im just meaning in some fights (extreme cases), i think mma judgeing differs slighty from other combat sports in that its more open to judges interpretation, escpecially at this infant level the sport is at just now where there is not such thing as a qualified MMA judge/ref or officials here just now, so most guys judgeing are going to score certain things differently due to factors such as there own back ground.
i know anytime im fighting or have a fighter on a show i always like to know who the judges are as it can give me an idea what they might be looking for.
Its a hard one in all honestly
I mean by overturning it, you could be seen to be undermining the judges who actually jusdged the fight, and have been asked and chosen to do so due to their experience within Scottish mma!
Its a can of worms, I mean, people always see fights different depending on team mates, before soon, you could have a large percentage of teams wanting every decision appealed if the fight has been close.
I mean, who chooses wether or not it goes to the appeal?
Hard one to be honest, and I dont see to many arguments on this forum over the past few years regarding it, so I would leave it the way it is.
Great win too last night James, Congrats
In a lot of sports there will be debatable decisions, to me its part of the appeal as it keeps people talking, football for example, had many a debate in the pub after being at a game. Would not want to see tv evidence and appeal panels take that away.
also i used the afterburner v gilbraith fight as an example, it wasnt a close fight graham win rounds 1 and 2 easily enough, caused some damage with cut etc (other doctors may hav stopped the fight for the cut above the eye) had the better wrestling and a couple submission attempts.
I gave dave the last round he got a take down, and spend more time on top but didnt really capitalise graham hasnt got a mark on him, graham also had a take down and an arm bar attempt in that round, but dave did finish stronger. 2 rounds to 1 in grahams favour
THEE Mark Connor
i think the option of appeal should be there and would make the sport here much more professional.
sometimes judges get it wrong and it would simply be fairer to fighters, to have the option of appeal...
PROFESSIONAL MMA SHIT.
LIKES FREE STUFF.
GIVE ME MONEY.
I don't think there should be an appeal system. The onus should be on improving the standard of judging in the first place. I would rather see debatable calls circulated between a network of judges and if the fight was badly scored, the judges in question were educated as to why.
Fights can also appear a lot different on the TV to how they were cage/ringside - such as telling if strikes actually landed, how close subs were to going on etc.
Once a decision has been made it should stand. The refree/judges' decision is final. That's sport.
Does it for us **flex**
How does boxing deal with people appealing every loss?
Perhaps you can have it that if they appeal and lose then they can't appeal for their next 3 fights?
Judges decisions should always be final unless there has been a mistake made (score written in the wrong column like in Din Thomas-Matt Serra). What should always happen is that judges are educated enough in the sport that they can make informed decisions based on what they can see.
The only way an appeal system should be in play is for things missed by the referee that were illegal and directly influenced the outcome of a fight (illegal holds, greasing, tapping out and then pretending you didn't, these sort of things)
I think all this once again leads to the talk of a governing body for MMA in Scotland, the different shows seem to get on well enough for this so why not?
Time to bring some intelligence to this thread.
James is completely right what he is meaning that maybe in extreme cases if needed we could review a fight and give it a no contest or make the result stand.
It would only be used in extreme cases eg I call on everyone to watch the Chase Beebe vs Mike Easton fight. If you watch this there is no way you can say there is no need to have a protective measure like this in place.
I think it's a great idea but for the Pros only. For them their record is pretty damn important, amateurs will just have to gripe. Also with coaches giving up free time it will cut out a lot of uneccessary appeals.
Somebody pointed this out earlier as well, the video would also have to be of pretty high quality to be able to judge effecticly whether strikes landed. None of the gash film making from the back of the bleechers with the same quality of home video shows.