Pick'em Leagues: THE BIG SHOW CASUAL BEST OF THE REST Single Event PvP: FANTASY POOLS Betting Leagues: THE BIG SHOW BEST OF THE REST
  MMA Playground 4.0 is live!     Returning members: check out the patch notes     New members: visit our getting started guide, read the FAQ's and start playing!

Jon Jones to Protest Loss To Matt Hamill

Print  
  Page 1 of 3     1     2     3  
Posted By Message

RhythmAndStyle

MMA Sensei

RhythmAndStyle Avatar
6





 
 
 


 
 
Posts:1,660
Career:2,348-1,408
Joined:Jan 2008
Camp: Project Mayhem
Chips:
170
Jon should have been deducted a point for the accidental illegal blow. Matt should have been treated like we treat the Brazilians and given 5 minutes to regroup and offered a translator so the ref could make the right call and understand Matt could not continue due to his shoulder injury not the blow.This should be a NC for both fighters but not a loss. Hammil continued with an injured Shoulder and only complained once the action was stopped (warrior) but the fight was stopped based on the shoulder injury in our opinion.

Link

Post #1   12/8/09 6:13:01PM   

RyanC

MMA Sensei

RyanC Avatar
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:1,290
Career:472-317
Joined:Aug 2009
Camp: Journalistas
Chips:
128
I think Jones' camp should have just let this go. I understand what they are saying, and I don't really disagree, but the chances this works aren't that good, and it looks like a desperation move to me. The loss isn't that big of a deal. Anyone who saw that fight will look at Jones as though he won.

Post #2   12/8/09 6:18:08PM   

JimiMak

WarWagon Never Die!

JimiMak Avatar
1
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:1,851
Career:454-333
Joined:Jan 2007
Camp: JT WarWagon
Chips:
219
He has no argument, esp since the instant replay was used, illegal blow + stoppage = dq. simple.

Post #3   12/8/09 6:33:18PM   

warglory

Heavyweight Champ

warglory Avatar
1
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:4,023
Career:535-344
Joined:Feb 2007
Chips:
776

Posted by JimiMak

He has no argument, esp since the instant replay was used, illegal blow + stoppage = dq. simple.



QFT

Post #4   12/8/09 6:48:35PM   

loonytnt

MMA Sensei

loonytnt Avatar
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:2,363
Career:299-241
Joined:Jul 2007
Camp: Diaz Fan Club
Chips:
158
jones was in the wrong, imo the fight was over he won the ref should have stopped it. but the ref didnt then those elbows =/ which werent the only ones like that he hit him with. i think he did 2 of those elbows before the 2 that stopped it ,then protest it? just leave it imo

Post #5   12/8/09 6:58:46PM   

Kpro

I STAB WATERBEDS!

Kpro Avatar
17
 
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:7,085
Career:2,416-1,238
Joined:Jan 2007
Camp: The Ringers
Chips:
1,854
I don't think it'll get changed, but it's worth a shot if I'm Jones' camp.

_______________________________________
If I was 50 years younger I'd kick your ass!

Post #6   12/8/09 7:00:20PM   

EliasG

In Full Mount

EliasG Avatar
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:586
Career:222-176
Joined:Oct 2007
Chips:
85
Don't see a problem with it. It's all technical. He "lost" because of the technical issues of a rule, not because he "lost." If it is found that "technically" they should have done something else, then he should pursue that. It's his management doing their job. I was under the impression that an illegal blow causing a DQ had to be the CAUSE of the fighter's inability to continue. If that is the case in this particular fight and that is the language of the NSAC rules, he has a very strong case. If the rules are more vague as in "if an illegal blow occurs and the fighter is unable to continue the fight will result in a DQ" they would have to argue that there is an implicit link between the illegal foul and an injury that prevents continuance. That is a bit harder but not undoable. THe NSAC came out and said, I believe that the fight was called a DQ because of a facial wound. if the illegal blow was shown NOT to have caused that wound, then it could also be argued that the decision should be changed to a NC.

In my opinion the fight should ahve been called a no contest. This was not a Badr Hari moment where the fighter kicked a downed opponent in the head causing him to be unable to fight. The illegal blow did not cause the cut, and the fighter was not able to respond because he was deaf. When the fighter did respond, he shared that his SHOULDER was dislocated and he couldn't continue--meaning that it was not linked to the illegal blow whatsoever.

So it really comes down to the specifics of the language in the NSAC rule books. Which is of course, why lawyers are paid money. :)

Post #7   12/8/09 7:05:53PM   

bjj1605

Heavyweight Champ

bjj1605 Avatar
6





 
 
 


 
 
Posts:3,204
Career:1,500-882
Joined:Oct 2007
Camp: Dark Horse
Chips:
678
Good. I was hoping he'd do this. The end of that fight had nothing to do with those elbows. Considering the damage jones had already done from the mount and the dislocated shoulder, the fight wouldn't have continued with or without those shots. To say otherwise is absolutely f'ing ridiculous (no offense if you disagree).

Think about it: Do any of you honestly believe, that had those elbows never been thrown, that the outcome of the fight would be any different?

That question right there is the key. Yes the elbows were illegal (due to a bad rule to begin with, but thats beside the point.) But did they affect the outcome of the fight? Would Hammil have had any chance of winning with out them? Were they the proximate/direct cause of the stoppage?

I think that Jones already had the fight won and the damage done with the elbows was negligible and unimportant in regards to the outcome of the fight.

Post #8   12/8/09 7:29:10PM   

KingCreep

MMA Regular

KingCreep Avatar
1
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:67
Career:418-327
Joined:Nov 2007
Chips:
8

Posted by bjj1605

Good. I was hoping he'd do this. The end of that fight had nothing to do with those elbows. Considering the damage jones had already done from the mount and the dislocated shoulder, the fight wouldn't have continued with or without those shots. To say otherwise is absolutely f'ing ridiculous (no offense if you disagree).

Think about it: Do any of you honestly believe, that had those elbows never been thrown, that the outcome of the fight would be any different?

That question right there is the key. Yes the elbows were illegal (due to a bad rule to begin with, but thats beside the point.) But did they affect the outcome of the fight? Would Hammil have had any chance of winning with out them? Were they the proximate/direct cause of the stoppage?

I think that Jones already had the fight won and the damage done with the elbows was negligible and unimportant in regards to the outcome of the fight.



it really doesn't matter if the outcome would've been different, he threw illegal blows, hamill couldn't see and likely had his head rattled too much to even walk to his corner so what else is there to question? if jones had been deducted a point and the fight continued, it would've been no different than lauzon/miller in season 5, sure miller's a tough dude for continuing but it doesn't give him any chance in the world to win the fight.
in the end, rules are rules and they are there to protect fighters, i'd rather see hamill look like lesser of a man for taking the win then to have brain damage from fighting after taking dangerous blows to the skull. same reason stomps and soccer kicks aren't allowed, it's not a fight to the death, if you want fights with no rules or regulations, watch the joke organizations over in japan.

Post #9   12/8/09 7:51:25PM   

grappler0000

MODular Approach

grappler0000 Avatar
25
 
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:10,137
Career:2,705-1,497
Joined:Mar 2007
Camp: The Ringers
Chips:
2,486

Posted by KingCreep


Posted by bjj1605

Good. I was hoping he'd do this. The end of that fight had nothing to do with those elbows. Considering the damage jones had already done from the mount and the dislocated shoulder, the fight wouldn't have continued with or without those shots. To say otherwise is absolutely f'ing ridiculous (no offense if you disagree).

Think about it: Do any of you honestly believe, that had those elbows never been thrown, that the outcome of the fight would be any different?

That question right there is the key. Yes the elbows were illegal (due to a bad rule to begin with, but thats beside the point.) But did they affect the outcome of the fight? Would Hammil have had any chance of winning with out them? Were they the proximate/direct cause of the stoppage?

I think that Jones already had the fight won and the damage done with the elbows was negligible and unimportant in regards to the outcome of the fight.



it really doesn't matter if the outcome would've been different, he threw illegal blows, hamill couldn't see and likely had his head rattled too much to even walk to his corner so what else is there to question? if jones had been deducted a point and the fight continued, it would've been no different than lauzon/miller in season 5, sure miller's a tough dude for continuing but it doesn't give him any chance in the world to win the fight.
in the end, rules are rules and they are there to protect fighters, i'd rather see hamill look like lesser of a man for taking the win then to have brain damage from fighting after taking dangerous blows to the skull. same reason stomps and soccer kicks aren't allowed, it's not a fight to the death, if you want fights with no rules or regulations, watch the joke organizations over in japan.



Forget everything else for a minute...do you truly believe the 2 illegal strikes did more damage than the 87 legal ones, just because of a few degree difference in angles? And I'm not even trying to argue the rules here. Steve didn't stop the fight prior to the last two strikes, but felt the need to do so afterward. Just put this into perspective for a moment. Jones threw 87 legal punches/elbows that Mazz didn't find to be fight-ending in nature. Jones slightly rotates his arm and the next two strikes are now fight-ending strikes? It doesn't make sense. Keith Kizer's official statement was that the fight was stopped due to facial wounds...nobody thus far has been able to show me which facial wounds were not present prior to the illegal elbows. The cut on Matt's nose was already present. And according to the NSAC, instant replay was used to support the fact that the illegal elbows contributed to damage that caused the stoppage. If you can show me what I'm missing, I'm completely willing to reconsider my stance. I'm not arguing anything about the illegal strikes...I'm well aware that Jones threw them. I have a problem with how Mazz stopped the match, the reason for stopping the match, and how everything just doesn't add up. With that said, I really don't see the AC doing much about the protest.

Last edited 12/8/09 9:06PM server time by grappler0000
Edit note/reason: n/a

_______________________________________

Post #10   12/8/09 9:05:27PM   

John_Jobber

MMA Regular

John_Jobber Avatar
1
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:106
Career:430-261
Joined:Mar 2007
Chips:
42
Jones should keep quiet here and take the high road. He'll make more money in the long run if he man's up, acts like a gentleman, and lets the UFC give him a fight obviously worthy of his skill and therefore higher paying. All he's going to accomplish with this legal crap is pissing off UFC brass thereby costing him popularity, airtime, and pay. Not to mention a huge distraction from training.

He should maintain the high level of class he showed in the ring just after the fight - not be sucked into this legal crap.

Post #11   12/8/09 9:22:10PM   

NatedawgThaM

MMA Sensei

NatedawgThaM Avatar
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:2,901
Career:676-444
Joined:Jun 2007
Chips:
339

Posted by JimiMak

He has no argument, esp since the instant replay was used, illegal blow + stoppage = dq. simple.



What do you mean no arguement? That was obvious BS. Horrible call. Those elbows didn't put Hamil away. Hamil wouldn't get up because of his shoulder. Not because of those elbows. You didn't hear hamil complain, he probably didn't even know they were illegal. he was talking about his shoulder the whole time afterwards. he couldn't continue because of an injury non-relating to that elbow. And in every other fight thats a TKO win. See Thiago Silva-James Irvin, Anthony Johnson-Kevin Burns 2, and every cut stoppage out there.

If they were going to DQ him then they should have done it right away because they then left it up to hamil if he could continue and he wouldn't, but not because of those elbows. But because of his hurt shoulder. Non-Illegal injury = TKO(injury) next to there win column. Simple.

Last edited 12/8/09 9:29PM server time by Natedawgtham
Edit note/reason: n/a

Post #12   12/8/09 9:27:48PM   

grappler0000

MODular Approach

grappler0000 Avatar
25
 
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:10,137
Career:2,705-1,497
Joined:Mar 2007
Camp: The Ringers
Chips:
2,486

Posted by John_Jobber

Jones should keep quiet here and take the high road. He'll make more money in the long run if he man's up, acts like a gentleman, and lets the UFC give him a fight obviously worthy of his skill and therefore higher paying. All he's going to accomplish with this legal crap is pissing off UFC brass thereby costing him popularity, airtime, and pay. Not to mention a huge distraction from training.

He should maintain the high level of class he showed in the ring just after the fight - not be sucked into this legal crap.



Every once in a while, it's alright to stand up for what you feel is right. He didn't make an ass of himself in his post-fight and is handling it professionally though the proper avenue. I'm not sure what else someone can expect. If a bad decision cost you money and marketability, then why not fight it? He's not disrespecting his opponent, so I don't see the harm. I'm really confused at how he's gonna piss off UFC brass though. How would raising a complaint with the NSAC piss off the UFC? If anything, Dana would probably be proud that someone is trying to make Mazzagatti be responsible for his actions.

_______________________________________

Post #13   12/8/09 9:39:57PM   

SmileR

Buy the ticket, take the ride

SmileR Avatar
5




 
 
 


 
 
Posts:3,347
Career:1,284-761
Joined:Dec 2007
Chips:
988

Posted by NatedawgThaM


Posted by JimiMak

He has no argument, esp since the instant replay was used, illegal blow + stoppage = dq. simple.



What do you mean no arguement? That was obvious BS. Horrible call. Those elbows didn't put Hamil away. Hamil wouldn't get up because of his shoulder. Not because of those elbows. You didn't hear hamil complain, he probably didn't even know they were illegal. he was talking about his shoulder the whole time afterwards. he couldn't continue because of an injury non-relating to that elbow. And in every other fight thats a TKO win. See Thiago Silva-James Irvin, Anthony Johnson-Kevin Burns 2, and every cut stoppage out there.

If they were going to DQ him then they should have done it right away because they then left it up to hamil if he could continue and he wouldn't, but not because of those elbows. But because of his hurt shoulder. Non-Illegal injury = TKO(injury) next to there win column. Simple.



The problem isn't with the damage he did more the fact he used an illegal move. I don't blame him for contesting the result but it wont change the fact that it was an illegal blow.
It wasn't until Mazzagatti consulted the instant replay (the first time it has ever been used) that the decision was made. I'm not arguing the fact that Jones wouldn't have won or that he wasn't dominating but the right call was made.
An illegal blow to the eye (stupid as the rule is about 12-6 elbows) cost Jones the match.
It was a clear violation and unfortunately for him it cost him.
If you look at the Irvin fight he blew his knee out from himself and it was from a perfectly legal move, the Johnson - Burns fight was unfortunate but instant replays weren't available then so its not fair comparing the two.

In the Lauzon - Miller fight where Miller was hit with a huge knee while his knees where down the ref stopped the fight took a point exactly the same as in the Jones - Hamill fight but with out the use of instant replay he was left with only Millers decision to go on.
After the fight everyone involved said the fight should have been stopped but it was the fighters choice, instant replays give the ref a better insight into the foul and allow better judgment to be called upon.
Its just a shame it cost a fighter who was dominating a win and took his unbeaten record.

_______________________________________
"RIP Evan Tanner, a real life trail blazer."

I was born to lead, not to read!!!!

Post #14   12/8/09 9:46:43PM   

grappler0000

MODular Approach

grappler0000 Avatar
25
 
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:10,137
Career:2,705-1,497
Joined:Mar 2007
Camp: The Ringers
Chips:
2,486

Posted by SmileR

The problem isn't with the damage he did more the fact he used an illegal move..



Actually the damage is 50% of the puzzle. The point of watching the replay was to determine whether the illegal blows contributed to the damage, that resulted in the fight being stopped. The fight was stopped due to "facial wounds" as the NSAC has put it. According to them, the replay confirmed their belief that the illegal elbows contributed to those wounds. I call shenanigans. I've been begging for someone to show me the wounds that were not present prior to the illegal strikes...and everyone has been silent so far.

_______________________________________

Post #15   12/8/09 9:59:29PM   
 
  Page 1 of 3     1     2     3