Should MMA have instant replay?

MMAPlayground.com » MMA General » General MMA Talk » Should MMA have instant replay?
POLL: Should Replay be used in MMA?
yes 48% (15)
no 52% (16)
SpiderSilva
6/19/09 6:52:32AM
emfleek
6/19/09 8:48:36AM
For what? Eye pokes?

No replays. Just rematches.
emfleek
6/19/09 8:53:29AM

The question isn't whether mixed martial arts needs instant replay; the question is how many more fighters will continue to be at risk of serious injury without it.


Okay...this makes absolutely ZERO sense. How will instant replay prevent serious injury? The replay would only be used AFTER the fight is stopped.

You CAN NOT and WILL NOT prevent any type of injury simply by allowing instant replays. If these fighters don't want to get hurt, they need to get a desk job.

Way to go Chris Young. Pay more attention to what you're writing next time.
tdietel01
6/19/09 5:34:15PM
mentalcase
6/19/09 10:07:09PM
NO
Jackelope
6/19/09 10:16:48PM
I can't possibly see how instant replay will help ANYTHING in MMA.

If the focus becomes on overturning decisions, then it wouldn't even matter, because decisions are overturned long after the bout is over. The footage is readily available at that time already.
RNC
6/19/09 11:45:21PM
No need for instant replay. What the UFC needs is detailed scoring criteria for judges and a referee's handbook.

george112
6/20/09 12:10:28AM
im not saying instant replay should be part of mma.but illegal blows that altered the outcome of a fight could be looked at.if that blow was to be in question.for instance the jardine/houston fight..i dnt kno for sure and i should go watch it again before i watch it..bt i remember seein a knee that could have possibly connected to jardines head when he was on a knee.now i kno this probably isnt the case since i havent seen any threads about it.bt o well. use the same point im tryin to make in a future fight

Violence108
6/20/09 12:25:29AM
i think they do, just look at the UFC 85 Nate vs. Thales, every nows that Nate won that fight but he got 2 points taken away and it was STILL a spilt des., the 1st point yeah it was illeagl knee, but the secound one that Herb Dean said was to the back of the head , on a replay it showed it wasnt and that cost him the win, i think MMA should instant replays on things like that.(and if Nate would have won the fight Thales would have never got a title shot and we would not of have to watch that sorry fight between him and Anderson)
EvenFlow
6/20/09 1:00:00PM
Of corse instant replay is needed more, its already used, if the ref makes a bad call it needs to be overturned its not an insult to the ref he just cant see every little thing. Every time you see a groin kick it goes on the moniters, so I really dont get all the No's in this thread since they already use it slightly and they'll use it more in the future mark my words.

Its a very simple way to slowly take the big decisions like fouls and situations like half tapping, out of the refs hands. Which is what MMA needs and will have in the future, no more benefit of the doubt for refs, if a guy taps and the ref dosnt see it, why is that fair to the guy who tapped him out? or if a knee hits the balls and ref dosnt see it, how is that fair to that guy...and his nuts? or if an eye poke is clearly visable how is that fair to that fighter? Maybe the ref needs an earpiece to hear some of the things he cant see.

I really dont care how it works but decisions should be able to be overturned on the spot just like the NFL. Its ridiculous to say No to instant replay seeing as how its already used and would help so much.
Jackelope
6/20/09 1:12:09PM

Posted by EvenFlow

Of corse instant replay is needed more, its already used, if the ref makes a bad call it needs to be overturned its not an insult to the ref he just cant see every little thing. Every time you see a groin kick it goes on the moniters, so I really dont get all the No's in this thread since they already use it slightly and they'll use it more in the future mark my words.

Its a very simple way to slowly take the big decisions like fouls and situations like half tapping, out of the refs hands. Which is what MMA needs and will have in the future, no more benefit of the doubt for refs, if a guy taps and the ref dosnt see it, why is that fair to the guy who tapped him out? or if a knee hits the balls and ref dosnt see it, how is that fair to that guy...and his nuts? or if an eye poke is clearly visable how is that fair to that fighter? Maybe the ref needs an earpiece to hear some of the things he cant see.

I really dont care how it works but decisions should be able to be overturned on the spot just like the NFL. Its ridiculous to say No to instant replay seeing as how its already used and would help so much.



It's not fair to the fighter at all. Does that mean it will change? I doubt it.

What are they going to do? Call the fight, watch the replay, and then have the fighters start fighting again when they realized they got it wrong? Overturn the decision immediately in the ring? Neither is ever going to happen.

Fouls are committed throughout all sports constantly. You can use the instant replay in football because it's been adapted to the rules with stipulations put upon it, but MMA isn't a team sport with downs and timeouts. It won't happen. Boxing would have already done it a long time ago if it was feasible.

The only way watching the replay can possibly change things is in the case of athletic commissions reviewing the tapes afterward. This system is already in place, though. Besides, when you review the tape long afterward it kind of takes the "instant" out of "instant replay" does it not?

EvenFlow
6/20/09 1:33:05PM

Posted by Jackelope


Posted by EvenFlow

Of corse instant replay is needed more, its already used, if the ref makes a bad call it needs to be overturned its not an insult to the ref he just cant see every little thing. Every time you see a groin kick it goes on the moniters, so I really dont get all the No's in this thread since they already use it slightly and they'll use it more in the future mark my words.

Its a very simple way to slowly take the big decisions like fouls and situations like half tapping, out of the refs hands. Which is what MMA needs and will have in the future, no more benefit of the doubt for refs, if a guy taps and the ref dosnt see it, why is that fair to the guy who tapped him out? or if a knee hits the balls and ref dosnt see it, how is that fair to that guy...and his nuts? or if an eye poke is clearly visable how is that fair to that fighter? Maybe the ref needs an earpiece to hear some of the things he cant see.

I really dont care how it works but decisions should be able to be overturned on the spot just like the NFL. Its ridiculous to say No to instant replay seeing as how its already used and would help so much.



It's not fair to the fighter at all. Does that mean it will change? I doubt it.

What are they going to do? Call the fight, watch the replay, and then have the fighters start fighting again when they realized they got it wrong? Overturn the decision immediately in the ring? Neither is ever going to happen.

Fouls are committed throughout all sports constantly. You can use the instant replay in football because it's been adapted to the rules with stipulations put upon it, but MMA isn't a team sport with downs and timeouts. It won't happen. Boxing would have already done it a long time ago if it was feasible.

The only way watching the replay can possibly change things is in the case of athletic commissions reviewing the tapes afterward. This system is already in place, though. Besides, when you review the tape long afterward it kind of takes the "instant" out of "instant replay" does it not?




What would they do? depends on the situation, idk. I mentioned having an ear piece for the ref, which would help tremendously if replay arnt used as much. I guess there are a lot of stipulations but there are timeouts.. technically, when hit in the groin you get 5 mins to recover and the minute between rounds. The scale I'm talking about is more so the distant future as the sport evolves further (and I could talk about the future..in general forever lol) but to say no to instant replay at all is kinda saying "whatever happens, happens, these guys are fighters not fairies, go get a desk job if you cant handle it" and its incorrect because like said replay IS used already, granted not to change the result but used none the less.

Actually if you look at footballs evolution it resembles MMA in a way, Football used to be a no rule backyard sport now its the most popular sport in America with all sorts of rules and replays. And MMA isnt much different in its evolution from a no rule combat sport to a semi-controlled combat sport with rules and some replay.
Jackelope
6/20/09 1:38:36PM

Posted by EvenFlow

What would they do? depends on the situation, idk. I mentioned having an ear piece for the ref, which would help tremendously if replay arnt used as much. I guess there are a lot of stipulations but there are timeouts.. technically, when hit in the groin you get 5 mins to recover and the minute between rounds. The scale I'm talking about is more so the distant future as the sport evolves further (and I could talk about the future..in general forever lol) but to say no to instant replay at all is kinda saying "whatever happens, happens, these guys are fighters not fairies, go get a desk job if you cant handle it" and its incorrect because like said replay IS used already, granted not to change the result but used none the less.

Actually if you look at footballs evolution it resembles MMA in a way, Football used to be a no rule backyard sport now its the most popular sport in America with all sorts of rules and replays. And MMA isnt much different in its evolution from a no rule combat sport to a semi-controlled combat sport with rules and some replay.



But can you give me an exact example of how it would be used? Obviously I don't agree, but I'm willing to hear the argument. I'm seriously sitting here trying to think of how it could possibly be used.
Aaronno9
6/20/09 2:00:40PM
I think it should be implemented. But I struggle to think of how it would work. I mean, obviously it couldnt be based on just a fighter asking the ref to veiw a replay, otherwise every loosing fighter would do it just on the off chance the ref will decide to continue the fight. But everytime I see the Johnson Burns fight I get pissed off. In a perfect would, the ref could of saw a replay of the fight and overturned the decision from a Burns win to a win to Johnson via DQ.
EvenFlow
6/20/09 2:42:44PM

Posted by Jackelope


Posted by EvenFlow

What would they do? depends on the situation, idk. I mentioned having an ear piece for the ref, which would help tremendously if replay arnt used as much. I guess there are a lot of stipulations but there are timeouts.. technically, when hit in the groin you get 5 mins to recover and the minute between rounds. The scale I'm talking about is more so the distant future as the sport evolves further (and I could talk about the future..in general forever lol) but to say no to instant replay at all is kinda saying "whatever happens, happens, these guys are fighters not fairies, go get a desk job if you cant handle it" and its incorrect because like said replay IS used already, granted not to change the result but used none the less.

Actually if you look at footballs evolution it resembles MMA in a way, Football used to be a no rule backyard sport now its the most popular sport in America with all sorts of rules and replays. And MMA isnt much different in its evolution from a no rule combat sport to a semi-controlled combat sport with rules and some replay.



But can you give me an exact example of how it would be used? Obviously I don't agree, but I'm willing to hear the argument. I'm seriously sitting here trying to think of how it could possibly be used.



While I respect that I fail to see why its such a big deal not to use it for almost any foul or act of cheating, if the ref misses something, someone watching the fight/replay can relay what he mightve missed with an ear piece then the ref can stop it like he would if he saw it and then clarifiy the call showing the replay (like the UFC does anyway when a fighter is fouled or cheated). For lack of a better example thats what shouldve happened with AJ vs Burns, and I also still fail to see how that result could arise seeing as how they saw the replay before the result was announced.

Whats the problem with this solution? I wanna hear more from you, because not only does it give other people power in the decision (which in turn will make reffing more perceptive) but makes replay useful and fair. Obviously it'll never be like the NFL anytime soon but I think my solution is reasonable.

EDIT- I'm talking about overturning it before the result is Announced, and when a fighter is fouled they show the replay anyway so...idk what else to say, replay is not gonna go away, it'll only get used more imho.
State_Champ
6/20/09 3:07:42PM

Posted by Aaronno9

I think it should be implemented. But I struggle to think of how it would work. I mean, obviously it couldnt be based on just a fighter asking the ref to veiw a replay, otherwise every loosing fighter would do it just on the off chance the ref will decide to continue the fight. But everytime I see the Johnson Burns fight I get pissed off. In a perfect would, the ref could of saw a replay of the fight and overturned the decision from a Burns win to a win to Johnson via DQ.



I don't even think a replay should've been necessary for the Burns vs Johnson fight. I can never believe the call that the ref made. It seemed so clear that Rumble had been put out by something other than a punch. I don't know what was going on with that call but if replay can stop things like that then I would be all for it.
Jackelope
6/20/09 3:38:42PM
Ahh, I see what you mean.

I just wanted you to elaborate on a specific situation, to see how it would be used. Take, for example, the Crocop vs. Al Turk fight.

Now, when I watched the fight I thought Crocop caught Al Turk with that slip and counter, but obviously it was the eye poke just before. I understand what you're saying about someone sitting ringside being able to identify that and say it to the ref through an ear piece. However, with instant replay, it would take them at least 5 or 10 seconds to identify this and then relay it. Meanwhile, the ref has the job of paying attention to what is going on in the Octagon at that current moment while somebody is trying to tell him about something that happened 10 seconds ago. So you see how it could cause a problem. Not to mention the fact that within those 10 seconds Al Turk was already on his backside against the cage with Crocop beating the **** out of him.

So you see that while it is a nice idea, it's just not feasible.
george112
6/20/09 7:26:16PM

Posted by Jackelope

Ahh, I see what you mean.

I just wanted you to elaborate on a specific situation, to see how it would be used. Take, for example, the Crocop vs. Al Turk fight.

Now, when I watched the fight I thought Crocop caught Al Turk with that slip and counter, but obviously it was the eye poke just before. I understand what you're saying about someone sitting ringside being able to identify that and say it to the ref through an ear piece. However, with instant replay, it would take them at least 5 or 10 seconds to identify this and then relay it. Meanwhile, the ref has the job of paying attention to what is going on in the Octagon at that current moment while somebody is trying to tell him about something that happened 10 seconds ago. So you see how it could cause a problem. Not to mention the fact that within those 10 seconds Al Turk was already on his backside against the cage with Crocop beating the **** out of him.

So you see that while it is a nice idea, it's just not feasible.



like i said in my earlier post about this.if the illegal blow altered the outcome of the fight which in some fights ive seen it has.then it should be brought to the attention of the judges AND the ref after the fight by the someone sitting ringside you mentioned.if in fact the illegal blow did alter the outcome of the fight an the replay proved it.it should be declared a NC not a DQ to the person who committed the foul

just my thoughts
Jackelope
6/20/09 8:52:06PM

Posted by george112


Posted by Jackelope

Ahh, I see what you mean.

I just wanted you to elaborate on a specific situation, to see how it would be used. Take, for example, the Crocop vs. Al Turk fight.

Now, when I watched the fight I thought Crocop caught Al Turk with that slip and counter, but obviously it was the eye poke just before. I understand what you're saying about someone sitting ringside being able to identify that and say it to the ref through an ear piece. However, with instant replay, it would take them at least 5 or 10 seconds to identify this and then relay it. Meanwhile, the ref has the job of paying attention to what is going on in the Octagon at that current moment while somebody is trying to tell him about something that happened 10 seconds ago. So you see how it could cause a problem. Not to mention the fact that within those 10 seconds Al Turk was already on his backside against the cage with Crocop beating the **** out of him.

So you see that while it is a nice idea, it's just not feasible.



like i said in my earlier post about this.if the illegal blow altered the outcome of the fight which in some fights ive seen it has.then it should be brought to the attention of the judges AND the ref after the fight by the someone sitting ringside you mentioned.if in fact the illegal blow did alter the outcome of the fight an the replay proved it.it should be declared a NC not a DQ to the person who committed the foul

just my thoughts



I see your reasoning for saying this, but I think there's something you're missing.

Basically the athletic commissions don't want to turn one single match into an act of congress. That is, they don't want too many hands in the basket. Like I said before- in instances like this there are appeals that can be made to the athletic commission after the fact. There is a system already in place, in other words. I understand some people get rubbed wrong when matches don't get overturned, but they can't undermine every single decision their refs make.

Like I said before- I understand all of you guys' reasoning for wanting it to be this way, but being realistic about it, I'm here to tell you that it will NEVER happen. Something like this would have occured already in boxing if there were any chance for it to rear its head in MMA.

I'm not saying you guys are wrong or dumb for thinking this way, mind you. I'm just presenting the case for why it can't work.
george112
6/20/09 10:41:42PM

Posted by Jackelope


Posted by george112


Posted by Jackelope

Ahh, I see what you mean.

I just wanted you to elaborate on a specific situation, to see how it would be used. Take, for example, the Crocop vs. Al Turk fight.

Now, when I watched the fight I thought Crocop caught Al Turk with that slip and counter, but obviously it was the eye poke just before. I understand what you're saying about someone sitting ringside being able to identify that and say it to the ref through an ear piece. However, with instant replay, it would take them at least 5 or 10 seconds to identify this and then relay it. Meanwhile, the ref has the job of paying attention to what is going on in the Octagon at that current moment while somebody is trying to tell him about something that happened 10 seconds ago. So you see how it could cause a problem. Not to mention the fact that within those 10 seconds Al Turk was already on his backside against the cage with Crocop beating the **** out of him.

So you see that while it is a nice idea, it's just not feasible.



like i said in my earlier post about this.if the illegal blow altered the outcome of the fight which in some fights ive seen it has.then it should be brought to the attention of the judges AND the ref after the fight by the someone sitting ringside you mentioned.if in fact the illegal blow did alter the outcome of the fight an the replay proved it.it should be declared a NC not a DQ to the person who committed the foul

just my thoughts



I see your reasoning for saying this, but I think there's something you're missing.

Basically the athletic commissions don't want to turn one single match into an act of congress. That is, they don't want too many hands in the basket. Like I said before- in instances like this there are appeals that can be made to the athletic commission after the fact. There is a system already in place, in other words. I understand some people get rubbed wrong when matches don't get overturned, but they can't undermine every single decision their refs make.

Like I said before- I understand all of you guys' reasoning for wanting it to be this way, but being realistic about it, I'm here to tell you that it will NEVER happen. Something like this would have occured already in boxing if there were any chance for it to rear its head in MMA.

I'm not saying you guys are wrong or dumb for thinking this way, mind you. I'm just presenting the case for why it can't work.



Jack i see the points your making loud and clear.an they make sense.but the instant replay would only be used when a fight was altered by the foul committed. ex: poke in the eye, knee to a grounded fighter an so on. something that would cause the fighter to be momentarily defenseless.i excluded kicks to the groin because in my opinion they dont often effectively alter the fight because 1.they still can defend themselves. an 2. refs are pretty good at seein them MOST of the time.also refs tend to miss things when there is heavy activity being made.i think this is due to the crowd and the refs feed off the energy an as soon as they here the oos an ahhs of the crowd the make hasty stoppages or just plain miss blatant illegal blows.which therefore calls for some kind of replay or SOMETHING to stop fighters from losing due to an illegal blow or hasty refs.BUT after all of that your right the more i think about it. replay would be hard to use in MMA.the only point im trying to make is to do atleast something to officiate the officials.
Playground_Samurai
6/21/09 6:49:55AM
The only time I would like to see it used is during questionable finishes(i.e. burns/johnson) If the finish is determined to be caused by an illegal strike, then the win should be overturned to a NC.

Does anybody know why the AC wouldn't overturn the Johnson/Burns call? I can see no plausible reason for the AC to not overturn that?
State_Champ
6/21/09 7:57:53AM
I heard the AC rarely overturns any call.
george112
6/21/09 4:35:02PM

Posted by State_Champ

I heard the AC rarely overturns any call.



which is a perfect reason for replay to be used.and if not replay they need to try something else.because the current system obviously isnt working
Joemoplata
6/22/09 11:14:04AM
You are forgetting one absolutely critical thing:

Pay per view time windows.

For events like the UFC that are PPV events, they are paying for a block of time and charging us for that block of time. For those of us that remember missing the ending on the original airing of Royce vs Severn because SEG didn't plan for their time very well within that window, I don't want anything inserted into the allocation of time other than showing me more of the preliminary matches. The last thing I want to pay for is some guy reviewing tape while we sit and listen to Rogan talk about how much he is in love with Anderson Silva.

It's one thing to sit through an NFL game for this, you're not paying for a block of time that is going to get turned off if it goes over.
mkiv9secsupra
6/22/09 4:38:04PM

Posted by gspfan
Does anybody know why the AC wouldn't overturn the Johnson/Burns call? I can see no plausible reason for the AC to not overturn that?



According to the state's athletic commission, any fight ending in a TKO cannot be overturned. The ref thought Johnson was rocked and not poked in the eye. Just on of those rulings that need to be fine tuned.
Jackelope
6/22/09 4:52:53PM

Posted by Joemoplata

You are forgetting one absolutely critical thing:

Pay per view time windows.

For events like the UFC that are PPV events, they are paying for a block of time and charging us for that block of time. For those of us that remember missing the ending on the original airing of Royce vs Severn because SEG didn't plan for their time very well within that window, I don't want anything inserted into the allocation of time other than showing me more of the preliminary matches. The last thing I want to pay for is some guy reviewing tape while we sit and listen to Rogan talk about how much he is in love with Anderson Silva.

It's one thing to sit through an NFL game for this, you're not paying for a block of time that is going to get turned off if it goes over.



This is just one tiny part of the numerous problems I was alluding to in my posts.

Like I said, in theory, it's a great idea. I just have serious doubts about the real life implementation.
jiujitsufreak74
6/22/09 5:05:31PM
instant replay would serve no purpose imo. the only reason to use them would be to over turn decisions like in the CC / Turk fight like people have said. however, this should not be the referees or the judges responsibility but rather the AC's responsibility to overturn it. instant replay, like jackelope said, wouldn't really do much to help those types of situations in real time. what should happen, however, is the AC has to take their head out of their asses and realize that some fights should be called NC when an illegal blow occurs. replay should be used to overturn decisions at the AC level, not the referee level. therefore, instant replay would serve no purpose in MMA imo.
Related Topics