Did Ponzi's Eyepokes Tarnish His Victory OR Should Gunnar Have Asked For A Break? (Poll)

[Arkridge]

I've seen a lot of debate over Sunday's Main Event regarding Santiago Ponzinibbio's victory and whether the eye pokes leading up to the finish played a significant role in Ponzi getting the finish or not. The majority of Sherdog seems pretty split. A lot of you think the eyepokes led to Ponzi's winning the fight but there are a lot of others that think it didn't play as big a factor.

Watching the fight back 3-4 times its my opinion that the eye pokes didn't play as big a factor as a lot of you think but I can understand why some of you feel the opposite. Ultimately, I felt if Gunnar was so effected by the pokes than he should have called for a break in action to the ref or at least made it a bit more clear to the ref that he was poked, not continue on fighting if you're seeing double. I wanted to throw a poll up so we can get a general consensus on how Sherdog feels about this fight. So let your opinion be heard Sherdog!

Did Ponzinibbio's eye pokes leading up to the stunning KO tarnish the victory in your eyes, or was it up to Gunnar to call for a break in action if the pokes were really effecting him that much?

 

[Emjay]

C. The ref should have made the call

 

[Arkridge]

C. The ref should have made the call

I was wondering the same thing before rewatching but the eyepokes are all very fast and in striking transitions. It would have been very hard for the ref to notice.

 

[bobafett]

I didnt think so at first, but upon review it takes some serious denial to think the repeated pokes didnt affect the fight. Ref didnt catch it though, so the point is moot unfortunately.

 

[Toco]

little bit of both, but gunnar should have DEFINITELY asked for a break. but if didn't bother him, well....

 

[Yangpetrus]

I think both, but B because they were blatant as fuck and intentional, and multiple in less than a minute. Imagine I kicked you in the balls 3 times ni a fight and then me getting the win.

 

[Emjay]

It would have been very hard for the ref to notice.

Then there's no debate. If the ref didn't see them, they didn't happen. No amount of a fighter asking for a break guarantees that he'll get a break.

 

[Peteyandjia]

The pokes definitely ruined the credibility of Ponzi's win.

One accidental poke is one thing, but it was a short fight, and Ponzi was digging in Gunnar's head like there was gold in there.

It doesn't help that Gunnar was winning before that

 

[MCS]

Slow-mo looked reactionary, not extending when both stand at a distance, like Jones does. Nelson should've asked for a break, but it's a tough spot when the ref doesn't call it, means he didn't see them and could just say "keep fighting". Can't do much about it with those gloves.

 

[Thesnake101]

I mean, if Gunnar didn't ask for a break and the ref didn't call it...

 

[Teh_Lulz7]

All I know is the Ponz is coming for Perry's eyes next.

 

[Peteyandjia]

 

[Arkridge]

Then there's no debate. If the ref didn't see them, they didn't happen. No amount of a fighter asking for a break guarantees that he'll get a break.

In the majority of fights it isn't the ref who sees a poke though, its the fighters reaction to a poke that causes the ref to step in. Other than a slight paw at his eye, Gunnar didn't react. If he had reacted the way a good majority of fighters do when they get poked, I'm sure the ref would have called for time. Especially since Ponzi was back pedaling after the poke. It isn't like he was in the middle of exchanging with Gunnar where a stop in action would have been hard to justify.

 

[MiroHa]

C. The ref should have made the call

Honestly I didn't see those pokes either until I saw picture and gifs online. Maybe the ref had a bad view of the situation and couldn't see it either.

I think this fight should be turned to no contest. Two pokes that were almost eye gouges definitely led to that victory.

 

[Thesnake101]

The pokes definitely ruined the credibility of Ponzi's win.

One accidental poke is one thing, but it was a short fight, and Ponzi was digging in Gunnar's head like there was gold in there.

It doesn't help that Gunnar was winning before that

Hard to say that Gunnar was winning when it happened during the first exchange. Sure, he had success with that uppercut, but it isn't like he was cucking Ponzinibbio left and right.

I do believe they affected him though.

 

[Arkridge]

The pokes definitely ruined the credibility of Ponzi's win.

One accidental poke is one thing, but it was a short fight, and Ponzi was digging in Gunnar's head like there was gold in there.

It doesn't help that Gunnar was winning before that

So you think Ponzi was gouging at his eyes intentionally?

 

[AKA_Steve_B]

yep - C: the ref

 

[k4lm4h]

The pokes definitely ruined the credibility of Ponzi's win.

One accidental poke is one thing, but it was a short fight, and Ponzi was digging in Gunnar's head like there was gold in there.

It doesn't help that Gunnar was winning before that

winning how? missing an uppercut and having his chin out and hands down?

 

[Peteyandjia]

So you think Ponzi was gouging at his eyes intentionally?

Hard to say for sure, but man that video I posted above makes a strong case. Especially that last one up against the cage right before the finish. So egregious. Should really be a NC

 

[Emjay]

In the majority of fights it isn't the ref who sees a poke though, its the fighters reaction to a poke that causes the ref to step in. Other than a slight paw at his eye, Gunnar didn't react. If he had reacted the way a good majority of fighters do when they get poked, I'm sure the ref would have called for time. Especially since Ponzi was back pedaling after the poke. It isn't like he was in the middle of exchanging with Gunnar where a stop in action would have been hard to justify.

So maybe the pokes weren't as impactful as folks want to make them out to be?