Eye pokes create a huge advantage, and current rules are absurd

[Lee Danger]

Because it very rarely ends in a NC and never ends in a DQ.

enforce stricter rules and let's see how may fights'll end for a dq.

if there's room to exploit a rule the majority will do it.

 

[fzoid4454]

This whole train wreck is good in a weird way....

Similar to how a stock market crash is "good" in that it results in correcting a bubble... but there will be pain, that is just how things work.


If no one stands up against a bad behavior then it continues.

All these idiots fighters saying a champ should just take it in the ass and fight on with a disadvantage and effectively award their opponent for cheating are part of the problem.

Gane is a serial cheater.

This was shaping up to be a competitive fight, such that the advantage caused by impaired vision from an illegal shot COULD have imparted sufficient change in the trajectory of the fight to possibly affect the outcome. We have seen NUMEROUS TIMES where a fighter gets fouled and finished shortly after whilst trying to fight on in a compromised state.

Effectively what the entire tard army is saying right now is:


"The HW champ should have risked his legacy and title by fighting with impaired vision because that means I get what I want and I don't care who else gets hurt as long as I get what I want."


Unfortunately for Gane, many of you in the tard army, Chael, Anthony Smith, etc.... Tom has enough backbone to not cave to pressure and cave to the crybabies, he was willing to stand up for himself and not get fucked over and placate cheating, whether it be intentional or not. Yall gotta wait and it will get rebooked and hopefully we get a fair fight then and may the best man win.

"Gane is a serial cheater."

That hyperbole pretty much puts you right in the "tard army," yourself.

 

[joy2day]

nice “no u” defense tho ^5

thats actually hilarious lolz… this sub hasnt changed a bit

Still bitching about bitching huh?

 

[fzoid4454]

Tom is having trouble seeing after eye pokes.

Article:

MSN

No shit. They were bad enough that they stopped the fight. There's going to be swelling, bleeding, inflammation.

If he was seeing fine 2 or 3 days later, then the complaints that he should have continued would have some weight to them.

His vision being compromised this soon after injury tells us nothing about whether the ultimate prognosis is bad, good, or if this is simply expected, and it takes a little bit of time to heal up.

But, maybe you're just commenting "yes, obviously he should not have said he can continue," which is fine. The tone of the article, itself, was pretty hysterical, the hyperbolic/panic variety, not the funny kind.

 

[axhand1e]

Still bitching about bitching huh?

 

[Hotora86]

how is it an advantage to have no-contests and DQs on your record?

just sayin

How many DQs have there been for eye pokes?

Serious question.

 

[axhand1e]

How many DQs have there been for eye pokes?

Serious question.

like ever?


maybe not enough… im not saying that


im just basically disagreeing that it is any kind of “advantage”… its a problem, yes, not an advantage

all im sayin

 

[Hotora86]

like ever?


maybe not enough… im not saying that


im just basically disagreeing that it is any kind of “advantage”… its a problem, yes, not an advantage

all im sayin

If I can poke your eyes in a fight and never get DQd for that - that's an advantage I'm gonna make use of.

Jones has made excellent use of that advantage.
Ever got DQd? NO.
Ever lost a point? NO.

Again, YOU CAN POKE EYES AND GET AWAY WITH IT.

 

[Hotora86]

It has been said many times, but the assessment of "intentional" or not shouldn't matter. You're warned in the locker room. First one is a point, regardless. Same for nut shots and fence grabs.

Second time? DQ loss imo.

There's no way a ref can be sure if the first instance of any foul was intentional, but they shouldn't be burdened with making that determination.

Refs in other sports have no issue calling a foul and determining the penalty. Not sure why it's so unreasonable to expect MMA refs to do the same.

This.
Most fouls in soccer are unintentional. Aimed for the ball, hit the leg. It's a foul nonetheless, free kick awarded. If the foul is damaging, yellow card, regardless of intent. If blatant, red card.

 

[joy2day]

How many DQs have there been for eye pokes?

Serious question.

Good question, I looked into this.-

In the UFC, there has been at least one disqualification for an eye attack: Dean Barry was DQ’d for an intentional eye gouge against Mike Jackson at UFC Vegas 52 on April 23, 2022. By contrast, most UFC eye pokes that stop a fight are ruled accidental and end in no contests—most recently when Ciryl Gane’s accidental double eye poke halted Tom Aspinall’s title defense at UFC 321 on October 25, 2025. Outside the UFC, clear eye-gouge disqualifications exist—most notably Don Frye’s win over Gilbert Yvel by DQ (eye gouging) at PRIDE 16 in 2001. Meanwhile, other major promotions more commonly record no contests for accidental pokes rather than DQs, such as Ryan Bader vs. Cheick Kongo at Bellator 226 in 2019 and Horiguchi vs. Makoto Shinryu on a Bellator card in 2023.

Apparently, it went in the other direction with a fight between Dean Barry and Mike Jackson in 2022 (I don't remember this). Jackson had already fouled during the fight before the eye poke (like Gane except with a groin shot), and after the eye poke (and Barry being unable to continue), was awarded the DQ win; a bit of inconsistency with what happened to Tom. That makes more sense though, multiple fouls should lead to disqualification.

Gilbert Yvel was DQ'd for really bad eye poking against Frye in Pride (this I DO remember). Yvel was a fouler like Gane, but was more unhinged, even hitting a referee during a fight once (more in the league of Palhares, who also has eye poked fighters among other things).

 

[Hotora86]

Good question, I looked into this.-

In the UFC, there has been at least one disqualification for an eye attack: Dean Barry was DQ’d for an intentional eye gouge against Mike Jackson at UFC Vegas 52 on April 23, 2022. By contrast, most UFC eye pokes that stop a fight are ruled accidental and end in no contests—most recently when Ciryl Gane’s accidental double eye poke halted Tom Aspinall’s title defense at UFC 321 on October 25, 2025. Outside the UFC, clear eye-gouge disqualifications exist—most notably Don Frye’s win over Gilbert Yvel by DQ (eye gouging) at PRIDE 16 in 2001. Meanwhile, other major promotions more commonly record no contests for accidental pokes rather than DQs, such as Ryan Bader vs. Cheick Kongo at Bellator 226 in 2019 and Horiguchi vs. Makoto Shinryu on a Bellator card in 2023.

Apparently, it went in the other direction with a fight between Dean Barry and Mike Jackson in 2022 (I don't remember this). Jackson had already fouled during the fight before the eye poke (like Gane except with a groin shot), and after the eye poke (and Barry being unable to continue), was awarded the DQ win; a bit of inconsistency. That makes more sense though, multiple fouls should lead to disqualification.

Gilbert Yvel was DQ'd for really bad eye poking against Frye in Pride (this I DO remember). Yvel was a fouler like Gane, but was more unhinged, even hitting a referee during a fight once (more in the league of Palhares, who also has eye poked fighters among other things).

OK so literally ONE time someone got DQd in the UFC for an intentional eye gouge, not even a poke.

Sounds like a free pass to poke away, which is what we are seeing more and more often.

 

[axhand1e]

If I can poke your eyes in a fight and never get DQd for that - that's an advantage I'm gonna make use of.

Jones has made excellent use of that advantage.
Ever got DQd? NO.
Ever lost a point? NO.

Again, YOU CAN POKE EYES AND GET AWAY WITH IT.

actually, I can’t get get away with it…

by your argument, one person who is semi-retired gets away with it to the point everyone is up in arms about it lolz


it was fun bros… im going back to the sanity of the OT ^5

 

[mkess101]

I don't think any rule changes would help a whole lot. The vast majority of eye pokes are incidental, and if severe punishments were handed out for them, you wouldn't like it. Guys would be cringing in pain over any finger that even brushed against their face, looking for an advantage.

Unless they change the gloves, which is a whole other ball of wax, I think they(and we) just have to deal with it being part of the fight game.

You are doing it to change behavior. So that when guys are training, their habits change. They aren't pawing with open hands near opponents eyes. Whether they're "trying" to poke eyes is mostly irrelevant (although some probably do try).

You don't have laws against drunk driving because you feel like people get behind the wheel after boozing and think "Time to see if I can plow into a family of 4!" You're enacting those laws to hopefully get some people to alter their behavior and ideally make society a little less dangerous. You make penalties for eye pokes more severe so fighters behave differently.

It's not a cosmic accident that Jim Miller has had 45 UFC fights and never eye poked someone and Gane has had 11 or 12 or whatever and has done it multiple times. Even if they're not "on purpose" (and I'm skeptical of that given he's also kicking dudes in the nuts), he should be forced to alter his behavior in the cage.

 

[Natural Order]

Lest we forget.

I always hope Chris continues to fight so that Father Karma can revisit him again, for the injustice to Bruno Silva.

 

[El Fernas]

Agree, one point on each infraction, 1 point after repeated warnings to not point the fingers or tap the face of the opponent with the palm open, the whole "fingers up" thing is not enough, obviously.

 

[The J0ker]

Yes, this is a blatant flaw in the system that needs to be addressed. Eye pokes are demonstrably not unavoidable or most often accidental when they occur so often for dirty fighters and *never* for legend Jim Miller. Stop fighting like a bitch with extended fingers near your opponent’s eyes.

There are so many examples of eye pokes turning the tides of a fight or even directly leading to a finish, greatly rewarding the fighter performing the foul. Flaw in the system.

 

[HereticBD]

You don't have laws against drunk driving because you feel like people get behind the wheel after boozing and think "Time to see if I can plow into a family of 4!" You're enacting those laws to hopefully get some people to alter their behavior and ideally make society a little less dangerous. You make penalties for eye pokes more severe so fighters behave differently.

That's an absurd comparison. People choose to drink. You're talking about(for the most part) a split second incidental contact in a fight. Why should "pawing" for distance not be allowed in a fight? Yeah, making harsh punishments for eye pokes might change some behavior, but would it for the better in a sport that requires hands to get close to eyes? I don't think so. You'd probably just end up with more boring fights, with dudes being more tentative to engage naturally, over fear of making a mistake and getting hammered for it. You'd also have guys exploiting it, and faking being eye poked.

 

[mkess101]

That's an absurd comparison. People choose to drink. You're talking about(for the most part) a split second incidental contact in a fight. Why should "pawing" for distance not be allowed in a fight? Yeah, making harsh punishments for eye pokes might change some behavior, but would it for the better in a sport that requires hands to get close to eyes? I don't think so. You'd probably just end up with more boring fights, with dudes being more tentative to engage naturally, over fear of making a mistake and getting hammered for it. You'd also have guys exploiting it, and faking being eye poked.

The drunk driving isn't obviously a 100% apples to apples comparison, it's more about making rules to alter behavior.

I think the flaw(s) in your thinking are in not taking into account that guys do in fights what they practice. If you truly penalize eye pokes, guys will focus on not swiping their open palms during training and thus won't do it in fights (as much). Also, there are plenty of guys who don't do it. And are successful and in entertaining fights. Then you have Jon Jones literally admitting (video of the interview posted itt) he does it on purpose. And on the flipside you have Jim Miller with 45 UFC fights who's never poked anyone in the eyes.

 

[HereticBD]

The drunk driving isn't obviously a 100% apples to apples comparison, it's more about making rules to alter behavior.

I think the flaw(s) in your thinking are in not taking into account that guys do in fights what they practice. If you truly penalize eye pokes, guys will focus on not swiping their open palms during training and thus won't do it in fights (as much). Also, there are plenty of guys who don't do it. And are successful and in entertaining fights. Then you have Jon Jones literally admitting (video of the interview posted itt) he does it on purpose. And on the flipside you have Jim Miller with 45 UFC fights who's never poked anyone in the eyes.

I guarantee that if you looked through the totality of MMA fights throughout the ages, eye pokes are gonna be a common issue, much like groin shots, and unfortunately figuring out "intent" is damn near impossible. It's just an occupational hazard of a violent sport. Like, it's not a headbutt or a fishhook, where you can say, "Hey, you're not allowed to do that!". It just happens. A guy shoots, and he gets poked. A guy rushes for a flurry and gets poked. It happens. To make some rule where you possibly lose a fight/purse over it, is dumb, and will have negative consequences to the sport as a whole.

There are already rules in place that may not be perfect, but about the best it can get, without entirely changing the dynamic of the sport. You want this to turn into soccer, where the fighters start looking for fouls to win, because the penalties are so severe? I don't. If it's intentional, let the ref and the rules in place decide that. You don't have the change the entire game, just because some fan favorite got poked.

 

[mkess101]

I guarantee that if you looked through the totality of MMA fights throughout the ages, eye pokes are gonna be a common issue, much like groin shots, and unfortunately figuring out "intent" is damn near impossible. It's just an occupational hazard of a violent sport. Like, it's not a headbutt or a fishhook, where you can say, "Hey, you're not allowed to do that!". It just happens. A guy shoots, and he gets poked. A guy rushes for a flurry and gets poked. It happens. To make some rule where you possibly lose a fight/purse over it, is dumb, and will have negative consequences to the sport as a whole.

There are already rules in place that may not be perfect, but about the best it can get, without entirely changing the dynamic of the sport. You want this to turn into soccer, where the fighters start looking for fouls to win, because the penalties are so severe? I don't. If it's intentional, let the ref and the rules in place decide that. You don't have the change the entire game, just because some fan favorite got poked.

I think it's dramatic in talking about changing the entire dynamic of the sport. I'm not trying to legislate intent, my point is more that intent isn't all that relevant. Again, you have Jon Jones admitting he does it on purpose. Why? Because he knows the negative outcomes for his opponent from it is real, and he knows that each fight he can get away with it and face essentially no consequences. Meanwhile you have Jim Miller with the most fights in org history and never doing it. Do you think that's some wild coincidence?