Failed challengers should NOT be given instant rematches

Discussion in 'UFC Discussion' started by GriffinLHWChamp, Oct 4, 2013.

  1. GriffinLHWChamp

    GriffinLHWChamp Green Belt

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2008
    Messages:
    1,259
    Likes Received:
    161
    (In my opinion) A lot of this Jones/Gustafsson stuff has been overhyped. I personally, don't believe a challenger baring an aweful controversial decision deserves an immediate rematch if he came up short on his first opportunity.

    If the champion loses? Im ok with it. You got a legend... he loses the match (Anderson Silva) instant rematch. If you got a robbery decision? Fine.

    I don't see the logic behind giving a guy a rematch who was given an opportunity and clearly came short. Reguardless to how close he came he still fell short.

    I think Jones fighting Glover is the right decision. What say you?
     
  2. Contraction**

    Contraction** Banned Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2013
    Messages:
    1,006
    Likes Received:
    0
  3. Torrincian

    Torrincian Blue Belt

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2012
    Messages:
    844
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    At the Hotel California
    So did you think Shogun didn't deserve another shot at Machida?
     
  4. GriffinLHWChamp

    GriffinLHWChamp Green Belt

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2008
    Messages:
    1,259
    Likes Received:
    161
    Controversial decision (as stated in original post) Majority of people had shogun winning their first fight (I had Machida but I was in the minority). The point being it was highly controversial.
     
  5. Cooliox

    Cooliox Gold Belt Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2013
    Messages:
    24,442
    Likes Received:
    29,838
    Location:
    Thailand
    That was a true robbery. Majority of experts had Shogun winning that fight. And most importantly, Dana White had Shogun winning that fight.

    only like 1/15 expert mma panels had Gustafsson winning the fight.
     
  6. DizzyYeahYeah

    DizzyYeahYeah Red Belt

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2013
    Messages:
    8,141
    Likes Received:
    2,149
    Location:
    Perth
  7. Torrincian

    Torrincian Blue Belt

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2012
    Messages:
    844
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    At the Hotel California
    Like this one wasn't a controversial decision. Most MMA fans and fighters thought Jones lost.
     
  8. TeamTanner

    TeamTanner Red Belt

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    Messages:
    8,711
    Likes Received:
    317
    I agree, and that's generally the way it is.


    Gray Maynard did deserve his instant rematch with Edgar though since he didn't actually lose (even though he failed in a sense).


    A draw, a highly controversial decision (not a manufactured controversy like Gustaffson/Jones), or in certain cases a no contest should grant an instant rematch to a challenger but that's it.
     
  9. Olir

    Olir Brown Belt

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2009
    Messages:
    2,895
    Likes Received:
    522
    No way did Shogun win that fight.
     
  10. Torrincian

    Torrincian Blue Belt

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2012
    Messages:
    844
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    At the Hotel California
    Dana White also scored for Gus originally, then changed his stance to have Jones' back (you know, his champion) shortly thereafter.

    The fans and fighters feel Gus won by a pretty large majority. And most MMA media outlets were picking Jones to kill Gus beforehand; you really think they'd make themselves look dumb by about-facing and admitting they were wrong by scoring a Gus victory, after months of riding on the Jones hype-train?

    Gus plainly deserves a rematch.
     
  11. TeamTanner

    TeamTanner Red Belt

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    Messages:
    8,711
    Likes Received:
    317

    Even if I had thought Jones lost, it was close enough to the point that it could easily have gone either way. There were multiple extremely close rounds in the fight. That doesn't really make it controversial. It just means that it was a coin flip that landed on tails while Gustaffson needed it to land on heads.
     
  12. trane

    trane Red Belt

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2012
    Messages:
    8,082
    Likes Received:
    10
    scared

    but nah I don't like immediate rematches either but you said it yourself, if it's a controversial decision then ya
     
  13. GriffinLHWChamp

    GriffinLHWChamp Green Belt

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2008
    Messages:
    1,259
    Likes Received:
    161
    I think your a bit confused. The vast majority in the sport support the decision and the hardcore fans do too. We got some people on forums complaining who are more than likely casual fans but so what?

    I mean.. it was a close fight but personally I didn't have any trouble reaching a 48-47 score card. I don't think simply a coin flip should describe the decision I mean come on.. I scored the fight while rooting HARD for Gustafsson and came out knowing he didn't get it done. He lost the last two rounds and the fight.

    If we had a deciding round come out TIGHT, then ok. I didn't see any of those rounds as hard to score so I don't see the coin flip situation.
     
    Last edited: Oct 4, 2013
  14. kintana

    kintana Purple Belt

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2009
    Messages:
    2,402
    Likes Received:
    43
    Location:
    Venezuela/europe
    With a very close decision or a controversial decision or a great fight I think a immediate rematch should be done.

    Shogun vs Machida though i thought machida won deserved a immediate rematch.

    Silva vs weidman I could have waited for but it does make sense for anderson to get one more fight right away. It is for the money. Even if you betted on weidman you cant deny you thought silva wouldnt lose that way.

    I dont see a problem with immediate rematches.
     
  15. trane

    trane Red Belt

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2012
    Messages:
    8,082
    Likes Received:
    10
    the thing is nobody actually thought machida won, they just say they did because they can't admit defeat
     
  16. DiegoLunes

    DiegoLunes Banned Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2012
    Messages:
    2,562
    Likes Received:
    2,021
    Gus deserves it. This fight was too close to call.
     
  17. TeamTanner

    TeamTanner Red Belt

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    Messages:
    8,711
    Likes Received:
    317

    Even if Weidman dominated Silva for 5 rounds straight, Silva would still get an instant rematch. You have to beat a champion like that twice before the UFC will be ready to move on and embrace someone new. I don't mean any champion, but someone who has been champion for a long time and is a proven draw.


    Hendricks will face the same problem if he beats GSP.
     
  18. TeamTanner

    TeamTanner Red Belt

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    Messages:
    8,711
    Likes Received:
    317

    Why should they admit defeat if he got his hand raised? That makes no sense to me.


    I agree entirely that it was a bad decision, but it's still a win for Machida. You can't change it.
     
  19. Szwok

    Szwok Brown Belt

    Joined:
    May 21, 2008
    Messages:
    4,020
    Likes Received:
    779
    Gus came up short. The majority of MMA experts gave the win to JBJ. It was just a challenger who lost vs the champ. Good fight or not, no inmediate rematch is required!
     
  20. Break Brick

    Break Brick Black Belt

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2012
    Messages:
    5,304
    Likes Received:
    523
    The criteria you're laying down is very subjective. One could easily argue that Gus deserves a rematch more than Anderson based on performance, others would argue that accomplishments need to be accounted for. The idea that a rematch should depend on how controversial a decision is is also debatable, ultimately it depends on WHO found it to be a questionable decision, not HOW questionable the decision was. Dana and co have decided they agree with the decision therefore the immediate rematch isn't happening, irrespective of how many others felt Gus won or at least deserved a rematch.

    Few could argue that the fight couldn't have been scored either way, you can say I though Jones won rounds X,Y,Z or I felt Gus won rounds A,B,C but if you cant concede the fight was about as close as they come then you aren't being very objective. Circumstances such as these certainly seem to suggest a rematch is in order doesn't it?

    The decision not to make the immediate rematch is a business one pure and simple. Controversy, the closeness of the first fight or the interest of fairness are not being considered, only dollars and cents are.
     
    Last edited: Oct 4, 2013

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.