| Posted By |
Message |
|
|
Posted by airkerma
Posted by bjj1605
Its a bit hypocritical though considering guys who continue to strike an unconscious opponent are usually excused as "being caught up in the moment."
Wrong analogy. A proper one would be a guy keeps punching the unconscious opponent after the ref stopped the fight and was in between the two fighters. That is essentially what happened. Pierce tapped, the ref jumped in and stopped the fight, Palhares cranks, Pierce re-taps, the ref physically pries the submission.
And those (not directed at you bjj) who say "he didn't hold it that long" do realize that after the fight is called it doesn't matter how long you hold the sub for, you let it go when the ref is on you telling you it's done. To reiterate the above analogy, if the ref jumps in and stops a striking finish and then the victor jumps back at it and punches the unconscious fighter again is it okay because "he didn't him him THAT many times after the fight was stopped"?
Fair enough.
I would hate to see someone get hurt because Palhares is a jerk, so I can get behind thins.
It just sucks because he's such a unique fighter.
|
|
Post #61 10/11/13 12:00:16PM
|
|
|
Only fair, Babaloo got the same punishment. The Tree Trunk can now snap legs for another organization. Adeus gordinho homem, boa sorte tronco de árvore.
|
|
Post #62 10/11/13 12:15:21PM
|
|
|
I agree with the ban. What the UFC are doing now is basically taking the sport to mainstream TV. It is not just hardcore fans they are targeting, but a whole new market. Now if you have one guy who goes beyond the referee's intervention,for whatever reason, then that does not look good on the sport in general, and definitely not what the UFC are trying to promote. Couple that in with the fact Palhares has history, then the ban is fair in my opinion.
_______________________________________
|
|
Post #63 10/11/13 12:41:05PM
|
|
|
I certainly hope this action by the ufc will serve as a precedent to help mma communities and athletics commissions to put in place strict regulations regarding misconducts inside the cage.
|
|
Post #64 10/11/13 12:42:23PM
|
|
|
Posted by tattflash
I agree with the ban. What the UFC are doing now is basically taking the sport to mainstream TV. It is not just hardcore fans they are targeting, but a whole new market. Now if you have one guy who goes beyond the referee's intervention,for whatever reason, then that does not look good on the sport in general, and definitely not what the UFC are trying to promote. Couple that in with the fact Palhares has history, then the ban is fair in my opinion.
casual fans like the heel to root against (pun not intended). Or because he is shredded casuals will think this guy will run through everyone. Paul Harris is the prototypical guy to market to casual fans, he just isn't brash like Lesnar
_______________________________________
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 #65 10/11/13 12:57:45PM
|
|
|
I find it fascinating that we watch a violent sport
Where people bleed and hurt eachother
And cause of a extra sec on a ankle lock not even
A choke and you guys are asking for his head on a platter
|
|
Post #66 10/11/13 1:55:05PM
|
|
|
Ah what the heck!?! Let's add eye gouging and bring back head-butting.
|
|
Post #67 10/11/13 2:36:07PM
|
|
|
Posted by prozacnation1978
I find it fascinating that we watch a violent sport
Where people bleed and hurt eachother
And cause of a extra sec on a ankle lock not even
A choke and you guys are asking for his head on a platter
Sorry Prozac but you're better than thinking like this. That "extra second" (which was longer than a few seconds) could have ended Pierce's career right there and then. Knockouts are one thing but tearing someone's ligaments is something they have to deal with forever basically. If Pierce couldn't fight anymore you'd be singing a different tune. Why do we need something stupid to happen before we take action on it? The UFC made the right decision here. It sent a message to everyone on that roster. You're not in this sport to ruin lives.
_______________________________________
|
|
Post #68 10/11/13 2:47:36PM
|
|
|
Posted by Budgellism
Posted by prozacnation1978
I find it fascinating that we watch a violent sport
Where people bleed and hurt eachother
And cause of a extra sec on a ankle lock not even
A choke and you guys are asking for his head on a platter
Sorry Prozac but you're better than thinking like this. That "extra second" (which was longer than a few seconds) could have ended Pierce's career right there and then. Knockouts are one thing but tearing someone's ligaments is something they have to deal with forever basically. If Pierce couldn't fight anymore you'd be singing a different tune. Why do we need something stupid to happen before we take action on it? The UFC made the right decision here. It sent a message to everyone on that roster. You're not in this sport to ruin lives.
THIS. Holding any submission well after a tap or the ref jumping in is bull shit.
If pierce wouldn't have tapped it clearly would have been a different story. Bull shit. He deserves to never fight again in the UFC.
|
|
Post #69 10/11/13 3:09:47PM
|
|
|
Posted by bjj1605
Posted by airkerma
Posted by bjj1605
Its a bit hypocritical though considering guys who continue to strike an unconscious opponent are usually excused as "being caught up in the moment."
Wrong analogy. A proper one would be a guy keeps punching the unconscious opponent after the ref stopped the fight and was in between the two fighters. That is essentially what happened. Pierce tapped, the ref jumped in and stopped the fight, Palhares cranks, Pierce re-taps, the ref physically pries the submission.
And those (not directed at you bjj) who say "he didn't hold it that long" do realize that after the fight is called it doesn't matter how long you hold the sub for, you let it go when the ref is on you telling you it's done. To reiterate the above analogy, if the ref jumps in and stops a striking finish and then the victor jumps back at it and punches the unconscious fighter again is it okay because "he didn't him him THAT many times after the fight was stopped"?
Fair enough.
I would hate to see someone get hurt because Palhares is a jerk, so I can get behind thins.
It just sucks because he's such a unique fighter.
I can't agree more, especially dispatching someone like Pierce that quickly. It makes one wonder what he could do to some of the other wrestlers at that weight. Rarely do we get to see such a gifted sub artist, let alone a leg locker. Like you I'm ambivalent about the cut but there is certainly no defending the action itself.
_______________________________________
|
|
Post #70 10/11/13 3:33:12PM
|
|
|
Posted by Budgellism
Posted by prozacnation1978
I find it fascinating that we watch a violent sport
Where people bleed and hurt eachother
And cause of a extra sec on a ankle lock not even
A choke and you guys are asking for his head on a platter
Sorry Prozac but you're better than thinking like this. That "extra second" (which was longer than a few seconds) could have ended Pierce's career right there and then. Knockouts are one thing but tearing someone's ligaments is something they have to deal with forever basically. If Pierce couldn't fight anymore you'd be singing a different tune. Why do we need something stupid to happen before we take action on it? The UFC made the right decision here. It sent a message to everyone on that roster. You're not in this sport to ruin lives.
Jon Jones was trying to stomp Gus's knee for five rounds. Had he landed the kick just right he could have ended Alex's career and I have no idea where I'm going with this...
|
|
Post #71 10/11/13 4:02:46PM
|
|
|
I agree with the decision to let him go, I enjoyed watching his fights just because he fights like no other in the ufc, basically always attacking the leg.
I personally don't think that he actually means to hold the submission for that long, he just goes in to ape mode when he has it and kind of loses control. That's not an excuse though.
|
|
Post #72 10/11/13 4:30:14PM
|
|
|
Posted by airkerma
Posted by bjj1605
Its a bit hypocritical though considering guys who continue to strike an unconscious opponent are usually excused as "being caught up in the moment."
Wrong analogy. A proper one would be a guy keeps punching the unconscious opponent after the ref stopped the fight and was in between the two fighters. That is essentially what happened. Pierce tapped, the ref jumped in and stopped the fight, Palhares cranks, Pierce re-taps, the ref physically pries the submission.
And those (not directed at you bjj) who say "he didn't hold it that long" do realize that after the fight is called it doesn't matter how long you hold the sub for, you let it go when the ref is on you telling you it's done. To reiterate the above analogy, if the ref jumps in and stops a striking finish and then the victor jumps back at it and punches the unconscious fighter again is it okay because "he didn't him him THAT many times after the fight was stopped"?
so rampage vs wanderlei III?
I will say this if this was a more popular fighter I doubt it is a ban. the hold didn't seem malicious but MAYBE because we expect it the hold seemed on longer, i watched it thought it was bad, rewatched a video that provided a timer between ref contact and the time he let go., however, the reality of it is this is a difficult guy to defend. He was punished way too lightly the first time so maybe we it all evens out
|
|
Post #73 10/11/13 6:37:06PM
|
|
|
They need to start arming the refs with tazers
_______________________________________
On the comeback trail
|
|
Post #74 10/11/13 6:46:03PM
|
|
|
It wasnt the extra second. It was the extra torque he used during that second. I dont believe it's an issue at all if he held it where he initially had it.
_______________________________________
Never Trust A Man Who Does Not Make All Of His Picks
|
|
Post #75 10/11/13 7:28:28PM
|
