- Joined
- Mar 17, 2013
- Messages
- 2,188
- Reaction score
- 168
So with the constant pulling out of big fights, I think the contracts would be for the fight date, with the opponent being discussed, but not being something that is the main point of agreement. If you arn't able to appear when contractually signed to appear, either because of injury or drug test failure exe you lose your current contendership or championship if you are holding it.
If you're not able to compete on a specific date when the title is being put on the line you should forfeit that title, regardless if it your fault or not. This would be pending they pull out 30 days or less from the scheduled event, to rework scheduling.
It's not to force fighters to fight injured, but rather to ensure the last 30 days they are not damaging themselves or doing heavy sparing, exe.
When you look at the Werdum vs Cain thing, Cain pulled out, and he would have lost his spot as top contender. Obviously fair. But when Werdum agreed to fight as champion on a certain date, you have a responsibility to defend your title. The title needs to be defended as scheduled. When they return from their injury and are capable of fighting they can earn the belt back.
But enough of the careless training.
You have a guy fighting the most important fight of his career break his foot the 11 days before the fight because someone checked his kick. Was it really worth it, for the risk, to be doing that? For what it costs the company that GIVES you that belt you have around you?
If you're on the undercard, obviously there should be some penalizing for not appearing when you say you will, but the champions and top contenders of the sport should be held to a higher standard.
It shouldn't just be all risk for the UFC to sign their fighters to a certain date only to lose out on having their own company belt on the line because someone says they can't show up to work.
If Connor was injured, the title would still be on the line, and Connor wouldn't have an opportunity like this again. They wouldn't risk it. But the champion is allowed to train irresponsibly with no repercussions as far as his standing as the responsibility of being champion.
Is stripping guys for last minute injuries too harsh?
If you're not able to compete on a specific date when the title is being put on the line you should forfeit that title, regardless if it your fault or not. This would be pending they pull out 30 days or less from the scheduled event, to rework scheduling.
It's not to force fighters to fight injured, but rather to ensure the last 30 days they are not damaging themselves or doing heavy sparing, exe.
When you look at the Werdum vs Cain thing, Cain pulled out, and he would have lost his spot as top contender. Obviously fair. But when Werdum agreed to fight as champion on a certain date, you have a responsibility to defend your title. The title needs to be defended as scheduled. When they return from their injury and are capable of fighting they can earn the belt back.
But enough of the careless training.
You have a guy fighting the most important fight of his career break his foot the 11 days before the fight because someone checked his kick. Was it really worth it, for the risk, to be doing that? For what it costs the company that GIVES you that belt you have around you?
If you're on the undercard, obviously there should be some penalizing for not appearing when you say you will, but the champions and top contenders of the sport should be held to a higher standard.
It shouldn't just be all risk for the UFC to sign their fighters to a certain date only to lose out on having their own company belt on the line because someone says they can't show up to work.
If Connor was injured, the title would still be on the line, and Connor wouldn't have an opportunity like this again. They wouldn't risk it. But the champion is allowed to train irresponsibly with no repercussions as far as his standing as the responsibility of being champion.
Is stripping guys for last minute injuries too harsh?
