Jump to content

BIg John gets a fail.


UFCCagerattler

Recommended Posts

Not that is mattered but the point Big John took away for the illegal upkick was legal. I have watched it several times in slow mo and big mos knees were off the ground and he was postured up.

 

That aside Big John reffed mabe the worst title fight I have seen in a month.

 

All that booing at the end means YOU SHOULD STOOD THEM UP ABOUT 20 TIMES!

 

The guy on the top can not simply lay there absorbing punishment. That is not in the definition of remaining active,

,

I thought Big John was better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have watched it several times in slow mo

Bear in mind that Big John does not have the option of stopping the fight and reveiwing his decision "severel" times in slow motion.

 

He has to have a decision realtime, and he only gets to see it once.

 

"Fail"??, cut the guy some slack!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

concerning the stand up:

 

mousasi worked himself out of a stand up. i guess he figured he was scoring points (i did too) but apparently not more than mo was scoring laying in his guard. this isn't the first time i've seen the guy on the bottom work himself out of a stand up and end up losing to lay and pray. i'd like to know exactly how many strikes = takedown and laying, because Lawal had 9 takedowns which is great skill getting to the ground, but this isn't a wrestling match you can't win by pin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

concerning the stand up:

 

mousasi worked himself out of a stand up. i guess he figured he was scoring points (i did too) but apparently not more than mo was scoring laying in his guard. this isn't the first time i've seen the guy on the bottom work himself out of a stand up and end up losing to lay and pray. i'd like to know exactly how many strikes = takedown and laying' date=' because Lawal had 9 takedowns which is great skill getting to the ground, but this isn't a wrestling match you can't win by pin.[/quote']

 

In fact if someone gets taken down and does more damage from the bottom they should get the points for allowing the takedown.

 

MMA is a fringe sport. The judging is atrocious. We all know that.

 

And likewise the reffing. Big John is bad. He may not be MAzzagotti bad - but he is pretty bad too.

 

He should be ashamed of himself for letting someone get a title that way..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not that is mattered but the point Big John took away for the illegal upkick was legal. I have watched it several times in slow mo and big mos knees were off the ground and he was postured up.

 

That aside Big John reffed mabe the worst title fight I have seen in a month.

 

All that booing at the end means YOU SHOULD STOOD THEM UP ABOUT 20 TIMES!

 

The guy on the top can not simply lay there absorbing punishment. That is not in the definition of remaining active' date='

,

I thought Big John was better.[/quote']

 

 

Big John is one of the best if not THE best MMA refs. Every ref has bad nights...I think the thing is is that he has had by far the least amount of bad nights...I think he deserves a little slack.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In fact if someone gets taken down and does more damage from the bottom they should get the points for allowing the takedown.

 

MMA is a fringe sport. The judging is atrocious. We all know that.

 

And likewise the reffing. Big John is bad. He may not be MAzzagotti bad - but he is pretty bad too.

 

He should be ashamed of himself for letting someone get a title that way..

 

thats how i saw it. in an earlier argument i advocated MOUSASI gets points for the takedown since he was the one doing all the work on the ground.

 

personally i don't think anything that isn't damaging should be scored, not dancing around the ring, not pushing your opponent into the cage, not spending all day humping your opponent's legs, not laying on top of someone. the only thing that should be scored in a FIGHT is damage. strikes, tight chokes/subs and hard slams/throws. if you aren't hurting your opponent you aren't fighting. if there is no effort to finish the fight i don't see how you can earn a decision.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

thats how i saw it. in an earlier argument i advocated MOUSASI gets points for the takedown since he was the one doing all the work on the ground.

 

personally i don't think anything that isn't damaging should be scored' date=' not dancing around the ring, not pushing your opponent into the cage, not spending all day humping your opponent's legs, not laying on top of someone. the only thing that should be scored in a FIGHT is damage. strikes, tight chokes/subs and hard slams/throws. if you aren't hurting your opponent you aren't fighting. if there is no effort to finish the fight i don't see how you can earn a decision.[/quote']

 

Obviously you've never competed in any sort of martial art. That system would cause too many fighters to throw away proper technique and control in order to put on an exciting show for people like you whose only knowledge of martial arts is as a spectator. The takedowns, circling, and pressure lead into damaging blows and are necessary. Yes, it was a boring fight, but you can blame Mousasi equally for it if not more so. Mo was taking him down at will and Gegard was doing nothing to stop it. Once it got to the ground, he played defense and threw soft hammer fists from the bottom. I didn't see much in the way of submission attempts either, just Gegard neutralizing most of Mo's ground and pound. Mo didn't win for having a great offense. He won for having an offense at all, which Mousasis didn't have after the second round.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Once it got to the ground' date=' he played defense and threw soft hammer fists from the bottom.[/quote']

 

No fewer or softer than Mo's. Those shots were laughable at best. At least you could hear Mousasi's connect, even from his back. And you're right about the submissions. There were a few attempts early on, but he should've threatened more, and made Mo think twice about the lay & pray.

 

I'm a Mousasi fan, but I'm extremely disappointed. I couldn't figure out if he looked more frustrated that the takedowns kept happening or more frustrated that he was even in that cage at all. His demeanor went from his usual "laid-back" appearance to "inconvenienced" rather quickly.

 

As for Big John, everyone's bound to make errors. He's probably made less throughout his career than nearly anyone else. I wish he would've stood it up more, but would that have really changed anything, unless Mousasi really connected on the feet before another Mo takedown? With that in mind, I can't be mad at John for Mousasi losing the belt. Blame the scoring system, etc if you must, but in this case, I don't see John's unwillingness to stand them up as being the reason Mousasi lost.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not that is mattered but the point Big John took away for the illegal upkick was legal. I have watched it several times in slow mo and big mos knees were off the ground and he was postured up.

 

That aside Big John reffed mabe the worst title fight I have seen in a month.

 

All that booing at the end means YOU SHOULD STOOD THEM UP ABOUT 20 TIMES!

 

The guy on the top can not simply lay there absorbing punishment. That is not in the definition of remaining active' date='

,

I thought Big John was better.[/quote']

 

I think by the late rounds Big John realized Mousasi wasn't going to stuff any take down so just let the fight happen. I agree, especially in the 3rd and 5th it should have been stood up multiple times, but the result would have just been Mousasi on his back again 30secs later.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree.

 

I think Big John was actually trying to help Mousasi, knowing Mousasi was behind on points. Mousasi was fighting as if the fight was close and did not have a sense of urgency. Big john walked around thinking about it for a long time and finally made the decision to take away the point, which IMO, was to force Mousasi to step it up if he wanted to win. Apparently, Mousasi did not get the hint until the very last minutes of the fight.

 

So, in all actuality, Big John was cheating to help out Mousasi.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Afraid not.

 

That was as poor an excuse for a title fight as I have seen recently. Absolutely unfair to those people who paid good money to sit through it.

 

They paid to see a fight' date=' not an experiment in survival.[/quote']

 

recently?i take it you didnt see anderson silvas last fight,if you did-then well,go home plz

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obviously you've never competed in any sort of martial art. That system would cause too many fighters to throw away proper technique and control in order to put on an exciting show for people like you whose only knowledge of martial arts is as a spectator. The takedowns' date=' circling, and pressure lead into damaging blows and are necessary. Yes, it was a boring fight, but you can blame Mousasi equally for it if not more so. Mo was taking him down at will and Gegard was doing nothing to stop it. Once it got to the ground, he played defense and threw soft hammer fists from the bottom. I didn't see much in the way of submission attempts either, just Gegard neutralizing most of Mo's ground and pound. Mo didn't win for having a great offense. He won for having an offense at all, which Mousasis didn't have after the second round.[/quote']

 

well actually i was trained in army combatives, jiu jitsu and i box for fitness and im quite confident this system is effective because it is used in japan (those ignorant spectators, japanese know nothing about martial arts). it was used in a little promotion called PRIDE and the idea is huge in japan. it just hasn't caught on here because americans for the most part are ignorant rednecks who love to wrassle and watch a snuggle fest.

 

im not some ignorant spectator calling for blood. i watch freestyle wrestling, jiujitsu, boxing, kickboxing, judo, tkd, sambo and i think all these styles have merit. HOWEVER when i watch MMA im watching a FIGHT. you can't win by pin or throw, you need to try to finish the fight. defending does not finish the fight, it's a good idea, but you need to have an active offense to finish and if it does come to the bell then the judges should decide based on effective offensive output.

 

No one ever said that takedowns, footwork, pressure is worthless in fact it's quite the opposite, its valuable to set up a good technique. You can't (for the most part) submit someone without taking it to the ground. Nor can you ground and pound someone out cold on the feet. You'd be hard pressed to land any strike without footwork. So the idea that technique would be thrown out the window is ridiculous, unfounded conjecture.

 

Specifically relating to this fight Mousasi did have some early submission attempts the best was a triangle but lawal defended it well. this next part shows your ignorance of grappling: later on the fight turn stale because although mousasi was striking from the bottom lawal was trapping his hips well and holding down, in place and flat on his back where an active guard is very tough. this again isn't offense but defense. essentially mo didn't want to do anything but to pin mousasi.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think what we have here is a misunderstanding. So just to make this clear, you believe footwork, control, and takedowns, but should not equal points? And just so you know, I wrestled, and trained in jiu jitsu and the friend I was watching the fight with did as well and we both felt that Mousasi lost the fight due to a lack of effective offense after the 2nd round. I did notice that Lawal at most points in the fight was using textbook lay and pray also. My point is simply that neither one executed a strong offense after the 2nd round, but for 3 out of 5 rounds, Lawal was controlling the fight, taking down Mousasi and at least trying to do some ground and pound despite his failure. If you believe that the only things that should score are damaging shots, then Mousasi couldn't have won the last 3 rounds either... so are you saying Gegard gets rounds 1 and 2 while the last three are all draws. The question at that point is which one do you blame for the inactivity later on? I may be wrong, but it seemed like that was mostly Mousasi's fault.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yellow card and getting rid of the 10 point system are what needs to happen.

 

A takedown that leads to nothing should account for no points. What happens to BJJ aces who are more than willing to display their guard? Does their opponent get rewarded or deducted(for being so stupid) for a takedown?

 

Scoring needs to be based on damage and working towards ending the fight.

 

 

And no, Big John did not do anything wrong in the Mousasi/King Mo fight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it just hasn't caught on here because americans for the most part are ignorant rednecks who love to wrassle and watch a snuggle fest.

 

Uh...

 

Let me get this straight. One day Americans are idiots who only like knockouts and a brawls but not perfectly executed techniques. Then the next Americans are ignorant rednecks who only like to "wrassle"?

 

I'm confused...yeah right.

 

Maybe you're one of those rednecks because you don't consider wrestling a form of fighting.

 

Let's say a pure wrestler is put up against a pure boxer and the wrestler constantly takes the boxer down, is it the wrestler's fault for being able to repeatedly take the boxer down?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

concerning the stand up:

 

mousasi worked himself out of a stand up. i guess he figured he was scoring points (i did too) but apparently not more than mo was scoring laying in his guard. this isn't the first time i've seen the guy on the bottom work himself out of a stand up and end up losing to lay and pray. i'd like to know exactly how many strikes = takedown and laying' date=' because Lawal had 9 takedowns which is great skill getting to the ground, but this isn't a wrestling match you can't win by pin.[/quote']

 

Sounds like GSP syndrome!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yellow card and getting rid of the 10 point system are what needs to happen.

 

A takedown that leads to nothing should account for no points. What happens to BJJ aces who are more than willing to display their guard? Does their opponent get rewarded or deducted(for being so stupid) for a takedown?

 

Scoring needs to be based on damage and working towards ending the fight.

 

 

And no' date=' Big John did not do anything wrong in the Mousasi/King Mo fight.[/quote']

 

It isn;t so much that he did anything wrong, but he did nothing right.

 

He is usually far more aggressive with the fighters and maybe the title aspect kept him quiet or something.That fight was poorly officiated. The ref allowed the fighters to do basically nothing for 30 minutes and you heard what the crowd had to say about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It isn;t so much that he did anything wrong' date=' but he did nothing right.

 

He is usually far more aggressive with the fighters and maybe the title aspect kept him quiet or something.That fight was poorly officiated. The ref allowed the fighters to do basically nothing for 30 minutes and you heard what the crowd had to say about it.[/quote']

 

Basing the correct way to ref a fight on the crowd's reactions is a awful idea. John knows quite a alot about MMA. I dont see how an extra stand-up in each round would have done anything to change the outcome of the fight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Basing the correct way to ref a fight on the crowd's reactions is a awful idea. John knows quite a alot about MMA. I dont see how an extra stand-up in each round would have done anything to change the outcome of the fight.

 

It would have made King Mo more tired by forcing him into more take downs.

 

It would also have made King Mo more beat up because every he took Mousasi down Mousasi hit him 5 or 6 times. \

 

Honest to god, how anyone could watch that fight and not be nausiated by the complete lack of action is beyond me.

 

Lack of action = refs responsibility.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some fights' date=' I can agree with that statement.

 

But in Mousasi vs Lawal, Lack of action = poor fight camp conditioning. They were both exhausted after round 1.[/quote']

 

Doresn;t matter.

 

McCarthy was told to leave them on the ground and he did.

 

He stood them up once?

 

YOu ought to be ashamed of yourself Big John.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Uh...

 

Let me get this straight. One day Americans are idiots who only like knockouts and a brawls but not perfectly executed techniques. Then the next Americans are ignorant rednecks who only like to "wrassle"?

 

I'm confused...yeah right.

 

Maybe you're one of those rednecks because you don't consider wrestling a form of fighting.

 

Let's say a pure wrestler is put up against a pure boxer and the wrestler constantly takes the boxer down' date=' is it the wrestler's fault for being able to repeatedly take the boxer down?[/quote']

 

you are confused because you are suggesting i said something i didn't. go back and reread if you must because i didn't say americans were idiots who only like KOs. i did however say for the most part americans are rednecks with a bias toward wrestling.

 

lets say a guy avoids every punch you can throw. is it his fault you can't hit him? you lost because he imposed his will. Kalib Starnes

 

the thing is i know more about wrestling than you. i don't consider a takedown an effort to finish the fight, just a change in position. a huge slam, yes. throw someone on their head, yes. takedown, no. remember this isn't like men in white coats trying to restrain you or cops slapping the cuffs on, its a fight. do your thing, do some damage and try to end it.

 

in the case of your boxer vs wrestler. did the boxer score good shots on the feet? did the wrestler drop elbows on the boxer or work to secure a submission? taking someone down over and over without doing any damage isn't a fight its a wrestling match. if neither opponent is able to do any damage to the other apparently getting the takedown amounted to nothing didn't it? being on top and not hurting your opponent isn't any better than being on bottom and not hurting your opponent. now add striking or submissions from either fighter and you can change that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some fights' date=' I can agree with that statement.

 

But in Mousasi vs Lawal, Lack of action = poor fight camp conditioning. They were both exhausted after round 1.[/quote']

 

this is true but if thats the case the ref should be more johnny on the spot. someone who's been very active on the ground takes a 15 second rest is one thing but when you haven't been dooing anything for an entire round and rest should be a stand up. in this way although the two are tired, you can bring the fight to either a finish or spur on action by not tolerating rest from unactive fighters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...