False arguments about unified rules
That was meant to have a question mark after it, but I don't think you can edit thread titles
Whenever the topic of rules sets are debated on here, it is sometimes argued that it is nonsensical to modify rules for any reason (including reasons aimed at promoting fighter safety) because this weakens the status of the sport of MMA as no other accepted sports has variations in this rule.
However in football (soccer to the Americans and some people in the UK over 50) we have 5 a side, 6 aside, 7 aside, 9 aside and 11 aside games and in youth football ( I don't know about the adult game) different leagues and different tournaments have all kinds of variations such as;
Kick ins instead of thrown ins
Keepers have to do goal kicks out of their hands
Goalkeeper areas that go from touch line to touch line
No penalties; only free kicks
Peanlties only given if the foul is in the goal area and parallel to the goal mouth
So if such an established sport can have such variations why should an MMA promoter get stick because s/he decided for example to ban heel hooks on the grounds of fighter safety?
I know some people will come back with all kinds of distinctions about adult and youth games but when I was a kid there was either 5 a side or 11 a side football and if you played 11 a siide at any age it was 45 mins each way on a full size pitch. I will accept that 5 a side is a completely different game but some of the other variations are just bastardisations of the 11 a side game