The only way to stop eye pokes and groin shots is to..

[SnitchInsider]

To be fair, it'd be an even playing field for everybody. I like the idea ts, no other way to stop it imo.

No, it's a terrible idea. All this would do is introduce flopping to MMA, and it would be much worse in this sport than others. Imagine if in soccer players got not penalty kicks, but free points when they flopped. Imagine in basketball if instead of free throws when you flop, you got 30 points for free. That's what you're advocating here by taking fights that are three-rounds and deducting points for accidental collisions.

 

[Jorge Luis Borges]

Quote where in the unified rules, or from any ref camp/training literature/source that proves this is how MMA refs are taught and trained to do.

Also I absolutely asked you to prove it, because you've also used in your arguments that it happens.....don't worry though I didn't think you actually could either. But if you can't make the distinction it's because it's not happening.

Now if you wanted to argue the refs not applying the current rules correctly you'd have a better case...... but this whole notion that guys cheat the system, and do it on purpose, and it happens all the time....well lets just say you would be using some real examples if this was true.

We are really talking past each other here. All I am pointing out is that there is a strong incentive structure in place for fighters to commit fouls. Of course I cannot point out intentional fouls. I have no idea whether or not fighters commit fouls intentionally, neither do you, neither do refs. We also have no way to tell whether fouls are unintentional.

You cannot see motive or intent. You can only see the foul.

 

[spid3yo]

We are really talking past each other here. All I am pointing out is that there is a strong incentive structure in place for fighters to commit fouls. Of course I cannot point out intentional fouls. I have no idea whether or not fighters commit fouls intentionally, neither do you, neither do refs. We also have no way to tell whether fouls are unintentional.

You cannot see motive or intent. You can only see the foul.

No this is where we are having the issue, because you want to make the most dramatic sport-changing rules since UFC 12, based off this fact, yet admit you can't prove it's even happening.

 

[ovbious]

If it somehow affects the outcome of a round/fight, it shouldn't matter if it is intentional or not.

 

[7437]

As it is, fence/trunks grabbing, eye poking and nut shots are ilegal if you do it once or twice.

So I don't see why fighters wouldn't do it. If the ref sees and don't do shit or only warn you, then it is legal.

I also favor more strict rules.

Fence/trunk grabbing isnt illegal. They cant get any more blatant than Aldo and Palelei's last fight, and no warnings were given. They both only needed to do it once.

 

[rtodd]

Maybe Gus should dig one of his fingers into Jones eye and try and dig it out then make a video mocking Jones for losing his sight.

 

[ovbious]

Fence/trunk grabbing isnt illegal. They cant get any more blatant than Aldo and Palelei's last fight, and no warnings were given. They both only needed to do it once.

Fouls as described in the unified rules:

http://www.abcboxing.com/committee_unified_mma_rules.html

Holding opponent's shorts or gloves;

A fighter may not control their opponent's movement by holding onto their opponent's shorts or gloves. A fighter may hold onto or grab their opponent's hand as long as they are not controlling the hand only by using the material of the glove, but by actually gripping the hand of the opponent. It is legal to hold onto your own gloves or shorts

But like I said, these are de jure rules, not the facto.

Eliminate the warning before a point is subtracted would help really making them illegal.

 

[masterofthetap]

Point deductions will make them think twice... not a bad idea.

 

[7437]

Fouls as described in the unified rules:

http://www.abcboxing.com/committee_unified_mma_rules.html

Holding opponent's shorts or gloves;

A fighter may not control their opponent's movement by holding onto their opponent's shorts or gloves. A fighter may hold onto or grab their opponent's hand as long as they are not controlling the hand only by using the material of the glove, but by actually gripping the hand of the opponent. It is legal to hold onto your own gloves or shorts

But like I said, these are de jure rules, not the facto.

Eliminate the warning before a point is subtracted would help really making them illegal.

Yeah, a piece of paper says not to do them. Its never called, so it is legal. In reality, grabbing shorts or the fence is fine.

 

[ovbious]

Yeah, a piece of paper says not to do them. Its never called, so it is legal. In reality, grabbing shorts or the fence is fine.

ops, only now I've seen my typo on the first post you've quoted(ilegal, instead on legal).

but the message was clear in the rest of the post.

 

[Jorge Luis Borges]

No this is where we are having the issue, because you want to make the most dramatic sport-changing rules since UFC 12, based off this fact, yet admit you can't prove it's even happening.

What rule did I suggest that would dramatically change the sport? Lol. I am not so sure I am the one being dramatic here.

I can easily prove fouls happen, but I can no more prove that they are intentional than you can that they are unintentional. Given that there is no way to divine a fighter's intentions, intent ought to be irrelevant when considering fouls (as it is in every other sport).

 

[KillingJoke]

You'd be crying x5 harder when your favorite fighter gets points docked for legit accidental fouls.

Not when the fighter extends his arm out, ala Jones. That's just ask for an accidental eye poke.

 

[spid3yo]

What rule did I suggest that would dramatically change the sport? Lol. I am not so sure I am the one being dramatic here.

I can easily prove fouls happen, but I can no more prove that they are intentional than you can that they are unintentional. Given that there is no way to divine a fighter's intentions, intent ought to be irrelevant when considering fouls (as it is in every other sport).

Nobody should have to tell you what talking points instantly for 1. eye pokes 2. low blows, 3. cage grabs, and any other rule you want to tack it on to, does for the sport of MMA whether it's your intention or not.


-A fighter may put their hands on the fence and push off of it at anytime. A fighter may place their feet onto the cage and have their toes go through the fencing material at any time. When a fighter's fingers or toes go through the cage and grab hold of the fence and start to control either their body position or their opponent's body position it now becomes an illegal action

A rule in which you deduct a point instantly means fighters can no longer risk any techniques pushing off the cage. Since you don't want to allow the referees any room to make the call, they have to enforce it anytime it happens. Is a wall walk really worth risking losing a point? What about simply clinching an opponent up against the cage, no point in trying to re-grip as you may get part of the cage instead. (and lets not play the that never happens card, if you'd trained you know what can and can not) Use your foot on the ground to push off the cage.....no longer worth it.

-Say goodbye to leg kicks......because most low blows are not a result of you throwing a bad kicks, it's your opponent moving or not being where you intended to throw it. You can't risk giving up 33% of the fight just to land the technique, the punishment FAR exceeds the reward. Same goes for knees to the body, knees and body punches against the cage/clinch.

-Since you can't risk having an open hand at any time you are better of not trying to reach out for a clinch, or for any kind of pushing technique. Then you'll have to retrain yourself how to parry so you can learn to keep your fist tight 100% of the time.

-How about other fouls like grabbing the shorts, I could argue it in the same vain (see sonnen/silva how a well timed grab of the shorts can change a scramble) wheather intended or not, it can dramatically effect a fight and the punishment should be to enforce the rule with a point deduction in 100% of instances. Guess everyone will go back to wearing board shorts to get lucky.

 

[maccer349]

the current system could work fine, however...
refs should be way more vocal when guys hold their fingers right near the other guys face like Jones does even though an eye poke hasn't happened yet. Maybe a rule that says you can't "paw" at your opponent with your fingers extended, but allow it with fingers curled. It seems like those Bellator gloves might help, they seem to curl the fingers by their design.

 

[spid3yo]

Not when the fighter extends his arm out, ala Jones. That's just ask for an accidental eye poke.

Extending your arms out is not illegal.

Doesn't throwing inside leg kicks ask for an accidental low blow??? Doesn't make the kick itself bad.

 

[BullNose]

Plus

 

[Sirwastealot]

Instead of that, how about they just do what they should be doing?

Warning first, take a point if it happens again. That's something that didn't happen in Jones Teixeira fight, and in most fights in general. I've seen refs take a point immediately or not take any at all. There doesn't seem to be that middle ground there should be.

Yes make it strict. If it happens twice take away the point, without exception or lenience. Often you see the ref talking to the fighter after the SECOND warning "listen i'm gona take a point away if you keep doing that" when a rule like this is being exploited and causing problem they should be absolutely strict.

And this may be a little out there, but i'd also think about including a review option. If the fighter complains and the ref doesn't believe him, he could have the option of calling for a replay review. If it looks like he was poked or hit in the balls on purpose take the point away.

 

[nintey]

I'd say better equipment will help both these problems however a strict 1 foul warning, 2 foul point deduction system would work better than the current.

 

[MilesAbove]

How would one determine whether a dirty shot is intentional? Intentional and unintentional eyepokes or groin kicks look very similar.

How do you know anything but yourself exists? How do you know you're not a brain in a vat. Too bad we aren't capable of such knowledge. Guess it's time to lay down and die.

 

[Jorge Luis Borges]

Nobody should have to tell you what talking points instantly for 1. eye pokes 2. low blows, 3. cage grabs, and any other rule you want to tack it on to, does for the sport of MMA whether it's your intention or not.

I think an automatic point deduction would do more harm than good, as mandatory penalties usually do. However, I would favor a system like soccer's yellow card system, in which a warning for a low blow or eye poke carries over for another fight or two. So if you were warned about eye poking in one fight, you would have to be careful for several fights afterward.

You and I already agree that instant point deductions are a bad idea, so your anxieties about me drastically remaking the sport are misplaced.

You are arguing so fervently in this thread that you seem to have lost track of what and whom you are arguing against.