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

UFC LHW Champ Jon Jones Apologises And Accepts Full Responsibility For UFC 151 Cancellation

Print  
  Page 3 of 4     1     2     3     4  
Posted By Message

george112

The Playground OG

george112 Avatar
2

 
 
 


 
 
Posts:5,355
Career:1,237-808
Joined:Jan 2007
Camp: Playground Legends
Chips:
1,057

Posted by Aether


Posted by george112


Posted by prophecy033


Posted by Aether


Posted by Dberntson

Heres the deal, if you are employed by a company every once in a while you have to take jobs/assignments you don't like. Example, my coworker quit. As a esult I have been covering his workload and mine for the last two months. We hired a new guy, but I am still covering the majority of the work. Here were my options: accept the extra work and keep my job or refuse to work late and get fired. The employer makes the rules. If you accept the paycheck, do the job.



That's not true at all. He doesn't have to take the fight, as evidenced by the fact that he didn't take the fight and still has his job. The employer makes some of the rules, and labour boards and courts make others that the employer has to follow, otherwise any employer could make all kinds of ridiculous demands of their workers and just say "don't like it? fuck off and we won't pay you."

The options are not do whatever your employer tells you or get fired. That's a false assertion that you made and based your argument off of. The parameters of "the job" are outlined clearly from the beginning, that's why they sign contracts. Employers don't get to tell you to do things you didn't agree to do when you accepted the job and fire you when you refuse.

Dude, my boss can fire me for sneezing in his direction. He can fire me for whatever he wants because he is the owner of the company and not a union. If it was union then yeah, you would be right but since I'm not a union member I can get fired for whatever he wants to fire me for. Truth



Proph is right.

The UFC isn't the NFL NBA or MLB.

How do you think guys get cut so easily. Jones being champion saved his ass. Had he not been champion I feel Dana would have been pretty close to letting him go. But then again if he wasn't champion we wouldn't be arguing about this.




Because they have something called an "escape clause" in the contracts they sign. Which is why I said:

"The parameters of "the job" are outlined clearly from the beginning, that's why they sign contracts."



So does that mean you agree that Jones could hypothetically get cut for no reason in particular?

_______________________________________
Ron Paul 2016

Post #31   8/26/12 12:11:59AM   

Aether

Heavyweight Champ

Aether Avatar
4



 
 
 


 
 
Posts:5,068
Career:946-505
Joined:Apr 2007
Chips:
1,039

Posted by Dberntson

To aether:


You live in canada, so maybe the labor laws are different, but in the States the majority of the states are employment at will, meaning both the employer and the employee can terminate employment for any reason other than race, religion or sex orientation.

The other explaination is you are either in high school or college and have never had a real job.




Let's go through this step by step.

Your post is clearly an assertion that it is Jones' "job" to accept the fight with Sonnen, because the boss makes the rules and you have no choice but to follow them.

I responded by saying that no, the boss doesn't just make the rules, the rules are agreed upon by both parties when you start the job, and the employer has certain rules they have to follow. Pretty clearly the implication being that Jones is NOT contractually obligated to accept a fight on 1 week's notice.

The UFC may or may not have an escape clause as part of their contracts, it may or may not be difficult to successfully charge a wrongful termination case, none of those points are relevant to the statement that Jones is not compelled to accept the fight, which was the assertion I was responding to.

Post #32   8/26/12 12:16:39AM   

Dberntson

In Full Mount

Dberntson Avatar
4



 
 
 


 
 
Posts:521
Career:1,052-611
Joined:Jun 2009
Camp: TKO
Chips:
188
Even with an escape clause the UFC can strip him of the belt or refuse to book a fight. The fans will drop Jon jones a lot faster then the UFC. JJ can try to sell his skills elsewhere but he won't make anywhere close to the money as he will in the UFC. Belator can't afford him, and no one is going to pay to see him beat up regional fighters. JJ needs the UFC more then they need him.

Post #33   8/26/12 12:22:06AM   

Aether

Heavyweight Champ

Aether Avatar
4



 
 
 


 
 
Posts:5,068
Career:946-505
Joined:Apr 2007
Chips:
1,039
Well, I said escape clause, but that's more than likely not accurate, since an escape clause can be used by both parties.

Entry level fighters may have some clause that lets the UFC get rid of them for absolutely any reason, but I doubt very much that more established fighters and especially champions don't have protection against arbitrary release. They may have a clause something like this:

"Any unwarranted behaviour associated with the sport of Mixed Martial Arts will not be
tolerated by G4 MMA Fighters Ltd who aims to provide a moral and ethical working
relationship. Any substance abuse leading to disqualification may render the contract void at the discretion of Gary Cross. Any substance abuse/intoxication or failure to adhere to point 14whether intentional or otherwise that results in a fight being disqualified will render the MMA Fighter Mr ……………………………………, liable to a flat administration fee to G4 MMA Fighters Ltd of £100 (one hundred pounds) OR 10% whichever is the greatest amount, based upon the potential revenue that would have been earned if the bout/fight had taken place."

Which would allow them to fire people for a pretty broad spectrum of reasons, but I sincerely doubt that the champions have no protection at all and sign contracts saying that they can be released at absolutely any time for any reason at all, or that the UFC could possibly compel anyone to accept a fight on such short notice.

Post #34   8/26/12 12:46:37AM   

bjj1605

Heavyweight Champ

bjj1605 Avatar
7
 
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:3,213
Career:1,543-899
Joined:Oct 2007
Camp: Dark Horse
Chips:
680
There are very few federal labor laws in the states. Basically you just can't fire someone for being part of a protected class. Other than that, there are great variations among states. The first thing you have to figure out is whether or not your state is a "right to work" state. Even then there can be a lot of differences across state lines. But either way, the employer doesn't have all the power.

If you agree to a set of responsibilities and they ask you to do something outside that agreement, you have the option to refuse. In some states that means termination, in others, you are safe.


As for this so called "apology".....am I missing something?

Seems heavily qualified to me. "If someone has to take the blame, I will accept full responsibility..."

"I feel terrible about the way that was handled" as opposed to "the way I handled things."

Not much of an apology really. More like a weak PR stunt that he was coached into doing. Unfortunately, he wasn't sincere and it came through in his words.

Post #35   8/26/12 12:46:59AM   

Bustamante-Aoki

Standup Guy

Bustamante-Aoki Avatar
16
 
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:321
Career:1,900-1,154
Joined:May 2009
Camp: Playground Legends
Chips:
115
Not sure how this turned into a debate about labor laws, but glad I'm not the only one who noticed that apology was B.S. Thread title says "Jones... accepts full responsibility" He didn't.

He feels terrible for how this was handled... Not for refusing to fight. He feels terrible for the fighters going broke, but not terrible enough to have fought. And he doesn't really accept responsibility for it. But he will if he has to.. Who decides if someone has to take the blame or notÉ

He said, "if someone has to take the blame, I will accept full responsibility"

He will accept responsibility, IF HE HAS TO. He obviously doesn't feel he has to.

At least now the UFC will start planning this shit better.

Zuffa always says UFC (the brand) is bigger than the fighters. Thats their excuse for paying fighters much, much less of a share of the profits than other professional athletes get, in different sports. And they just proved they`re full of shit. The brand is nothing without the fighters. UFC, and therefore MMA (since they buy all the competition) is turning into pro-boxing. Zuffa doesn`t really care about MMA, they only want to bleed all the money they can from it.




Post #36   8/26/12 2:18:43AM   

scoozna

Liver shot!

scoozna Avatar
7
 
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:3,035
Career:2,272-1,271
Joined:Jan 2007
Camp: The Ringers
Chips:
601

Posted by Dberntson

Even with an escape clause the UFC can strip him of the belt or refuse to book a fight. The fans will drop Jon jones a lot faster then the UFC. JJ can try to sell his skills elsewhere but he won't make anywhere close to the money as he will in the UFC. Belator can't afford him, and no one is going to pay to see him beat up regional fighters. JJ needs the UFC more then they need him.



I agree with this, mostly. But Bustamante-Aoki makes some good points too. It may be that JJ needs the UFC more than they need him, but they would both be smart to realize how much they stand to gain from each other. They can go on pressuring each other to do the other's bidding, or they can work it out with tough negotiating and reaching mutually beneficial compromises. That will be tough going forward if they both bad mouth each other.

I think the fans play a key role here. There's plenty of criticism to go around here. Zuffa needs to listen to the criticism that this was a weak card and we all knew it. JJ and Jackson need to understand that there are a lot of ways to earn the fans' respect and a lot of ways to lose it.

All that said, I think JJ's apology was poorly worded. The "if someone has to take the blame" sentence shouldn't be there. Either apologize or don't. I want to believe he's being sincere or it makes a mockery of his own faith.

_______________________________________
“I don’t know what kind of technique was used there, but there was a lot of kicking and punching.” Jim Brown

Post #37   8/26/12 9:45:28AM   

ncordless

MODulation

ncordless Avatar
12
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:4,855
Career:1,895-1,080
Joined:Apr 2007
Camp: The Ringers
Chips:
1,102
The relationship between fighters and the UFC is not really an employer/employee relationship. The contracts are more like business to business agreements than employment-at-will. There might be an escape clause, but the at will presumption doesn't apply.

_______________________________________
Flame Not, Lest Ye Be Flamed Yourself.

Post #38   8/26/12 3:36:08PM   

bigrand826

MMA Regular

bigrand826 Avatar
1
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:185
Career:833-506
Joined:Apr 2011
Chips:
38

Posted by telnights

1. Did the UFC even ask anyone else other than a Sonnen? If so who did they ask and what did they say?
Sure doesn't seam like Zuffa did. If Zuffa did offer the fight to a bunch of real LHWs aren't they just as guilty as Jones by some peoples logic.

2. On what planet is Sonnen deserving of a shot at the LHW belt? Who has he beat at LHW?
If they didn't ask every top 10 LHW in the UFC before asking Sonnen then Zuffa is just making a joke out of the rankings and the hole earning a title shot system. Say the fight did happen and Sonnen was beat down what is he going to do now talk trash about HW champ and get a shot at that belt to or hell why not WW.

3. Why would the UFC cancel a hole event after one fight being canceled?
They feel the under card was so weak that it wasn't worth putting on. The UFC should have made a better under card.



1. I was pretty sure they did. I thought I read or heard that in one of the interviews. Although, it could have just been Dana telling lies again. I was pretty sure he said something about how none of the LHW's he asked would take a fight with Jones without a full training camp, but Sonnen would and did. I definitely would like to know what LHW's were asked, but I wouldn't blame them for not taking the fight. It is not the same thing at all as far as I'm concerned. Most LHW's were not in a training camp like Jones is, and anyone that has to cut weight would have had a very difficult time doing that with only 8 days notice. With the landscape at LHW right now, most of the viable ones are a win or two away from earning a shot at the title with the benefit of a proper training camp. No need to jump at this chance with those additional disadvantages, in my opinion.

2. This is tightly linked to 1. Again, it could have just been a lie from Dana, or maybe I just misinterpreted something, but the way I understood it was that they went down the line asking guys and when they asked Sonnen, he was the first to accept. No one was thinking this was a deserved title shot, but given the situation (assuming LHW's were offered and declined the fight), I wouldn't have a problem with that fight had it gone down. I'm sure had Sonnen lost, he would have sited that he didn't have a proper training camp and that next time he'd put up a better fight. He wouldn't even make it an excuse as he'd acknowledge he took the fight knowing the situation. And let's be real. There have been several title shots given to guys that didn't deserve it. I'll name a few easy ones, that were also injury related, Cote stepping in for Okami and Maia stepping in for Belfort. No, these weren't only 8 days out and yes these guys were arguably more deserving than Sonnen as they were in the weight class and had put together a win streak, but these were guys at the weight that were asked and accepted.

3. Yes, that's what I got from it and that's what many people believe. People would have been pissed if they bought tickets and got that card without the scheduled main event. It wasn't even necessarily that the undercard was weak, it was more that it didn't have 'names' on it. Those fights aren't bad, but were lacking in name power. I think a lot of people buy tickets and PPV based more on names than actual quality of fights. It sucks the card got canceled and it is the UFC's fault that the card couldn't stand on its own without the main event, but that didn't real mean the fights would have sucked. It just didn't look all that good on paper as far as names.

Post #39   8/26/12 4:52:35PM   

hymiekooken

MMA Regular

hymiekooken Avatar
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:175
Career:162-131
Joined:Dec 2008
Chips:
41
Mabye he will accept full responsibility for the epic ass whoopin Vitor will put on him. War Belfort !!!

Post #40   8/26/12 4:58:00PM   

Aether

Heavyweight Champ

Aether Avatar
4



 
 
 


 
 
Posts:5,068
Career:946-505
Joined:Apr 2007
Chips:
1,039
I want to clarify the labour law point, because everyone seems to be taking it literally. It's an analogy. DBernstein made an analogy between his work and Jones' situation, and said that it was Jones' job to do what he was told.

I took that analogy and pointed out that there are limitations to what an employer can actually demand of you, and that that's why athletes sign contracts, to delineate those limitations. The terms are agreed upon when the fighters sign their contracts, meaning that Dana can't actually just tell them to do absolutely anything or let them go for absolutely any reason.

There is probably a clause in there that lets him release people for "inappropriate" or illegal behaviour outside of work, which is why we see people getting cut for rape jokes, drug use, and other similar things.

My point is that no, Dana can't just release fighters whenever he feels like it, they have some amount of protection, that's the purpose of a contract, and demanding that someone accept a fight on 8 days notice does not fall within the reasonable limits of what he can demand of his employees.

Nowhere did I say that employers have no authority to ask you to do some extra work now and then, or that it's impossible for them to fire you without a good reason. I said that there are LIMITS to what they can demand, and they are not allowed to say "do x or you're fired" where X can be absolutely anything. X has clear limitations, is the point, and that what was asked of Jones doesn't fall within that range.

Post #41   8/26/12 5:06:26PM   

grappler0000

MODular Approach

grappler0000 Avatar
25
 
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:10,148
Career:2,803-1,547
Joined:Mar 2007
Camp: The Ringers
Chips:
2,491

Posted by Aether

...and that what was asked of Jones doesn't fall within that range.



I agree with pretty much everything you said, with the exception of this. We don't know whether it falls in that range or not. We can assume, but Dana also implied turning down a second fight in the same fashion would get Jones canned...which, if he's serious...and I believe he is, means that it actually would fall into that range. We can't assume just because Jones didn't get fired this time that he "couldn't" have been.

_______________________________________

Post #42   8/26/12 9:38:26PM   

Bubbles

Come at me bro

Bubbles Avatar
5




 
 
 


 
 
Posts:9,368
Career:1,120-670
Joined:Oct 2009
Chips:
1,461

Posted by bigrand826
2. This is tightly linked to 1. Again, it could have just been a lie from Dana, or maybe I just misinterpreted something, but the way I understood it was that they went down the line asking guys and when they asked Sonnen, he was the first to accept. No one was thinking this was a deserved title shot, but given the situation (assuming LHW's were offered and declined the fight), I wouldn't have a problem with that fight had it gone down. I'm sure had Sonnen lost, he would have sited that he didn't have a proper training camp and that next time he'd put up a better fight. He wouldn't even make it an excuse as he'd acknowledge he took the fight knowing the situation. And let's be real. There have been several title shots given to guys that didn't deserve it. I'll name a few easy ones, that were also injury related, Cote stepping in for Okami and Maia stepping in for Belfort. No, these weren't only 8 days out and yes these guys were arguably more deserving than Sonnen as they were in the weight class and had put together a win streak, but these were guys at the weight that were asked and accepted.


Don't forget Jones stepped in to replace Rashad.

_______________________________________
The best cure for insomnia is a lot of sex. Even if it doesn't end up putting you to sleep, you don't mind so much

Men be careful, female sexual predators are using a date rape drug called a Blowjob to trap men into scams called relationships.

Post #43   8/26/12 9:42:37PM   

george112

The Playground OG

george112 Avatar
2

 
 
 


 
 
Posts:5,355
Career:1,237-808
Joined:Jan 2007
Camp: Playground Legends
Chips:
1,057

Posted by Aether

I want to clarify the labour law point, because everyone seems to be taking it literally. It's an analogy. DBernstein made an analogy between his work and Jones' situation, and said that it was Jones' job to do what he was told.

I took that analogy and pointed out that there are limitations to what an employer can actually demand of you, and that that's why athletes sign contracts, to delineate those limitations. The terms are agreed upon when the fighters sign their contracts, meaning that Dana can't actually just tell them to do absolutely anything or let them go for absolutely any reason.

There is probably a clause in there that lets him release people for "inappropriate" or illegal behaviour outside of work, which is why we see people getting cut for rape jokes, drug use, and other similar things.

My point is that no, Dana can't just release fighters whenever he feels like it, they have some amount of protection, that's the purpose of a contract, and demanding that someone accept a fight on 8 days notice does not fall within the reasonable limits of what he can demand of his employees.

Nowhere did I say that employers have no authority to ask you to do some extra work now and then, or that it's impossible for them to fire you without a good reason. I said that there are LIMITS to what they can demand, and they are not allowed to say "do x or you're fired" where X can be absolutely anything. X has clear limitations, is the point, and that what was asked of Jones doesn't fall within that range.



Like I said jones being champion saved his ass. He's already proven himself as being a fighter find really easy to dislike. That coupled with the dui, and the turned down Sonnen fight was PLENTY for him to get fired.

You said it yourself about the escape clause enabling Dana to cut fighters for "inappropriate" behavior. Id say Jones has acted more then "inappropriate" enough. Wouldnt you say?

_______________________________________
Ron Paul 2016

Post #44   8/26/12 9:53:39PM   

Franklinfan47

Simply The Best

Franklinfan47 Avatar
11
 
 
 
 


 
 
Posts:3,686
Career:2,605-1,426
Joined:May 2007
Camp: Project Mayhem
Chips:
682
The way I see it, Dana chose to leave the fate of the event to Jon Jones when he offered him the Sonnen fight.

In hindsight that was a poor choice by Dana, but he probably didnt think in a million years Bones would turn down that fight.

So while I say primary blame falls on Jones, Dana and the UFC have some blame for leaving the event in Bone's hands.

Post #45   8/27/12 1:52:15PM   
 
  Page 3 of 4     1     2     3     4