Commentators (including: Rogan, Goldberg, Florian, and John Anik) are consistently getting this wrong and creating unnecessary controversy where there shouldn't be. When Sakara was disqualified after hitting Cote with 10 strikes (my count, not Rogan or Goldberg's) to the back of the head, posters in here went wild. Many could agree with 2 or 3, but no more than that and many called foul on Patrick - that he was playing pussy. Tonight again, controversy in the Nobre/Alcantara bout . . . or was there? Here is the agreed-upon definition of "back of the head" strikes as agreed upon in 2009. http://www.mmajunkie.com/news/2009/...st-fine-clears-up-back-of-the-head-definition I believe there is confusion because the early unified rules defined it is a Mohawk strip, while this clarification only locates the Mohawk strip from the top of the ears to the crown. The "nape" area of illegal strikes is located from the top of the ears where the skull begins to curve. This rule really needs to be better defined to those who are calling fights. The onus is on them and Zuffa for purposes of clarity and clearing up controversery.