Potential rule changes coming up

[loisestrad]

My point is that even nations at war can exhibit a sense of common decency.

Why defend eyepokes for the sake of "real" fighting?

Eyepokes are illegal. Sticking your fingers out aren't, yet.

I don't like Jones (i.e.) sticking out his fingers. It IS kinda cheap. But then again, I would probably like to see people getting dq'ed for actually poking rather than being punished for pretending.

 

[RiotWyatt]

Eyepokes are illegal. Sticking your fingers out aren't, yet.

I don't like Jones (i.e.) sticking out his fingers. It IS kinda cheap. But then again, I would probably like to see people getting dq'ed for actually poking rather than being punished for pretending.

Sticking your fingers out at your opponents face is intentional eye poking regardless of whether it misses or not.

 

[Meduza]

Might as well just retire at this point

 

[Degen Gambler]

Eyepokes are illegal. Sticking your fingers out aren't, yet.

I don't like Jones (i.e.) sticking out his fingers. It IS kinda cheap. But then again, I would probably like to see people getting dq'ed for actually poking rather than being punished for pretending.

I highly doubt there will be point deductions for outstretched fingers, just endless warnings like there already are. It will end up being a pointless rule.

 

[clumseygenius]

Glad to see them dealing with these issues. It's been idle too long and talked about too long and not addressed while being a serious problem, the fingers to the eyes especially. I also like what they are aiming for with the "grounded opponent" rule change too.

Is it a "huge, huge safety issue" though? How many fighters have been damaged by fingers?

 

[FrontNakedChoke]

Good stuff. Love the grounded rule.

 

[Aluminati]

Is it a "huge, huge safety issue" though? How many fighters have been damaged by fingers?

Mitrione, everyone Jones faced, and at least 5 or 6 undercard fighters who I can't remember for obvious reasons.

 

[loisestrad]

Sticking your fingers out at your opponents face is intentional eye poking regardless of whether it misses or not.

Why the rule change then?

 

[RiotWyatt]

Why the rule change then?

Because the rules didn't indicate that. It didn't take into consideration that certain fighters would exploit it by making it look accidental.

 

[bigpunch]

Good thing they didn't wait until someone got blind to change this rule.

 

[loisestrad]

Because the rules didn't indicate that. It didn't take into consideration that certain fighters would exploit it by making it look accidental.

Instead of making a new rule, you could just as easily just say: Don't poke your fingers in the eyes of your opponent. Or the face. And punish the fighters for doing so.

 

[RiotWyatt]

Instead of making a new rule, you could just as easily just say: Don't poke your fingers in the eyes of your opponent. Or the face. And punish the fighters for doing so.

Really? You're just trolling at this point.

What's to stop a fighter from doing it and what gives a referee authority to address it if it's not in the rules?

 

[loisestrad]

Really? You're just trolling at this point.

What's to stop a fighter from doing it and what gives a referee authority to address it if it's not in the rules?

It's already in the rules that you aren't allowed to poke your opponents in the eyes or in the face.

Now you don't get to stick your fingers out while at a distance, which is - somewhat - fine by be.

It's watering down the concept of fighting, though. That's not even questionable.

 

[effedup]

JBJ might as well retire

Good changes though.

 

[BrazilianDude]

Good news.

 

[effedup]

It's already in the rules that you aren't allowed to poke your opponents in the eyes or in the face.

Now you don't get to stick your fingers out while at a distance, which is - somewhat - fine by be.

It's watering down the concept of fighting, though. That's not even questionable.

That was out the window once nut shots, eye-gouging, and small joint manipulation were changed.

 

[BrazilianDude]

I still think being able to use your hands to "ground" yourself is stupid. It should be a knee or your butt and back, that's it. And when you're grounded, you should be able to kick regardless if the other person is grounded or not making up kicks more available from your back. Makes no sense not to be able to kick to the head when you yourself are grounded.

Putting both hands on the ground will make the body 100% vulnerable to strikes and will leave you open to the opponent going for your back. I think kicks should be allowed, but this change should be enough to get rid of those bizarre situations.
I agree with you about the upkicks though.

 

[Phronimos]

I won't hold my breath on these rule changes.

 

[SouthoftheAndes]

http://www.bloodyelbow.com/2016/8/3...boxing-commissions-amends-mma-s-unified-rules

Among the changes are clarifications or redefinition of scoring criteria, and standardizing WMMA attire. Biggest changes:



Both of these are good news for the sport, IMO. The grounded opponent rule was silly and eye pokes were a ticking time bomb waiting to happen.

You should edit your post to include the grabbing the clavicle change and the heel kicks to the kidneys in guard.


This is huge and a step in the right direction. Eventually we can surely get upkicks, 12-6 elbows, and knees to head in North south. The athletic commission was even talking about allowing 12-6 elbows but I suppose that may take a little longer. I know they also wanted to redefine what strikes to the back of the head mean.

 

[SouthoftheAndes]

Anyone remember the last time the ABC made rule changes? A bunch of new weight classes, legal 12-to-6 elbows...http://www.mmaconvert.com/2008/07/0...artial-arts-significant-weight-class-changes/

Way too many weight classes I can't see the UFC ever doing that.