it was a horrible decision, why would anyone pay to see that again? Last time there was a controversial decision they had the rematch free on Spike. That's what I'm hoping for.
What about Lesnar backing out Unless Spider or St Pierre get put on 106 that card won't be worth watching.
kimchi_chigae wrote:So, did Shogun get robbed or what? I like Machida, but I think he got a little help from the judges here. There have been some talk that the UFC gave it to Machida so they can have a rematch between the two, but even if they had "given" the bout to Shogun, a rematch would still bring them a ton of PPV buys and it wouldn't have looked fishy. Now the interwebs is calling the UFC corrupt and you know you can't stop the interwebs.
I'd agree with the corrupt charges except for the fact that White himself thinks Rua won. Sounds like the judges weren't convinced that Machida deserved to lose his title in such a "close" fight. Terrible decision though.
I was there at Staples for Machida/Shogun and I thought Shogun was robbed of the title at that moment, but after watching a few replays of the match, I don't believe either really stood out for the victory. It was a strategic match, but also a fight that I thought Shogun would win out because it seemed he had a better feel of the fight as it wore on. Rua had a more measured approach for this one than he usually does and had the better strikes. However, I felt he got too conservative (fearing a Machida KO out of nowhere) and his takedowns weren't that good. A closer fight than seeing it live, that's for sure, but I still think Shogun would have edged it here.
I happened to come across MMA Torch the next day and a number of the folks there thought this match was "booked", as if it were a WWE match.
"First of all what you need to understand is that from where the judges are sitting, we get to see things that the fans at home may miss. Mauricio Rua was being aggressive but it wasn't effective aggressiveness which is what we as the judges look for when scoring a fight. The way I saw it, Lyoto was landing the more cleaner and damaging strikes throughout the fight - if you take a look at the judging criteria clean strikes are valued more-so than the quantity of strikes landed. Although Rua threw a lot of low kicks they were not as damaging as Lyotos diverse attack in the earlier rounds which is why I scored the first three rounds for Machida. You have to keep in mind we always the favour the fighter who is trying to finish the fight, and leg kicks certainly don't do that."
"When both fighters are engaged in a striking match what I always look for is the fighter who is being judicious, picking his spots, being accurate and landing the cleaner strikes which ultimately is what Lyoto did more effectively than Rua. Lyoto made Shogun come after him, he determined where the fight took place which in my opinion constitutes as effective Octagon control. I recognize the fact that Rua did have a few takedown attempts during the course of the fight however Lyoto defended them all successfully which counts as effective grappling in his favour, where as ununsuccessful takedown attempts are not scored at all. Therefore going by that criteria, I believe Lyoto won the fight clearly. I'm just glad the other judges on the panel saw it the same way and I'm sure the fans who understand the technicalities of the sport agree with the decision too."
I don't recall Machida landing much of anything during the whole fight. I also disagree that "making Shogun come after him" constitutes octagon control. If a fighter won't approach you, what are you supposed to do? Stand there and not hit each other? I know it's Machida's style to land a killer counter-punch., but if someone won't take the bait they shouldn't be penalized for it.
In a fight that close, the champ should remain the champ. It's up to the challenger to take the title away -- like, "tie goes to the runner" in baseball.
It's not looking good for Brock Lesnar. There's news out that he's been hospitalized and Dana White says it's a "possibility" his career is over. It's not HIV or cancer but I suspect it might be liver failure or something else steroid-related.
nsulham wrote:It's not looking good for Brock Lesnar. There's news out that he's been hospitalized and Dana White says it's a "possibility" his career is over. It's not HIV or cancer but I suspect it might be liver failure or something else steroid-related.
- Dana White has revealed to TMZ that Brock Lesnar has some sort of intestinal disorder that will require "major surgery". As we reported over the weekend, White has said there's a possibility Lesnar will never fight again.
Any chance that blowing this up is a simple ratings ploy? Meaning Brock really does have an issue of some sort, but by "major surgery" and "may never fight again", it is all being said simply to drive even more publicity towards UFC? Brock doesn't really need the publicity, he took care of that all by himself after his last fight, so the buyrate on his next fight would have been huge anyway. Or maybe this is damage control to "soften" his image a bit after that big outburst of his? I don't know Dana or UFC well enough to have any idea if any of that is possible, so what do you guys think?
If Brock truely is this sick, I wish him a speedy recovery. UFC is more interesting with him in the picture.
On a somewhat related note, Shane McMahon seems to have had a meeting with someone in the MMA world. Been hearing buzz about that lately...
Yes doctor, I am sick. Sick of those who are spineless. Sick of those who feel self-entitled. Sick of those who are hypocrites. Yes doctor, an army is forming. Yes doctor, there will be a war. Yes doctor, there will be blood.....
Yes doctor, I am sick. Sick of those who are spineless. Sick of those who feel self-entitled. Sick of those who are hypocrites. Yes doctor, an army is forming. Yes doctor, there will be a war. Yes doctor, there will be blood.....
Cafe Home
Fantasy Football
Fantasy Basketball
Fantasy Hockey
by 
