Unintentional Fouls should not be a DQ loss

[jarj]

The shot on Diego was obviously not an intentional foul.

If the referee determines in their judgment that a foul was intentional, then they can make it a DQ loss. If someone winds up and soccer kicks someone in the head while they are laying on the ground, fine.

However, a significant foul that is ruled unintentional ("fog of war" type hit) should just be an automatic point deduction. If the fouled fighter cannot continue, then go ahead and score all rounds (including the fouled round up to that point). The fouled round has additional leeway for a 10-10 round prior to the point deduction - for example if it's extremely early in the round and there's nobody dominating. Maybe have a rule that fouls that end a fight where the scoring is even are considered a no contest instead of a draw.

In the Diego fight, for example, Diego Sanchez would likely have lost 29-27 if he said he couldn't continue. The foul was unintentional but significant, it cost 1 point. However, Diego lost all 3 rounds.

 

[Zebra Cheeks]

The shot on Diego was obviously not an intentional foul.

If the referee determines in their judgment that a foul was intentional, then they can make it a DQ loss. If someone winds up and soccer kicks someone in the head while they are laying on the ground, fine.

However, a significant foul that is ruled unintentional ("fog of war" type hit) should just be an automatic point deduction. If the fouled fighter cannot continue, then go ahead and score all rounds (including the fouled round up to that point). The fouled round has additional leeway for a 10-10 round prior to the point deduction - for example if it's extremely early in the round and there's nobody dominating. Maybe have a rule that fouls that end a fight where the scoring is even are considered a no contest instead of a draw.

In the Diego fight, for example, Diego Sanchez would likely have lost 29-27 if he said he couldn't continue. The foul was unintentional but significant, it cost 1 point. However, Diego lost all 3 rounds.

Isn’t there a responsibility to be in control of your weapons? Someone like pereira that does all the flips and crazy things...yes it’s entertaining, but he’s not accurate at all, and it’s his fault for landing an illegal shot because he has zero control.

 

[Al Stone]

Isn’t there a responsibility to be in control of your weapons? Someone like pereira that does all the flips and crazy things...yes it’s entertaining, but he’s not accurate at all, and it’s his fault for landing an illegal shot because he has zero control.

Fighters act on instinct at times to beat an opponent. That foul in particular has happened REPEATEDLY and will continue to happen. It's almost unnatural to stop such an easy fight ending attack. Granted I hear you that you have to have control. He is just one of many fighters that kneed to the head of a grounded opponent.

 

[Mmmmmmma1234]

The shot on Diego was obviously not an intentional foul.

If the referee determines in their judgment that a foul was intentional, then they can make it a DQ loss. If someone winds up and soccer kicks someone in the head while they are laying on the ground, fine.

However, a significant foul that is ruled unintentional ("fog of war" type hit) should just be an automatic point deduction. If the fouled fighter cannot continue, then go ahead and score all rounds (including the fouled round up to that point). The fouled round has additional leeway for a 10-10 round prior to the point deduction - for example if it's extremely early in the round and there's nobody dominating. Maybe have a rule that fouls that end a fight where the scoring is even are considered a no contest instead of a draw.

In the Diego fight, for example, Diego Sanchez would likely have lost 29-27 if he said he couldn't continue. The foul was unintentional but significant, it cost 1 point. However, Diego lost all 3 rounds.

Unintentional fouls are a NC.

Pereira was both deemed intentional and looked like he knew right after. He earned that DQ loss in his excitiment for a finish he forgot the rule he obviously saw Diego was down.

 

[genecop]

How does anyone honestly judge intention?

 

[FlyingDeathKick]

It's weird, Eddie landed 2 or 3 on Dustin and it was a NC, in the 2 cases last night only 1 knee was landed and they were dq'd. Should be a NC unless it's clearly intentional imo, also Diego should have continued.

 

[TheJohnnyWalkerEra]

How does anyone honestly judge intention?

ringside dr with a polygraph

 

[KING BONES]

How does anyone honestly judge intention?

gender identity

 

[Mmmmmmma1234]

It's weird, Eddie landed 2 or 3 on Dustin and it was a NC, in the 2 cases last night only 1 knee was landed and they were dq'd. Should be a NC unless it's clearly intentional imo, also Diego should have continued.

Dustin should be 2-0 vs eddie, herb dean is a scrub ref. And it was 3 illegal knees.

 

[Ironman70.3]

It should absolutely be a DQ. A fighter may not be in their right mind after a blow like that. Even though the may say they can continue, the Dr needs to protect the fighter. It's a shitty situation for everyone involved.

 

[seanb1979]

It looked intentional to me. He acted like he thought it was within the rules. His trainers failed him.

 

[Rebel_LioN]

The shot on Diego was obviously not an intentional foul.

If the referee determines in their judgment that a foul was intentional, then they can make it a DQ loss. If someone winds up and soccer kicks someone in the head while they are laying on the ground, fine.

However, a significant foul that is ruled unintentional ("fog of war" type hit) should just be an automatic point deduction. If the fouled fighter cannot continue, then go ahead and score all rounds (including the fouled round up to that point). The fouled round has additional leeway for a 10-10 round prior to the point deduction - for example if it's extremely early in the round and there's nobody dominating. Maybe have a rule that fouls that end a fight where the scoring is even are considered a no contest instead of a draw.

In the Diego fight, for example, Diego Sanchez would likely have lost 29-27 if he said he couldn't continue. The foul was unintentional but significant, it cost 1 point. However, Diego lost all 3 rounds.

I’ve been saying this. Completely agree.

the Mexican vs Native American dude knee on the other hand, was the Mexican dude’s fault.

 

[theaustrianoak]

how was that not intentional? he clearly intended to knee the head of his opponent, who was down on the mat at the time

i understand you are unhappy with the result, but let's not act like it was some fluke accidental foul

 

[Lawrence]

The shot on Diego was obviously not an intentional foul.

If the referee determines in their judgment that a foul was intentional, then they can make it a DQ loss. If someone winds up and soccer kicks someone in the head while they are laying on the ground, fine.

However, a significant foul that is ruled unintentional ("fog of war" type hit) should just be an automatic point deduction. If the fouled fighter cannot continue, then go ahead and score all rounds (including the fouled round up to that point). The fouled round has additional leeway for a 10-10 round prior to the point deduction - for example if it's extremely early in the round and there's nobody dominating. Maybe have a rule that fouls that end a fight where the scoring is even are considered a no contest instead of a draw.

In the Diego fight, for example, Diego Sanchez would likely have lost 29-27 if he said he couldn't continue. The foul was unintentional but significant, it cost 1 point. However, Diego lost all 3 rounds.

“Fog of war?’

Did Diego even hit him?

No fog

Legit DQ

 

[g*r*b]

There are different kinds of "unintentional" to my mind. Things move fast in the cage and a shot may land where it wasn't aimed; that's understandable and I can excuse it some. But Perreia is holding on to Sanchez and following him down as Sanchez collapses. With his own body position he should know that he's entering a no-go zone for that kind of strike. "Fog of War" to me means a murky confusion of action, where you can't figure what exactly is going on. That's not the case here. His type of unintentional is that of the mindless follow-through, and I have far less sympathy for that.

 

[Prince Nephilim]

DQ win is bullshit when it comes to it. It's a fight and someone can lose but a fighter shouldn't have a win over another fighter that wasn't earned...that's just me though

 

[KinoDemo]

It should be a DQ if unintentional. If intentional it should be a DQ and the fighter in question should lose their license to fight.

 

[faustian]

As if refs/judges don't already have enough control over the outcome of fights, we're now gonna give refs the power to read fighters' minds and determine intent. Sounds awesome

 

[mirko>anyone]

So a guy is losing the fight, gets fouled with a fight ending blow and not only loses the opportunity at a comeback, but also loses a decision prematurely as well? Nice

I’d just win the first 2 round and then kick a guy in the nuts as hard as possible at the beginning of the third round to win a decision.

 

[ulysse]

DQ was ok.
Pereira have to feel stupid since he was winning, easy, and on the way to end the fight... His fight IQ have to pretty low if you look at the last 2 fights.
Everyone looked bad in there, even the Ref !