'd like to know how the ref can warn GSP 3 times for shots to the back of the head and not do anything? what's worse is, he said he'd stand them up, no point deduction.

this is what the Lesnar fans were talking about when we said it was a BS stand up. where is the line drawn, 2 warnings? 3 warnings? and what's the deal with telling them you'll stand them up? what happened to point deduction? thank you UFC for once again showing there are no real set of rules.

:sign0011:

F34R 02-01-2009 09:11 PM

Are you complaining about Lesnar losing? Or complaining about the very few inconsistencies in the fights?

I mean, cmon... it happens in EVERY sport when there are humans determining the outcome of a game by making decisions about a certain set of rules. It's NOT going to change. It won't EVER be 100% perfect. Unless you think you could be just that much better than these guys that do it already, I suggest you lighten up about it already. Sheesh.

County Mike 02-02-2009 01:06 AM

For the record, UFC doesn't make the rules. It's the athletic comission of whatever state the event is being held in. I agree though, that it would be nice if the refs were more consistent but I'm not big on the "back of the head" rule when the "victim" is constantly moving into those shots.

The back of the head rule should be something like not punching the back of a head while a guy is trying to take you down. When you have the guy in mount and are trying to punch his face, but he's moving back and forth - should not apply.

Bonnie 02-02-2009 01:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hughes_GOAT
GSP didn't do anything i didn't think he would against Penn, except for the action on top. GSP takes anyone down but last time he just laid there against Penn. i'd like to know how the ref can warn GSP 3 times for shots to the back of the head and not do anything? what's worse is, he said he'd stand them up, no point deduction.

this is what the Lesnar fans were talking about when we said it was a BS stand up. where is the line drawn, 2 warnings? 3 warnings? and what's the deal with telling them you'll stand them up? what happened to point deduction? thank you UFC for once again showing there are no real set of rules.

I'm pretty sure Herb did tell him that if it happened one more time he would deduct a point.

I agree with Mike in that I don't think it was deliberate on GSP's part; I think he was trying to hit him in the side of the head, but, like Mike said it's hard missing the back when they are moving their heads like that.

I do agree with you, Goat, on the Mir/Lesnar fight. Lesnar WOULD have won that fight if Mazi hadn't stood them up like that and didn't he also deduct a point from Lesnar(?).

TexasRN 02-02-2009 03:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by County Mike
For the record, UFC doesn't make the rules. It's the athletic comission of whatever state the event is being held in. I agree though, that it would be nice if the refs were more consistent but I'm not big on the "back of the head" rule when the "victim" is constantly moving into those shots.

The back of the head rule should be something like not punching the back of a head while a guy is trying to take you down. When you have the guy in mount and are trying to punch his face, but he's moving back and forth - should not apply.


I agree with you. I don't like seeing people get hit in the back of the head just due to the brain trauma it can cause BUT I also don't like that a fighter can be penalized for the other person turning their head in to those shots to take it there rather than be hit in the face or side of the head.


~Amy

Hughes_GOAT 02-02-2009 04:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bradwright
what does it really matter,,he could have stood them up and took a point away at the same time,,BJ still gets a good thrashing and loses the fight anyway.

irrelevant, you either have rules and follow them or you're corrupt.

Hughes_GOAT 02-02-2009 04:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by F34R
Are you complaining about Lesnar losing? Or complaining about the very few inconsistencies in the fights?

I mean, cmon... it happens in EVERY sport when there are humans determining the outcome of a game by making decisions about a certain set of rules. It's NOT going to change. It won't EVER be 100% perfect. Unless you think you could be just that much better than these guys that do it already, I suggest you lighten up about it already. Sheesh.

the inconsistency of the rules. and yes, i could ref better. you study the rules and apply them. Dean obviously read a different manual than Mazzagatti.


All times are GMT. The time now is 04:33 AM.

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