Take a point for a foul the first time, every time

[sdpdude9]

Anybody disagree with this? I don’t think intent should exempt you. Accidental or not, you broke the rules and should be punished. It’s that way in every other sport, there should be no free fouls. Guarantee you see guys be much more careful and the fouls lessen significantly.

 

[Sapp]

John Dodson would win a lot more decisions with this in place, with the frequency he takes low blows.

 

[kimocomplex]

Just because Joe Rogan blew it up? That wasn't that hard of an up kick

 

[welcometohavoc]

Anybody disagree with this? I don’t think intent should exempt you. Accidental or not, you broke the rules and should be punished. It’s that way in every other sport, there should be no free fouls. Guarantee you see guys be much more careful and the fouls lessen significantly.

For something like a fence grab I agree, but for something borderline like that where you can argue he was trying to throw his leg up i disagree

 

[sdpdude9]

Just because Joe Rogan blew it up? That wasn't that hard of an up kick

I’m speaking in general, not due to one isolated incident.

 

[Mortigan]

100% agree ts!

 

[Wizzlebiz]

Agreed.

It would be kinda cool if the ref was allowed to go eye for eye. For instance.

Someone gets poked. The ref stops the fight and pokes the poke offender.

Or kicks him in the nuts for an low blow.

This could be fun to watch.

 

[popac]

Intent matters to some extent because it indicates that there might be recidivism. But if the foul gives a great advantage to the person (e.g. by stopping a takedown), it makes sense to take a point even with no intent. The idea in this case is to give back what was lost, not to punish someone.

 

[GSP_37]

Damage is done and victim is at a disadvantage so penalty no matter what.

 

[billharford]

I think points should be deducted more frequently, but "zero tolerance" ends up being worse than letting the ref have some discretion.

 

[Carl Sonnen]

 

[Syndrm]

Fights are frequently won with back of the head strikes... which is far from getting a point taken

Nut shots, eye pokes, glove hooks should be mandatory point after warning

Downed fighter and cage grabs that stop a transition should be no tolerance

 

[GrantB13]

Taking an extreme example, but there's a difference between manslaughter and murder. One is unintentional, and the other isn't. Intent should matter a bit if it's from a generally clean fighter, but if Jones pokes someone in the eye then he has a very long track record of fouling and should be handled more harshly.

 

[Alpha_T83]

Anybody disagree with this? I don’t think intent should exempt you. Accidental or not, you broke the rules and should be punished. It’s that way in every other sport, there should be no free fouls. Guarantee you see guys be much more careful and the fouls lessen significantly.

I agree.

1st obvious foul should be a point. A warning should only happen when the ref isn't quite sure if a foul took place. But if there's obvious evidence of a foul, take a point.

 

[markys00]

No, that's silly