Who are we kidding, how was that not intentional?

[DumpsterBaby]

Whether it was or wasn’t, Tom crying about it during and especially after has made him kind of a joke. His dad came to his defense like he’s in middle school, and, fucking still, there’s nothing wrong with his eye that can be proven through testing… only his word. I can say that I can’t see when I look a certain way too and nobody could tell me any different.

The fact that a world champion is exhibiting this pathetic behavior is so embarrassing for him, his fans, and the organization. People paid millions of dollars to watch that fight either in person or at home, and he quit like a playground bully with a rich dad.

 

[Mohawk Banditó]

The issue seems to be that they conflate intentional with Malicious. Eddie Alvarez kneed Dustin in the head. He wasn't trying to knee him in the body and the guy moved thereby accidentally fouling. He aimed for the head and hit the head. Because they didn't think it was maliciously intended they went NC rather than DQ.

I think they need to make the fingers to the face an automatic point and if there is an actual poke of any significance an automatic DQ.
Sumo has very few eye pokes because of the culture of honor and its a DQ. The Sumo wrestlers train to curl their fingers so they don't eye poke. MMA fighters will only train as such if they have to, warning after warning won't alter the behaviour.

Tim Means once said something about this after kneeing a grounded Brazilian Cowboy (in a no contest where he absolutely deserved a disqualification)

"I don't know how they called it accidental. I misconstrued the rules when we were breaking them down in the back, and we have to have this three points of contact, hand down and all that. ... I saw his hands up, I saw him trying to defend my knee, and he thought a knee was coming, as well. When I got in the back, there were fighters who also were confused on it. There was a big gray area. I'd take more responsibility on myself and call myself a dumbass if it was only me who thought that the knee was legal. But there was a whole bunch of confusion behind it. ... I didn't try to hurt him or cheat him in any way, but I did try to take him out. If we're following the rules, we're following the rules. Accidental? They're playing with my intelligence. I threw the knee on purpose because I thought it was completely legal, so give the dude the DQ."

'Accidental'? Tim Means says knees in first fight with Oliveira intentional, so go ahead and DQ him

FORTALEZA, Brazil –\u00a0The first time Tim Means and Alex Oliveira got together, it was nothing short of controversial. Means (26-7-1 MMA, 8-4 UFC) and Oliveira (16-3-1 MMA, 5-2 UFC) were booked for a lightweight fight at UFC 207 in late December, and their fight was a great…

mmajunkie.usatoday.com

Regardless of how incredibly stupid he was for being confused or thinking anyone else was confused about the situation, respect points to him for taking a stance against this "accidental" bullshit, even at his own detriment

 

[Captain Herb]

Are people seriously retarded?

Yes, around here, yes they are.

 

[CombatCyborg]

Are people seriously retarded?

Gane was literally digging in his fingers once he locked in the target. Also he did the exact same thing shortly before stopping Tom's takedown by fingering Tom's eyes. A takedown that would've guaranteed Tom the RD if not even the fight.

What could possibly be the explanation someones fingers randomly just end up in the opponents eye sockets?

As soon as you admit eye pokes aren't an MMA technique, you're on the road to Jon Jones not being the greatest. It's a slippery slope. Did you even think about Jon Jones fans?

 

[Jinx_AA]

Was definitely not intentional

Just a habit

You think he’s not the biggest loser in this - he could of been champion that night

 

[Mohawk Banditó]

Was definitely not intentional

Just a habit

You think he’s not the biggest loser in this - he could of been champion that night

A habit someone would intentionally have to neglect to keep it a habit.

When the ratio of fouls that give you an advantage vs the fouls that stop a fight are like 500:1, then that leads to 2 questions:
-If you give him the benefit of the doubt and think he's someone with good intentions, how does a ratio like that teach him to address his behavior?

- And if you assume the worst of him and that he fouls on purpose or at least doesn't give a shit about fouling, then why would he even expect with that kind of ratio that he'd run the risk of not being able to win the belt as a possible result before fouling?


Something about fouls and the advantages they create need to be addressed so it's easier to weed out the difference between the two