Referee trainer breaks down after-the-bell activity in Germaine de Randamie’s win over Holly Holm

KazDibiase

"My style is kneeing people in the face."
@Silver
Joined
Nov 8, 2015
Messages
11,993
Reaction score
51,034
There is a common misconception in MMA, according to referee Rob Hinds. The bell does not end a round or a fight — the ref does, per rules. It doesn’t matter if strikes come after the bell, only if those strikes were thrown after the referee steps in to stop the action.

“When the bell sounds, whenever that happens that’s just our indication to stop the round,” said Hinds, who is an Association of Boxing Commissions and Combative Sports (ABC) certified trainer of referees and judges. “That’s not the signal for the exact end of the round. We need to make sure we’re in position and everything is in place to stop the action as close to that horn as possible.”



According to Hinds, a referee must hear the clack when there are 10 seconds remaining in a round and begin to prepare. A ref has to close the distance to the competitors and, when the horn sounds, get in between them physically and also shout something verbally to halt the action.

“Once we’ve done that, we’ve intervened and anything after that is punishable,” Hinds said.

In both instances Saturday night, de Randamie seemed to start throwing the punches before Anderson could get in between the two women and shout, though it’s hard to pinpoint because it happened quickly. It’s also difficult to determine intent.

Hinds says these are situations in which referees must look back afterward and assess their performance, something he calls “personal accountability.”

“Could he have closed the distance better?” Hinds said of Anderson. “Possibly. Did he have that countdown from 10 in his head, so he had a pretty decent idea of when that round was coming to an end? Did he get physically involved and verbally involved? Those were some of the pieces that when we look at our performances, we could go, ‘I could have done that a little better.’”

Hinds said if Anderson had given a warning to de Randamie the first time about late strikes, it would have made it easier for him to take a point after the second instance. But because there was no warning previously, some referees will be hesitant to dock a point without something verbal first.

“If you don’t take care of things as they happen, it steamrolls,” Hinds said. “Because he didn't give her a soft warning the first time or address it directly the first time, now that second time, this is a strong warning phase. This is a hard warning.”

In this particular instance, Hinds said it would be within the rules to dock de Randamie a point, even after the first late strikes. The things referees look at when determining whether to take a point are: intent, if it’s a repeat foul, how much damage it did, and how much did it affect the fight, Hinds said.

“The second time, it absolutely could have been [a point],” he said. “There’s no doubt. Even if was done the first time, it would have been considered acceptable.”

When asked what he would do if he were Anderson after the third round, Hinds admitted, “Yes, I would have taken the point.”

That one point ended up being the difference in the result. If de Randamie was docked, the fight would have been a draw and there wouldn’t be a champion.

Anderson, Hinds said, is “an outstanding referee,” but mistakes do happen, especially in high-pressure spots with very little time to think or margin for error.

http://www.mmafighting.com/2017/2/1...-in-germaine-de-randamies-win-over-holly-holm
 
"Hinds said if Anderson had given a warning to de Randamie the first time about late strikes, it would have made it easier for him to take a point after the second instance."

The only constructive takeaway I've ever seen about this fight.
 
nothing wrong with the first one. second one was late sure, got a hard warning for it... but she was also just head-kicked and soccer-kicked seconds before that. Who knows if she even heard the bell. The ref should have done a better job separating them... after what happened the previous round.

should have been extra alert there... there was a shot right at the bell the round before, and now the 2 women were engaging hard in the final 10 seconds. He had to assert himself better.
 
In this particular instance, Hinds said it would be within the rules to dock de Randamie a point, even after the first late strikes. The things referees look at when determining whether to take a point are: intent, if it’s a repeat foul, how much damage it did, and how much did it affect the fight, Hinds said.

When asked what he would do if he were Anderson after the third round, Hinds admitted, “Yes, I would have taken the point.”


@fordman7795

I suppose he was taught incorrectly as well.
 
"Hinds said if Anderson had given a warning to de Randamie the first time about late strikes, it would have made it easier for him to take a point after the second instance."

The only constructive takeaway I've ever seen about this fight.
I think a warning should have been issued at LEAST after the second time. The first time and you can make an argument that with the adrenaline and the noise she didn't know the round had ended. But when it happens twice? That's not a coincidence. Every other fighter on that card had no problem stopping when the round was over, and damn near all the fights went to decision, so it's not like there weren't ample opportunities for them to fuck up and throw punches after the bell.
 
In this particular instance, Hinds said it would be within the rules to dock de Randamie a point, even after the first late strikes. The things referees look at when determining whether to take a point are: intent, if it’s a repeat foul, how much damage it did, and how much did it affect the fight, Hinds said.

When asked what he would do if he were Anderson after the third round, Hinds admitted, “Yes, I would have taken the point.”


@fordman7795

I suppose he was taught incorrectly as well.

Did you skip over the part where the round ends at the referee's call and not the sound of the bell?
 
Did you skip over the part where the round ends at the referee's call and not the sound of the bell?

Did you skip over the part where he calls it a foul and says he would've docked her a point? As I told you earlier, it doesn't matter whether the ref has called time or not (even though he did, as I demonstrated). It's still illegal what she did and a point deduction was warranted.
 
Goes along with exactly what my thread said:
http://forums.sherdog.com/threads/t...according-to-big-john.3469751/#post-127212757

The only thing that bothers me is that if the strikes were indeed legal how can you take a point away?
You can give a warning. If a fighter throws a strike as the round is ending and the red if going to stop the round, you can't take a point immediately but you can give a warning, which is more than fair. And it means that a second time, the fighter has been warned and knows the consequences.
 
There is a common misconception in MMA, according to referee Rob Hinds. The bell does not end a round or a fight — the ref does, per rules. It doesn’t matter if strikes come after the bell, only if those strikes were thrown after the referee steps in to stop the action.

“When the bell sounds, whenever that happens that’s just our indication to stop the round,” said Hinds, who is an Association of Boxing Commissions and Combative Sports (ABC) certified trainer of referees and judges. “That’s not the signal for the exact end of the round. We need to make sure we’re in position and everything is in place to stop the action as close to that horn as possible.”



According to Hinds, a referee must hear the clack when there are 10 seconds remaining in a round and begin to prepare. A ref has to close the distance to the competitors and, when the horn sounds, get in between them physically and also shout something verbally to halt the action.

“Once we’ve done that, we’ve intervened and anything after that is punishable,” Hinds said.

In both instances Saturday night, de Randamie seemed to start throwing the punches before Anderson could get in between the two women and shout, though it’s hard to pinpoint because it happened quickly. It’s also difficult to determine intent.

Hinds says these are situations in which referees must look back afterward and assess their performance, something he calls “personal accountability.”

“Could he have closed the distance better?” Hinds said of Anderson. “Possibly. Did he have that countdown from 10 in his head, so he had a pretty decent idea of when that round was coming to an end? Did he get physically involved and verbally involved? Those were some of the pieces that when we look at our performances, we could go, ‘I could have done that a little better.’”

Hinds said if Anderson had given a warning to de Randamie the first time about late strikes, it would have made it easier for him to take a point after the second instance. But because there was no warning previously, some referees will be hesitant to dock a point without something verbal first.

“If you don’t take care of things as they happen, it steamrolls,” Hinds said. “Because he didn't give her a soft warning the first time or address it directly the first time, now that second time, this is a strong warning phase. This is a hard warning.”

In this particular instance, Hinds said it would be within the rules to dock de Randamie a point, even after the first late strikes. The things referees look at when determining whether to take a point are: intent, if it’s a repeat foul, how much damage it did, and how much did it affect the fight, Hinds said.

“The second time, it absolutely could have been [a point],” he said. “There’s no doubt. Even if was done the first time, it would have been considered acceptable.”

When asked what he would do if he were Anderson after the third round, Hinds admitted, “Yes, I would have taken the point.”

That one point ended up being the difference in the result. If de Randamie was docked, the fight would have been a draw and there wouldn’t be a champion.

Anderson, Hinds said, is “an outstanding referee,” but mistakes do happen, especially in high-pressure spots with very little time to think or margin for error.

http://www.mmafighting.com/2017/2/1...-in-germaine-de-randamies-win-over-holly-holm

Good read. Rogan going nuts didn't help things. I've seen it happen before and Rogan's not been anywhere near as frenzied. It was like ice gate allover again.

 
I guess in writing this makes sense, but it actuality this is just asking for trouble. If someone's holding onto a submission and the bell rings, they should let go, surely?

And I'm not sure we'd even be considering this if, for example, someone was giving a serious beating from mount, and just continued to throw bombs after bell simply because the ref isn't *quite* close enough to get between them on time?
 
Did you skip over the part where he calls it a foul and says he would've docked her a point? As I told you earlier, it doesn't matter whether the ref has called time or not (even though he did, as I demonstrated). It's still illegal what she did and a point deduction was warranted.

Yes it does, because the round isnt over until the ref says it is. Exactly as Big John says, exactly as the ref in this article says and exactly as the rules say.
 
Yes it does, because the round isnt over until the ref says it is. Exactly as Big John says, exactly as the ref in this article says and exactly as the rules say.

No, it doesn't. The ref says that it would've been within the rules to dock a point after the first instance. That means it's a foul. He also added that if it were him, he would've docked a point if it happened again after the third round. Again, that means it's a foul. If a foul wasn't committed here, then there would be no reason to say that a point deduction was warranted. He never said that the punches were legal, contrary to what you said. 'Late strikes' (as he described them) are not 'legal strikes'.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, we get it, but he was still late...and he should have given a warning the FIRST time. Dude fucked up several times. Hopefully he'll learn from it.
 
You can give a warning. If a fighter throws a strike as the round is ending and the red if going to stop the round, you can't take a point immediately but you can give a warning, which is more than fair. And it means that a second time, the fighter has been warned and knows the consequences.

He explicitly says you can:

"In this particular instance, Hinds said it would be within the rules to dock de Randamie a point, even after the first late strikes."

He says that giving a warning would've made it 'easier' (more justifiable), but they basically have the leeway to dock a point at their discretion, warning or no warning.
 
The only thing that bothers me is that if the strikes were indeed legal how can you take a point away?

It's called damage control.
I explain the rule, then I try to play down the situation in order to avoid throwing a fellow ref completely under the bus.

I guess in writing this makes sense, but it actuality this is just asking for trouble. If someone's holding onto a submission and the bell rings, they should let go, surely?

And I'm not sure we'd even be considering this if, for example, someone was giving a serious beating from mount, and just continued to throw bombs after bell simply because the ref isn't *quite* close enough to get between them on time?

You let go of the sub when the ref intervenes, not when your opponent taps. And you stop smashing your opponent's skull when the ref steps in, not when said opponent is unconscious. I mean, you can be classy and stop, but if you don't nobody has a problem with that. Same with the end of the round. Fighters might not hear, not pay attention, mistake the sound for something else. Their obligation is to follow the ref's instructions and fight, not keep track of time (although I think GDR knew what she was doing).
 
1) de Randamie is a clean fighter.
2) The referee did a bad job. You must step in and stop the fighters when the round ends.
3) A lot of people are idiots (people who say de Randamie is dirty).
 
"Hinds said if Anderson had given a warning to de Randamie the first time about late strikes, it would have made it easier for him to take a point after the second instance."

The only constructive takeaway I've ever seen about this fight.
Racist. Now it's the Spider's fault. Someone tell Tyron.
 
Back
Top