After watching UFC 158 post fight it seems Dana's stance on shots thrown after the bell is significantly more laxed than it was at UFC 113 apparently because the actual shots thrown after the bell at UFC 158 didn't land (regardless of the fact that w/o the ref the 1st certainly would of). I've yet to hear from the commission about their take on the situation, or the fighter potentially assaulted after the bell, but I'm still searching.
Now I'm sure emotions can run high, but there should be a certain level of self control and professionalism that should come along with being a professional athlete on that big of a platform/promotion, along with certain kinds of consequences after to prevent the actions from reoccuring; Not only with the fighter in question, but other fighters so the actions doesn't appear tolerable under circumstances and preference.
Now people in general deserve second chances, but also a lesson to be learned w/ it imo, not just a slap on the wrist and/or less. How do you guys feel about it and why? I don't believe this is something that should just be swept under the rug, especially if the issue happens again and the problem of throwing after a bell becomes punishable upon preference.
Either thrown after the bell is bad, or actually shots landing after the bell is bad. If the latter choice of action is a punishable offense, should the earliest be condoned? What degree of action, or courses of action should be taken after the earliest in your opinion?
Post edited by Keem on
Should fighters be allowed to throw punches after the bell as long as they don't land?
This is a public poll: others will see what you voted for.