Why don't we see more soccer kicks to the legs?

NoBiasJustMMA

NoBiasJustMMA

Titanium Belt
@Titanium
Joined
Dec 24, 2010
Messages
37,522
Reaction score
11,258
I'm talking Sakuraba vs Belfort style, or like Wanderlei used to do a lot. Is there anything in the rules that prevent a fighter from doing this? It does seem that in America the refs don't really let the fighters just tee off on a guy's legs if he is on his back and his opponent is standing. They seem too eager to separate the fighters so that the guy on his back can improve his position. I don't think there is a rule saying that they have to do this so is it just that the refs are told to do this?

I don't like it, IMO it makes the fight more artificial, if you can't get up your opponent should be able to beat up your legs. If anyone asks I don't like stand ups when both fighters are on the ground either but that seemed to always be the same in Pride and the UFC if your stalling on top you get stood up.
 
NoBiasJustMMA said:
I'm talking Sakuraba vs Belfort style, or like Wanderlei used to do a lot. Is there anything in the rules that prevent a fighter from doing this? It does seem that in America the refs don't really let the fighters just tee off on a guy's legs if he is on his back and his opponent is standing. They seem too eager to separate the fighters so that the guy on his back can improve his position. I don't think there is a rule saying that they have to do this so is it just that the refs are told to do this?

I don't like it, IMO it makes the fight more artificial, if you can't get up your opponent should be able to beat up your legs. If anyone asks I don't like stand ups when both fighters are on the ground either but that seemed to always be the same in Pride and the UFC if your stalling on top you get stood up.
Click to expand...

They open you up kicks to the knee, and in general, are not extremely effective. Unless you plan to close the distance and stand inside the guard / pass the guard, standing on the outside trying to kick an opponents legs is not going to finish the fight.

I hate standups, but this is the one area I don't really mind refs intervening. Either attack a down opponent, or let him up, stop wasting our time hanging on the outside pretending your kicks are doing any serious damage.
 
Meh. Cause you can only get so far kicking your opponent's legs while he's lying on his back.
 
I like when fighters do it, but they need to either engage (kicks or jumping in for gnp) or let the fighter stand.
 
I dunno, might be more risk of injury if you tee off with a massive soccer kick, and they give a brief kick off their back shattering your leg into 5 pieces.
 
Ive asked myself the same thing who cares if it doesnt finish fights it does alot more damage than what some fighter do on top.

Im sure if refs let it guys like Barboza or Aldo could get a finish from there.
 
Why are you going to risk losing a chance at getting mount so that you can kick him in the legs a few times?
 
People have got much better at defending that kind of thing off their back. Not only do they swivel to avoid, they can also dish out a fairly damaging knee kick, which can obviously hyperextend the knee.

That's my guess anyway.
 
I don't know why either. Belfort couldn't even stand.

Lethal_Striker said:
Why are you going to risk losing a chance at getting mount so that you can kick him in the legs a few times?
Click to expand...

It's a big risk if you're against a guy with a great guard.
 
I notice that too. Back in Pride, smashing people's body and legs with soccer kicks was a technique. But I think having knees to a grounded opponent and stomps added a lot to the total strike package, so attacking the body was more effective. Now, you really have to be careful not to hit the head and get disqualified. If the guy on bottom is attacking and swiveling, you can accidentally kick their head.

Back in the day it was constant attack, because who cares if you stomp the head? It was allowed by the rules. Now, everyone is paranoid about the rule set. So attacking a downed opponent is less aggressive. It's a situation where the guy on bottom can constantly go for the knees or upkick to the face, while the guy on top has to careful.
 
MushroomWizard said:
They open you up kicks to the knee, and in general, are not extremely effective. Unless you plan to close the distance and stand inside the guard / pass the guard, standing on the outside trying to kick an opponents legs is not going to finish the fight.

I hate standups, but this is the one area I don't really mind refs intervening. Either attack a down opponent, or let him up, stop wasting our time hanging on the outside pretending your kicks are doing any serious damage.
Click to expand...

Not by itself but it could lead to a finish later besides hitting your opponent more than they hit you means you're winning.

I take it you haven't seen many Pride fights? I've seen a few fights from Sakuraba and Wanderlei where those types of kicks did meaningful damage to their opponents.
 
Lethal_Striker said:
Why are you going to risk losing a chance at getting mount so that you can kick him in the legs a few times?
Click to expand...

You say this as if we see guys get mount from this position often, we don't, the only time I've ever seen someone get close to getting mount from that position is when Shogun missed a stomp attempt on Arona.
 
hoyle1911 said:
I notice that too. Back in Pride, smashing people's body and legs with soccer kicks was a technique. But I think having knees to a grounded opponent and stomps added a lot to the total strike package, so attacking the body was more effective. Now, you really have to be careful not to hit the head and get disqualified. If the guy on bottom is attacking and swiveling, you can accidentally kick their head.

Back in the day it was constant attack, because who cares if you stomp the head? It was allowed by the rules. Now, everyone is paranoid about the rule set. So attacking a downed opponent is less aggressive. It's a situation where the guy on bottom can constantly go for the knees or upkick to the face, while the guy on top has to careful.
Click to expand...

This definitely has a lot to do with it but the refs in Japan also seemed more okay with allowing fighters to fight how they wanted to and didn't dictate how they can fight as much though they didn't like stalling, thus the yellow and red cards.
 
I don't know why no one does it but I don't thinks it's the refs' fault. From what I can remember in general they just stand it up when the guy who is standing is clearly just stalling trying to score free points on position by throwing nothing behind his kicks. They might be afraid of upkick counters or that someone will grab a leg if they throw anything behind their kicks.
 
campbecc said:
I don't know why no one does it but I don't thinks it's the refs' fault. From what I can remember in general they just stand it up when the guy who is standing is clearly just stalling trying to score free points on position by throwing nothing behind his kicks. They might be afraid of upkick counters or that someone will grab a leg if they throw anything behind their kicks.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I know the rules in Pride helped in making them work better but it just seems like a forgotten technique.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,266,773
Messages
57,427,335
Members
175,703
Latest member
Dudagameplay

Share this page

Back
Top