Easton-Beebe Changed to 'No Decision'

MMAPlayground.com » Community » MMA News Share Forum » Easton-Beebe Changed to 'No Decision'
Sinister
10/8/09 6:18:13PM
"The main event had just gone the distance, and promoter Marcello Foran entered the cage holding his promotion’s bantamweight title belt.

He approached former WEC champion Chase Beebe, of Chicago, who looked to have just taken, at the very least, three of five rounds against champion and hometown favorite Mike Easton at UWC 7 Saturday in Fairfax, Va."

LINK

Such a surprise.
grappler0000
10/8/09 6:45:51PM

Posted by Sinister

Such a surprise.



Actually I'm quite surprised...it's not often that a commission is willing to investigate something like this without a formal complaint. Props to them.
bjj1605
10/8/09 7:06:03PM
I didn't see the fight but I see this as a good sign for MMA. I've seen many a terrible decision and I think that judges need to be held accountable. That is with in reason. I would hate to see every fighter who looses a close decision to get a re-do.

I wish this had been applied to Jeff Curran vs Takeya Mizugaki.
jiujitsufreak74
10/8/09 8:55:01PM
this is an interesting situation. this sets a precedent that has the potential to be a pandora's box. i personally agree with it here in this situation and on one hand it is good to see the commissions getting involved with fights with unfortunate endings, although i would more so like to see them get involved with fights that end with eye pokes and illegal moves moreso than bad decisions. but on the other hand this is setting a precedent where the judges authority is being overruled and questioned, which is a potentially bad thing.

i do agree that the judging has been piss poor lately across north American MMA, but the problem should be solved by preventing the problem instead of the commissions trying to cure it,

so, in summation, i guess i'm torn with this because of the precedent it makes even though i agree with it.
grappler0000
10/8/09 9:17:09PM

Posted by jiujitsufreak74

this is an interesting situation. this sets a precedent that has the potential to be a pandora's box. i personally agree with it here in this situation and on one hand it is good to see the commissions getting involved with fights with unfortunate endings, although i would more so like to see them get involved with fights that end with eye pokes and illegal moves moreso than bad decisions. but on the other hand this is setting a precedent where the judges authority is being overruled and questioned, which is a potentially bad thing.

i do agree that the judging has been piss poor lately across north American MMA, but the problem should be solved by preventing the problem instead of the commissions trying to cure it,

so, in summation, i guess i'm torn with this because of the precedent it makes even though i agree with it.



You bring up some valid points. I think I'm mostly happy because there's actually a commission that stepped forward and said that the professionals representing them may have possibly made an error...California should take note. I do see this as possibly setting a dangerous precedent, but only for Virginia. I don't foresee Nevada or any other major states following suit anytime soon. I do however think they will be paying very close attention to see what comes of this.
mshalosky
10/8/09 9:59:18PM

I didn't see the fight but I see this as a good sign for MMA. I've seen many a terrible decision and I think that judges need to be held accountable. That is with in reason. I would hate to see every fighter who looses a close decision to get a re-do.
I wish this had been applied to Jeff Curran vs Takeya Mizugaki.



I couldnt beleive when the judges said mizugaki had won. Curran controlled the whole fight thru sub attempts, sweeps and position controll probably landed more shots too. That triangle he had on mizugaki was nasty.
Gogoplatapus
10/8/09 10:23:08PM
LINK

UPDATE: Sports Illustrated's Josh Gross says Holland "misspoke" and that while there is an internal investigation underway, there is no regulation that allows for a temporary change in the status of a fight. Stay tuned.
Sinister
10/9/09 5:08:08AM

Posted by grappler0000


Posted by Sinister

Such a surprise.



Actually I'm quite surprised...it's not often that a commission is willing to investigate something like this without a formal complaint. Props to them.



If it was Nevada or California I'd say that but anywhere else I try no to call out cause I don't really see many fights in Virginia
BigBadAl
10/9/09 4:45:08PM
Oh I thought home town advantage only happend in the UK
telnights
10/9/09 6:05:45PM
Well this is a good and bad thing. They are trying to fix the issue after the fact but this wouldn't even be an issue if MMA judging didn't have such a huge problem with it right now. Something really needs to be done to fix this issue so the commissions don't have reasons to over turn decisions.
Jackelope
10/9/09 6:15:01PM

Posted by telnights

Well this is a good and bad thing. They are trying to fix the issue after the fact but this wouldn't even be an issue if MMA judging didn't have such a huge problem with it right now. Something really needs to be done to fix this issue so the commissions don't have reasons to over turn decisions.



Between what you and JJFreak both said I'm starting to think maybe we should all band together and start our own referee school, haha. Seriously.. some of this stuff is just crazy.
jae_1833
10/9/09 9:24:58PM
Ex fighters who are non partial would fix this (non partial would be the hard part) guys like Bas Rutten, Randy when he retires, Liddell if he retires...there are many to pick from.
Related Topics