Worst robberies in UFC (and MMA) history? And how bad were UFC FN 59 decisions?

Phan vs. Garcia still ranks number 1 in my list.

Bendo-Cerrone was pretty close. There would be lots of people crying about a robbery if they gave it to Bendo.
 
Both were bad calls. Any educated, unbiased MMA fan knows who won them.
Ben never once had cowboy in any trouble and Rogan was swinging on Bens nuts so hard it was hard to tell how well Cowboy was doing.
 
Pendred was landing lots of leg kicks.

I think people were enamored by the 3 rights Spencer landed in the first.

Tough fight to score.


Cathal has one hell of a chin, but he needs to work out his own fight style. You can see he's trying so hard to emulate Conor, but he's just missing something doing that.
 
I don't consider anything Pendred landed to be significant.
 
I think Gus was up at least 2-1 and maybe 3-0 going into the 4th. And although Jones hurt Gus bad late in the fourth, you can't say it's a 10-8 because Gus was dominating that round with less than a minute to go.

So no, I don't understand the scoring in that fight. It wasn't the worst decision ever by a longshot, but it was a bad one. Chalk it up to having to beat a champ even more decisively I guess.

I guess if you somehow give Jones one of the first three rounds maybe. I don't see it personally.
 
Both were bad in my opinion. Two judges did not even give Spencer a round? WTF?

Probably bad decisions. Far from a "robbery" though.
 
Cerrone was the aggressor/initiator, and landed more/better strikers in the first two rounds. He was also the only one who got takedowns. I could have potentially given the third round to Cerrone as well.. strikes were almost even, and he again landed a takedown.

29-28 was the absolutely correct decision.
 
People kept mentioning Reza Madadi being robbed in Brazil, how bad was it really?
 
Diego-Sanchez_2935024b.jpg


Neither of last night's were even close to as bad.

Perhaps they just look at the scoring criteria and are like "Aggressiveness" yep, a lot of that CHECK.
 
The worst I can remember is Pearson vs. Diego Sanchez. That fight is the definition of robbery.
 
Not in the UFC, but still under Zuffa was Noons/Couture as someone mentioned before. It was glaringly obvious that Noons was better and faster at all facets of the game, and in each and every round. Like KJ eluded to, fighting in Oklahoma paid dividends to his opponent.
 
There's no fucken way Cerrone won that fight, 2nd and 3rd round, all he did was just stand there. Ben was being the aggressor.
 
I still think Big Nog vs Ricco Rodriques in Pride in 2003 is the worst I have seen
 
As far as Pendred went, I was pissed that no one mentioned the illegal knee. Pendred got tagged several times while he was attempting a protest. I wanted Spencer to lose just for that. Listening to Rogan comment on how poor and slow Pendred's standup was really got to a lot of people. Spencer looked like he should have won just based on crispness and hand speed, but that slow ass plodding uppercut Pendred kept throwing was actually landing, just not flush. I thought the fight was going to go to Spencer just on looks, but I am not upset about the outcome.

I thought Benson lost. He didn't do anything but a leg stomp for most of the fight. He got a couple of flush shots in, but Donald looked fresher by the end, was landing regularly, and controlled the pace of the fight. Judges have shown that they will rate octagon control up there with effective techniques when it's a close fight. Realistically, what else can they go by when both guys are not going for the finish?
 
There's no fucken way Cerrone won that fight, 2nd and 3rd round, all he did was just stand there. Ben was being the aggressor.

What fight were you watching? Henderson seemed content to let stuff happen, while Cowboy was trying to make things happen. That was the difference.
 
I don't see why every close fight where someone doesn't agree with the decision is a robbery these days. Three round fight closely contested by Cerrone and Henderson, neither of which wanted to do a whole lot for most of the fight, and it's a robbery when the scores come out 29-28 in favor of one of them because most judges feel like they need to pick a winner? Come on, people. Cerrone spent most of the fight throwing outside leg kicks with his lead leg, and Bendo spent most of the fight throwing body jabs and lead leg push kicks to the thigh. Neither guy really wanted to engage for a majority of the fight. Can we quit with all the robbery talk anytime someone wins 29-28/48-47 and you don't agree with it?
 
The worst I can remember is Pearson vs. Diego Sanchez. That fight is the definition of robbery.

That fight is the clearest example of hometown robbery. It's not even that bad in Brazil.
 
There's no fucken way Cerrone won that fight, 2nd and 3rd round, all he did was just stand there. Ben was being the aggressor.

I thought Cerrone took the second round. It was even until Cerrone scored the take-down.
 
As far as Pendred went, I was pissed that no one mentioned the illegal knee. Pendred got tagged several times while he was attempting a protest. I wanted Spencer to lose just for that. Listening to Rogan comment on how poor and slow Pendred's standup was really got to a lot of people. Spencer looked like he should have won just based on crispness and hand speed, but that slow ass plodding uppercut Pendred kept throwing was actually landing, just not flush. I thought the fight was going to go to Spencer just on looks, but I am not upset about the outcome.

protesting like that nearly got him KTFO - but i agree with you.

those awkward uppercuts WERE landing.

i kept waiting to hear joe or goldie mention that knee but was surprised that nothing was said - especially considering how much he tried to protest and how he nearly paid for it by getting tagged a few more times.
 
Back
Top