A reminder: Verbal contracts are binding

Alpha_T83 said:
What would you do if you and/or your manager agreed to a fight, and then realized it was the "wrong" opponent? He clearly stated "as promised by Dana White" -- he thought he was fighting someone higher ranked, then he realized Trinaldo is fringe top 15.

The UFC will not make a bout without the verbal consent from either the fighter and/or his agent. If the agent has power of attourney to agree to bouts on behalf of the fighter, then that's a legally binding bout agreement.
Click to expand...
I think you just underestimate how unprofessional the ufc are
 
Alpha_T83 said:
HAHAHAHAHHA, ookay there kid. You clearly know NOTHING about the law.

If a fighter backed out of a big fight because "their mom died" and the UFC had to cancel an event and lost millions, they could ABSOLUTELY SUE THEM. You have a legally binding contract, and the law doesn't give two shits about your personal feelings.
Click to expand...

Of course they could sue them. The question is whether they would WIN.

You used one case study to support your claim and wiki as the source. I'm not saying that info is inaccurate, but there are likely a TON of variables that were applied in that specific case that led to the court awarding those damages.

What you need to do is apply more common sense. What exactly would the UFC have to gain by bringing legal action against one of ITS OWN PROSPECTS?? What kind of monetary award would any court grant in this specific case LOL? Why would the UFC even entertain the headache of litigating a situation like this? It is the textbook definition of cutting off your nose to spite your face.
 
Hitto said:
Crush.gif


Islam is Khabib's boy. UFC will not do a damn thing to him.

Also your post is completely wrong anyway.
Click to expand...

Look at McGregor trying to claw dem eyes out before Khabibs sends him reeling backwards.
 
kflo said:
Did the ufc agree to give him a top 10 opponent and then not fulfill their “contract”? Is that illegal?
Click to expand...

That's not a legally binding contract. When Dana White says "we'll try to get you a top 10 opponent next time" or whatever, that's not some legally promissory note. But when the UFC calls you and formally offers you a bout agreement, and you agree on a recorded call, that's a legally binding bout agreement.

There's a very clear difference.
 
mkess101 said:
Of course they could sue them. The question is whether they would WIN.

You used one case study to support your claim and wiki as the source. I'm not saying that info is inaccurate, but there are likely a TON of variables that were applied in that specific case that led to the court awarding those damages.

What you need to do is apply more common sense. What exactly would the UFC have to gain by bringing legal action against one of ITS OWN PROSPECTS?? What kind of monetary award would any court grant in this specific case LOL? Why would the UFC even entertain the headache of litigating a situation like this? It is the textbook definition of cutting off your nose to spite your face.
Click to expand...

Of course they wouldn't. Would they win? Yes -- 100%. All they would need to do is present the court evidence that the verbal contract was made, and they'd win.

But, as you said, it wouldn't be worth damaging their relationship with a promising young prospect -- especially since this would also piss off their LW champion. It just pisses me off that these fucking savage Dagastani's think they can do whatever they want. They have NO RESPECT.
 
Dreago said:
Look at McGregor trying to claw dem eyes out before Khabibs sends him reeling backwards.
Click to expand...

Dude that was an epic punch by Khabib. He feinted takedown, had McGregor biting, and threw a blistering right. I knew the fight was over once I saw that right hand land.
 
Alpha_T83 said:
That's not a legally binding contract. When Dana White says "we'll try to get you a top 10 opponent next time" or whatever, that's not some legally promissory note. But when the UFC calls you and formally offers you a bout agreement, and you agree on a recorded call, that's a legally binding bout agreement.

There's a very clear difference.
Click to expand...
Your op clearly said a top 10 opponent was promised. Not we’ll try.....
 
Do we have any evidence that he actually verbally committed? And do we know what he committed to if so? There is a difference between agreement in principle with details to be worked out (these kinds of deals break down all the time) and agreeing to all points of interest and just needing to get it down on paper.
 
Only Here for Attachments said:
Blaming Makhachev for UFC's bush-leagueness <Lmaoo>
Click to expand...

So, let's say for arguments sake my speculation is correct, and the UFC had a verbal agreement from Makhachev to fight Trinaldo.

How exactly is that UFC bush-leagueness? If they have a verbal (legally binding) agreement from both fighters, they have the right to start advertising the fight. What am I wrong about here?
 
Alpha_T83 said:
Of course they wouldn't. Would they win? Yes -- 100%. All they would need to do is present the court evidence that the verbal contract was made, and they'd win.

But, as you said, it wouldn't be worth damaging their relationship with a promising young prospect -- especially since this would also piss off their LW champion. It just pisses me off that these fucking savage Dagastani's think they can do whatever they want. They have NO RESPECT.
Click to expand...

Ahh. I thought you were actually advocating they do it.

If they won the monetary damages awarded would be a net loss after the cost of litigation and the future revenue of losing a prospect.

I'm not going to comment on the rest of the situation from a practical standpoint. I don't know enough about it.
 
Alpha_T83 said:
He clearly stated "as promised by Dana White" -- he thought he was fighting someone higher ranked, then he realized Trinaldo is fringe top 15.
Click to expand...

Well, Sherlock, the proposed fight was with Hernandez, not Trinaldo.
 
kflo said:
Your op clearly said a top 10 opponent was promised. Not we’ll try.....
Click to expand...

Ah, well, that's quoting what Mahkachev said. We have no source for what Dana White actually said. Makhachev believes Dana White "promised him" a top 155er, but what did Dana ACTUALLY say? Does he have any proof? Whatever the case, Dana's statement to him is likely not legally binding. In contrast, the bout agreement IS legally binding.

The law is a bitch, but it's fair.
 
pbateman said:
my bad, I saw a thread early today and i must have gotten it backwards.
Click to expand...

All good man, I do the same thing all the time. You had my heart skipping a beat that I'm looking like a fucking retard ;)

I mean, some people will think that regardless. But I'm 100% correct on the verbally binding contract. People might not like it, but that's the law.
 
mkess101 said:
Ahh. I thought you were actually advocating they do it.

If they won the monetary damages awarded would be a net loss after the cost of litigation and the future revenue of losing a prospect.

I'm not going to comment on the rest of the situation from a practical standpoint. I don't know enough about it.
Click to expand...

I mean, I'm ranting about it because I hate these entitled Dagastani's. And yea, the legal fees would be more than they'd get in damages.

I just think if the fighters want to be respected, they ought to respect the law. Once you agree to a bout, that's a legally binding bout agreement, as good as signed papers.

But I can promise you 100% that the UFC wouldn't make this bout "official" without consulting the fighter and/or his agent. Someone made a verbal agreement to the bout with legal authority.
 
Alpha_T83 said:
Thanks for admitting I'm right. It feels nice.
Click to expand...


"UfC ShoUlLd SuE HiMM"

Idk who this fighter even is but you're corny as fuck. Employee trying to talk like an employer fuck outta here.
 
Alpha_T83 said:
So, let's say for arguments sake my speculation is correct, and the UFC had a verbal agreement from Makhachev to fight Trinaldo.

How exactly is that UFC bush-leagueness? If they have a verbal (legally binding) agreement from both fighters, they have the right to start advertising the fight. What am I wrong about here?
Click to expand...

Islam said he was never told anything. This has happened numerous times with fights being announced and the people supposedly fighting each other finding out about it on social media. It's a common tactic to try to force match-ups.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,239,622
Messages
55,640,733
Members
174,868
Latest member
mezgomg

Share this page

Back
Top