# Ariel Helwani escorted from UFC event, and banned... for life



## M.C (Jul 5, 2008)

https://twitter.com/arielhelwani

These are his tweets (can't embed Twitter at the moment, someone else can if they wish to do so, though).



> I was escorted out of the building by Zuffa staff before the main event. Credential taken away, too. Didn't see Bisping realize his dream.





> I love this sport & this job with all my heart. Did nothing unethical. I reported fight news. That's it. & then told we're banned for life.


People are assuming it's because he leaked the Brock news early.


----------



## Joabbuac (Jan 31, 2009)

Showing Ali tributes while stamping down on free speech/freedom of the press, classy UFC.


----------



## Trix (Dec 15, 2009)

Ariel saved the UFC millions.

Now they don't need an expensive press conference to get the word about Brock fighting at UFC 200 out.

:thumbsup:


----------



## TheAuger (Jun 30, 2011)

I am more concerned with Esther Lin getting the boot along with him. She takes some amazing MMA photos.


----------



## rabakill (Apr 22, 2007)

If he leaked it that's dumb. That part at the end was clearly a teaser and he ruined it.


----------



## slapshot (May 4, 2007)

Ive never liked him and always thought he has the worst interviews and he seems like a cocky prick often.

But if thats why they banned him, I think its unfair.


----------



## systemdnb (Dec 7, 2008)

I mean wtf told him in the first place? I think that is the person who should be held accountable. Of course, unless it was said "off the record."


----------



## Rygu (Jul 21, 2008)

The UFC banning someone for reporting something factual? Who do they think they are, the liberal media?


----------



## boatoar (May 14, 2010)

This put a bit of a damper on an outstanding evening of fights and announcements. Hell, even the post fight presser was amazing (and post post fight mini altercation to boot). 
I really like Ariel, but get why many do not. He can come off as prickish and condescending, but he really is passionate about what he does. This seems like a hair trigger reaction that'll likely be rescinded at some point. Can't imagine this lasting.


----------



## RangerClydeTheBlue (Jul 11, 2012)

I like the guy but at the end of the day, UFC wanted a big reveal and if he did leak it before they got the chance it's understandable. If someone got their hands on WWE's script for the evening and went into the crowd telling everyone what was going to happen exactly, they'd be removed too.


----------



## No_Mercy (Oct 17, 2006)

Those orders must have came from DW. Which means Ariel may be back within a few months. Although media/journalists do need to be more responsible. They're job is to report it in a responsible and timely manner, but I think DW must have given him the heads up before hand. 

Weird news indeed.


----------



## Joabbuac (Jan 31, 2009)

I am all for freedom to report facts and all that... but showing some restraint would just be the better thing to do in this situation, don't ruin the surprise at the end of a promo like that, just so you can get your little breaking news story 5 mins before it happens.


----------



## systemdnb (Dec 7, 2008)

I think it's dumb as hell. It's reporters jobs to break news as long as they feel the source is reliable. If you don't want someone to break news like that you don't tell ANYONE. Loose lips sink ships.


----------



## Spite (Jul 7, 2009)




----------



## Bonnar426 (Jul 18, 2006)

When its all said and done Ariel did nothing wrong. He did what his job required him to do: Report the News. If course, if I was Dana I would be more concerned on who leaked the information in the first place.


----------



## Calminian (Feb 1, 2009)

systemdnb said:


> I think it's dumb as hell. It's reporters jobs to break news as long as they feel the source is reliable. If you don't want someone to break news like that you don't tell ANYONE. Loose lips sink ships.


Right, but the UFC is also free to associate with who they want. Freedom cuts both ways.


----------



## Term (Jul 28, 2009)

I guess it depends on the situation, if Dana or someone at the UFC said something like here's a secret but you can't tell anyone until we announce it and Ariel agreed then I get it. If someone let it slip and then said but you can't tell anyone, well that's a different story. The person that told him then has to deal with it, but at that point Ariel was doing his job.


----------



## systemdnb (Dec 7, 2008)

Calminian said:


> Right, but the UFC is also free to associate with who they want. Freedom cuts both ways.


Of course they are but you'd never see the NFL escort someone from espn.com from the event. That's just being a giant baby about shit.


----------



## Calminian (Feb 1, 2009)

systemdnb said:


> Of course they are but you'd never see the NFL escort someone from espn.com from the event. That's just being a giant baby about shit.


It's all relative to opinion. There are millions of fans that don't give a rip either way. The way I look at it, don't bite the hand that feeds you.


----------



## Calminian (Feb 1, 2009)

Term said:


> I guess it depends on the situation, if Dana or someone at the UFC said something like here's a secret but you can't tell anyone until we announce it and Ariel agreed then I get it. If someone let it slip and then said but you can't tell anyone, well that's a different story. The person that told him then has to deal with it, but at that point Ariel was doing his job.


I had no idea that was his job. News to me. He's a fight commentator and interviewer. If he wants to leak info, then the UFC has the right to tell him to pound sand. Again, freedom is not limited to one side.


----------



## Sportsman 2.0 (Jul 10, 2012)

systemdnb said:


> I think it's dumb as hell. It's reporters jobs to break news as long as they feel the source is reliable. If you don't want someone to break news like that you don't tell ANYONE. Loose lips sink ships.


Completely agree with this. Guy is a reporter. Reporters get praised for newsflashes they dig before anyone. If he get this info, why wouldn't he make it public? And if UFC itself told him the news and specifically told him not to say a word about it, why would he betray them so blatantly? Makes no sense at all.


----------



## Term (Jul 28, 2009)

Calminian said:


> I had no idea that was his job. News to me. He's a fight commentator and interviewer. If he wants to leak info, then the UFC has the right to tell him to pound sand. Again, freedom is not limited to one side.


I never said otherwise, the UFC is a private company and they can do as they see fit. 

IMO it's not Ariel that's the issue it's the person who leaked the info. No matter what job description you give him. He is an MMA journalist and Brock coming back is big MMA news. So if someone gives him that information they had to know that it would be released. Unless, of coarse he got the info illegally somehow or was told in confidence with the understanding he would not release it, if so then I agree 100% with the UFC decision.

Even then I don't think it was a big deal, Ariel tweeted that Brock was close to inking a deal, I think most people went yeah I will believe it when I see it. So I don't think it took anything away from the announcement.


----------



## systemdnb (Dec 7, 2008)

Sportsman 2.0 said:


> Completely agree with this. Guy is a reporter. Reporters get praised for newsflashes they dig before anyone. If he get this info, why wouldn't he make it public? And if UFC itself told him the news and specifically told him not to say a word about it, why would he betray them so blatantly? Makes no sense at all.


One top of that in the post fight presser and they asked the UFC press guy, don't know his name, and he said the Lesnar fight was news to him too. I'm very curious to see how this plays out. You'd think he'd be one of the guys that knew that. It's laughable really. He's probably lying.


----------



## Calminian (Feb 1, 2009)

Term said:


> I never said otherwise, the UFC is a private company and they can do as they see fit.
> 
> IMO it's not Ariel that's the issue it's the person who leaked the info. No matter what job description you give him. He is an MMA journalist and Brock coming back is big MMA news. So if someone gives him that information they had to know that it would be released. Unless, of coarse he got the info illegally somehow or was told in confidence with the understanding he would not release it, if so then I agree 100% with the UFC decision.
> 
> Even then I don't think it was a big deal, Ariel tweeted that Brock was close to inking a deal, I think most people went yeah I will believe it when I see it. So I don't think it took anything away from the announcement.


This is not a legal issue. No laws were broken. Ariel screwed up, biting the hand that fed him. If he's a true journalist, he should move on. He has the right to repot anything he wants. No journalist has the right to be in events interviewing people. I don't have that right, you don't. It's not a right, but a privilege. You have to take that into consideration, when releasing info that's not yours to release. 

Ariel is an insider. He's got access to people due to his privileged position. But that privilege can be taken away, if you do something to piss off the person granting you that privilege. 

All parties are acting within their legal rights.


----------



## edlavis88 (Jul 12, 2009)

I think cooler heads will prevail. Ariel holds too much weight with fighters and other media to be blacklisted.


----------



## kantowrestler (Jun 6, 2009)

Also why did they wait until the main event to escort him from the building? Also Esther Lin and the other guy shouldn't have been escorted out if Ariel was the sole person responsible. This is just fishy to me.


----------



## Calminian (Feb 1, 2009)

When cooler heads prevail, I think most won't care. The press are not royalty. They don't have special rights. They're not above getting booted out of private events. Ariel bit hands that fed him. He claims it was somehow his duty, but we all know that's false. He had a choice. So does the UFC. Turnabout is fair play.


----------



## kantowrestler (Jun 6, 2009)

He wasn't told that he couldn't report on it.


----------



## Calminian (Feb 1, 2009)

kantowrestler said:


> He wasn't told that he couldn't report on it.


what is your source for this? 

it makes no sense for the UFC to boot him out, if they didn't think they had a good reason. not that they need one, but they obviously did think they had one.


----------



## kantowrestler (Jun 6, 2009)

It just seems odd that they booted him out right before the main event when the trailer had already been out for a while. Also does that warrant a lifetime ban? On top of that whatever Ariel did didn't warrant Esther Lin getting thrown out as well.


----------



## Trix (Dec 15, 2009)

If Ariel doesn't need to appease the UFC anymore, he can put out content he normally wouldn't if he needed to stay in the UFC's good graces.

This could be the origins story of Ariel's evolution towards some type of independent, guerilla, MMA journalism.

Now the handcuffs are off. Ariel is free to run stories on the UFC not paying fighters enough, the reebok deal being bad, the UFC's corrupt business practices and other things he normally wouldn't be able to get away with.

The day could come when the UFC wishes they hadn't banned Ariel and will beg him to come back.

The UFC had minor issues with Burt Watson, Stitch, Randy Couture, Ken Shamrock and others and came out of it without too much trouble.

This time they might have gone too far.

:laugh:


----------



## kantowrestler (Jun 6, 2009)

And something tells me that another network might be willing to pick him up. He's already detached from Fox so maybe things will turn around.


----------



## jonnyg4508 (Jan 30, 2010)

Calminian said:


> I had no idea that was his job. News to me. He's a fight commentator and interviewer. If he wants to leak info, then the UFC has the right to tell him to pound sand. Again, freedom is not limited to one side.


Your post is stupid as always. A fight commentator? When has he ever commentated? yes he interviews for part of his website which generates MMA news. Part of being in that business is breaking news as you hear it. So you seem lost and have no idea what you are saying as always.

That said you play the game or don't. UFC was pissed at him before. He had to know if he kept it up he would be punished. I'm for it all. I like Ariel and like what he is doing....but he isn't naïve to the situation and knew he was getting under their skin. Is it dumb he isn't allowed to do that and got basically banned? Sure from a technical standpoint. But at end of the day he knew he was ruffling feathers and UFC is allowed to do what they did. So really play with fire and expect to get burned. 

It isn't that big of a deal in the long run. He will still do what he does and do it better than anyone. He more or less chose this.


----------



## Term (Jul 28, 2009)

Calminian said:


> This is not a legal issue. No laws were broken. Ariel screwed up, biting the hand that fed him. If he's a true journalist, he should move on. He has the right to repot anything he wants. No journalist has the right to be in events interviewing people. I don't have that right, you don't. It's not a right, but a privilege. You have to take that into consideration, when releasing info that's not yours to release.
> 
> Ariel is an insider. He's got access to people due to his privileged position. But that privilege can be taken away, if you do something to piss off the person granting you that privilege.
> 
> All parties are acting within their legal rights.



You were quoting my post so I assume you were addressing that post. I am curious what part of my post suggested I thought this was his right or it is a legal issue. All I said was if the UFC wants to punish someone they should go after the leak not a reporter doing what he does, report MMA news.

As I said the UFC can run their events any way they see fit, I am not a UFC basher but I occasionally feel they make PR blunders and to me this seems to be one. Like the Stitch thing, it just doesn't shed a good light on the UFC.

Just to be clear this is only my opinion, no ones rights were violated.


----------



## Calminian (Feb 1, 2009)

Trix said:


> If Ariel doesn't need to appease the UFC anymore, he can put out content he normally wouldn't if he needed to stay in the UFC's good graces.
> 
> This could be the origins story of Ariel's evolution towards some type of independent, guerilla, MMA journalism.
> 
> ...


Agree 100%. That just may be his thing.


----------



## RangerClydeTheBlue (Jul 11, 2012)

I'm confused as to what actually relates to "news".

People, especially on MMAFighting of course, are saying that it's Ariel's "job" to report stuff like this, and that he would be corrupt if he withheld information based on the commercial potential of a company.

But since when did information like this become "news". Since when was it someone's sworn duty to reveal information relating to the commercial product that the company wanted to reveal it's own way?

It's not a pro wrestling journalist's duty to find out who's winning at WrestleMania and then spoil it for everyone.

The UFC wanted to build a reveal up their own way. Ariel wanted to reveal it his way, and as a result they took his creds away. I think it's completely fair for the UFC to want to reveal their own commercial information their own way. We have no idea about why anyone else might have been removed right now but as for the situation at hand, UFC are pissed off that Ariel beat them to their reveal and I reckon that's pretty reasonable.


----------



## Calminian (Feb 1, 2009)

jonnyg4508 said:


> Your post is stupid as always. A fight commentator? When has he ever commentated? yes he interviews for part of his website which generates MMA news. Part of being in that business is breaking news as you hear it. So you seem lost and have no idea what you are saying as always.
> 
> That said you play the game or don't. UFC was pissed at him before. He had to know if he kept it up he would be punished. I'm for it all. I like Ariel and like what he is doing....but he isn't naïve to the situation and knew he was getting under their skin. Is it dumb he isn't allowed to do that and got basically banned? Sure from a technical standpoint. But at end of the day he knew he was ruffling feathers and UFC is allowed to do what they did. So really play with fire and expect to get burned.
> 
> It isn't that big of a deal in the long run. He will still do what he does and do it better than anyone. He more or less chose this.


You said the UFC's actions would only be justified if only "he got the info illegally somehow." So I was responding to that saying I didn't believe anyone did anything illegally. That's all.


----------



## Calminian (Feb 1, 2009)

jonnyg4508 said:


> Your post is stupid as always....


Sorry you feel that way. I know I've said stupid things, but likely have some good posts once in a while.


----------



## kantowrestler (Jun 6, 2009)

To me the situation still doesn't make sense. He found out about it from someone and announced it. Then he got a lifetime ban because he didn't report that he was announcing it to the promotion because its against standard practice.


----------



## LizaG (May 12, 2008)

That news sucks...I like Ariel.

Hate that Esther Lin was also removed, just purely by association. Shitty move.


----------



## kantowrestler (Jun 6, 2009)

Yeah it's hard to see the details with Ariel and its basically a he said situation, but Esther shouldn't have been ejected. She just goes and snaps pics. If nothing else I hope they allow her back in to get those great pics.


----------



## Spite (Jul 7, 2009)

LizaG said:


> That news sucks...I like Ariel.
> 
> Hate that Esther Lin was also removed, just purely by association. Shitty move.


Seems like they were punishing MMAFighting more than any one individual.

Stupid move by the UFC, reporters report, it's their job. Esther Lin is the best MMA photographer in the business - she is an asset to MMA. It seems like in banning MMAfighting they are sending a message - Cross us and we'll ruin you.

Would have been interesting to see what would have happened if they'd tried that with one of the major networks rather than a niche MMA reporting website.


----------



## kantowrestler (Jun 6, 2009)

In the long run I think this is going to backfire on them. MMAFighting has standing in the MMA community and Ariel Helwani is as mainstream as it gets for a MMA journalist. I don't think this helps the UFC at all.


----------



## Sports_Nerd (Apr 23, 2012)

To quote Hilde Kate Lysiak


> "I have since found out that the police had asked the media not to run the story. I may be nine, but I have learned that my job as a reporter is to get the truth to the people. I work for them, not the police."


A depressing number of reporters these days work for the people they cover, rather than the people that read their articles. This whole episode doesn't make me want to watch UFC events any less, but it made me a lot more interested in what Helwani has to say than I was before.


----------



## DonRifle (Jan 18, 2009)

Spite said:


> - Cross us and we'll ruin you.
> 
> .


This has always been the UFC way, nothing different for the journo's.


----------



## TheNinja (Dec 10, 2008)

I'm going to wait until today's MMA Hour before making judgement. I think the UFC would be making a huge mistake banning by far the best MMA reporter in the history of the sport. He could cause serious problems for the UFC with all his sources and people that respect him.


----------



## VolcomX311 (Aug 18, 2009)

Asking a journalist to lie about something to cover a company's negligence or mistake is one thing. Asking a journalist to hold off on a situation because we have a big reveal planned, and probably set for tonight (at or after UFC 199), isn't a lot to ask for, imo. Ariel looks like the asshole here to me. It really isn't a lot to ask for if this is what this is about.


----------



## DonRifle (Jan 18, 2009)

Yes journos are constantly asked to hold off on releasing stories in all industries - politics, sport etc. its part of the job


----------



## TheAuger (Jun 30, 2011)

Ariel knew exactly what he was doing. And that was to trying to steal the UFC's thunder. 

And exactly why does he need event access to do his job? He still has his sources & access to any fighter that wants to talk to him while not at an event.


----------



## Spite (Jul 7, 2009)

DonRifle said:


> Yes journos are constantly asked to hold off on releasing stories in all industries - politics, sport etc. its part of the job


Helwani said he did not break any code of ethics.

To me that sounds like he found out about the Lesnar situation all by himself and released the info without any consultation from the UFC.


----------



## DonRifle (Jan 18, 2009)

Spite said:


> Helwani said he did not break any code of ethics.
> 
> To me that sounds like he found out about the Lesnar situation all by himself and released the info without any consultation from the UFC.


Not really about ethics, more being smart on his part. Using his noggin he would know its huge news that the UFC would want to break themselves. But he wanted more clicks, probably should have known better. 
This is not really an ethical issue, its not as if there is a conspiracy or something illegal going on that needs to be uncovered by an investigative journo, its a PR announcement and he stole the thunder.


----------



## Soojooko (Jun 4, 2009)

DonRifle said:


> This has always been the UFC way, nothing different for the journo's.


Its not exclusive to the UFC. All top sports have brutal business practices. The only reason it happens in the UFC is because reporters still think they can pull a fast one and get away with it, because lets face it, the UFC isnt that big or dangerous looking. Can you imagine a UK footie reporter doing anything even remotely hurting the premierships media machine? Career suicide.

If you want to report big sports you have to accept that you cant f*uck with the overlords shit.


----------



## RangerClydeTheBlue (Jul 11, 2012)

People acting like this is investigative journalism and shit. The guy released a rumour before the UFC announced it and stole their thunder. Simple as that. 

People act like these journalists are under the UFC's thumb and shit, yet we've got the fighter salary complaints on the front page all the time, guys breaking down every second of the anti trust lawsuit and covering it, people sharing the Muhammad Ali Act (aka the death of MMA), people comparing UFC and Bellator numbers and whatever else on these sites. The reason you see less insider reports and investigative breakdowns is because most of these people covering the sport aren't investigative journalists.


----------



## Spite (Jul 7, 2009)

DonRifle said:


> Not really about ethics, more being smart on his part. Using his noggin he would know its huge news that the UFC would want to break themselves. But he wanted more clicks, probably should have known better.
> This is not really an ethical issue, its not as if there is a conspiracy or something illegal going on that needs to be uncovered by an investigative journo, its a PR announcement and he stole the thunder.


Its his job though, reporters report. MMAfighting are the best source for MMA because they get the scoops. For all we know Helwani might not have know they were going to announce it at the actual 199 card.

He's done nothing wrong at all. UFC have spat their dummies out because they wanted to break the news. Well boo-hoo, maybe they should look for the source of the leak, probably a person who was bound by a confidentiality clause and should not have been speaking - rather than pick on the journalist and his team that broke the news.


----------



## DonRifle (Jan 18, 2009)

Spite said:


> Its his job though, reporters report. MMAfighting are the best source for MMA because they get the scoops. For all we know Helwani might not have know they were going to announce it at the actual 199 card.
> 
> He's done nothing wrong at all. UFC have spat their dummies out because they wanted to break the news. Well boo-hoo, maybe they should look for the source of the leak, probably a person who was bound by a confidentiality clause and should not have been speaking - rather than pick on the journalist and his team that broke the news.


Sorry I dont agree, he's not done anything 'wrong' but he has done something stupid. In the industry you play the game, otherwise you get f***ed which he just did. Very naive. Take the White House press room, you do something like that you lose your press pass and you political reporting career is over. You gotta play the game as a journo for certain things, otherwise you lose your credentials. He should have asked himself what was more important when he leaked that, a few clicks or losing his privilages.


----------



## Spite (Jul 7, 2009)

DonRifle said:


> Sorry I dont agree, he's not done anything 'wrong' but he has done something stupid. In the industry you play the game, otherwise you get f***ed which he just did. Very naive. Take the White House press room, you do something like that you lose your press pass and you political reporting career is over. You gotta play the game as a journo for certain things, otherwise you lose your credentials. He should have asked himself what was more important when he leaked that, a few clicks or losing his privilages.


Yeah sure, for major things. I don't see how breaking the news that Brock Lesnar is returning as a major piece of news in the scheme of things. Besides I think the original article was Lesnar in talks with the UFC.

Its like if the UFC told a bunch of journalists that they are selling up but they want to break the news themselves, then sure I can understand them being pissed. If the UFC had told Helwani that Brock was coming back and but wanted to keep it hush hush, then I could understand them pissed.

But this is the equivalent of a football journalist getting an inside scoop on a transfer and breaking the news. It literally happens all the time.

No harm no foul. MMAfighting breaking this news has absolutely no bearing on the UFC's bottom line.


----------



## Sportsman 2.0 (Jul 10, 2012)

The odd thing is he was booted out and banned for life for releasing news that made me go like...












Some thunder...


----------



## Spite (Jul 7, 2009)

On live now. Ariel choking back the tears.






You can rewind to the beginning of show.


----------



## RangerClydeTheBlue (Jul 11, 2012)

Seriously though why the fk is he nearly crying?


----------



## DonRifle (Jan 18, 2009)

ClydebankBlitz said:


> Seriously though why the fk is he nearly crying?


Cause he's a poor little lamb!


----------



## DonRifle (Jan 18, 2009)

So Helwani is on his high horse right now about journalism ethics, but his check was signed by the UFC. Something I always suspected. He wants it every way. High ethics, yet his paycheck is from the UFC...does not compute....


----------



## Calminian (Feb 1, 2009)

DonRifle said:


> So Helwani is on his high horse right now about journalism ethics, but his check was signed by the UFC. Something I always suspected. He wants it every way. High ethics, yet his paycheck is from the UFC...does not compute....


And the UFC says this was not the only reason he was thrown out. 


(A reporter for mmafighting.com, Ariel Helwani, broke the news of Lesnar’s return on Saturday and was later ejected from a U.F.C. card at the Forum in Los Angeles. A U.F.C. spokesman told The Los Angeles Times that reporting the news was not the only factor in Helwani’s ejection and said he should have sought a comment from the U.F.C. on the story. Helwani tweeted, “Did nothing unethical. I reported fight news. That’s it.”)​

source


----------



## DonRifle (Jan 18, 2009)

This show is incredibly wishy washy. He's not done himself any favours here and may well have ended his own career. Stand up for yourself man and have some stones and stop crying like a bitch. OK your emotional, but your almost crying now for 90 minutes. 

You took a paycheck from the UFC and are talking about journalistic ethics. He made his bed and needs to lie in it now. Lifes a bitch Ariel, you took the paycheck and now your paying for it.


----------



## Term (Jul 28, 2009)

Calminian said:


> And the UFC says this was not the only reason he was thrown out.
> 
> 
> (A reporter for mmafighting.com, Ariel Helwani, broke the news of Lesnar’s return on Saturday and was later ejected from a U.F.C. card at the Forum in Los Angeles. A U.F.C. spokesman told The Los Angeles Times that reporting the news was not the only factor in Helwani’s ejection and said he should have sought a comment from the U.F.C. on the story. Helwani tweeted, “Did nothing unethical. I reported fight news. That’s it.”)​
> ...


He did address that on his show. He said if it was He said she said kind of thing then you need to get both sides. Asking the UFC if it was true would have been pointless, because they would have said it's not true.


----------



## Calminian (Feb 1, 2009)

Term said:


> He did address that on his show. He said if it was He said she said kind of thing then you need to get both sides. Asking the UFC if it was true would have been pointless, because they would have said it's not true.


But this begs the question. If the UFC is this immoral, why would he want to collect paychecks from them? Go your own way and be a free reporter that can report whatever he wants. You're guaranteed freedom of press in this country, not the right to collect a paycheck from the company you're reporting on. 

I've seen this guy long enough to know he's very self-righteous and pompous, and I can see why they'd eventually tire of him and show him the door. But it's not like their taking away his freedom of speech. Let him make his case from his own property, and if people listen, he's achieved his goal.


----------



## Jumanji (Mar 30, 2011)

My guess is he gets unbanned in a couple of months.


----------



## Calminian (Feb 1, 2009)

Jumanji said:


> My guess is he gets unbanned in a couple of months.


Not at the rate he's going. Not looking good for him right now.


----------



## Spite (Jul 7, 2009)

I think Helwani has just buried himself.

I feel for the guy, hes very emotional right now but he's not coming across very well on his show.


----------



## Jumanji (Mar 30, 2011)

Calminian said:


> Not at the rate he's going. Not looking good for him right now.


I'm not listening to his show so I don't know what he's saying but 500k creds says hes back in a couple of months.


----------



## Spite (Jul 7, 2009)

Anyways, with regards to Ariel saying things "Got Physical"


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/739334516590837760


----------



## DonRifle (Jan 18, 2009)

First decent thing front row brian has reported in years! Now we know why he doesnt go under his real name lol


----------



## Calminian (Feb 1, 2009)

Jumanji said:


> I'm not listening to his show so I don't know what he's saying but 500k creds says hes back in a couple of months.


Half a mil? You're in the tank for this guy. You sure?

DANA WHITE
ARIEL HELWANI CAN COME TO UFC 200
... If He Buys a Ticket


Dana White confirms to TMZ Sports ... MMA reporter Ariel Helwani will never receive another media credential to another UFC event "as long as I'm here" ... but says he can still buy a ticket.​

That right there is some serious dislike. Sounds like he's been wanting to do this for a while.


----------



## Jumanji (Mar 30, 2011)

Calminian said:


> half a mil? you're in the tank for this guy.


lol thats all I got.

I just think UFC is getting some heat for this and it won't be worth it for them to keep the ban. I bet he's there at UFC 200.


----------



## Calminian (Feb 1, 2009)

Jumanji said:


> lol thats all I got.
> 
> I just think UFC is getting some heat for this and it won't be worth it for them to keep the ban. I bet he's there at UFC 200.


did you catch the article i linked above? Unless you're just saying he'll be there. If you're saying Dana will recant and give him a media credential, you're just giving your credits away.


----------



## jonnyg4508 (Jan 30, 2010)

So UFCs little hissy fit and lifetime ban and not as long as Im here stuff lasted 2 days?

Lol the UFC brass is a joke. Not that it is news but they out do thrmselves over and over. Complete idiots.

Ariel is free. Out on bail!


----------



## jonnyg4508 (Jan 30, 2010)

Calminian said:


> did you catch the article i linked above? Unless you're just saying he'll be there. If you're saying Dana will recant and give him a media credential, you're just giving your credits away.


Good call as usual.


----------



## kantowrestler (Jun 6, 2009)

This is a public relations disaster in and of itself because it overshadowed all the big events at UFC 199. All the journalists are covering Ariel Helwani who is embarrassed that he is being made a martyr for journalism. Yes alot of people are talking about Brock but even more could be talking about him, instead they are talking about Ariel doing his job and suffering.


----------



## Calminian (Feb 1, 2009)

kantowrestler said:


> This is a public relations disaster in and of itself because it overshadowed all the big events at UFC 199. All the journalists are covering Ariel Helwani who is embarrassed that he is being made a martyr for journalism. Yes alot of people are talking about Brock but even more could be talking about him, instead they are talking about Ariel doing his job and suffering.


maybe getting rid of Ariel is almost as satisfying as getting Brock back? nah. only the whiny press is talking about this, along with guys like me that are glad some press brats are getting some pushback. This isn't hurting the UFC in the slightest.


----------



## Jumanji (Mar 30, 2011)

Calminian said:


> did you catch the article i linked above? Unless you're just saying he'll be there. If you're saying Dana will recant and give him a media credential, you're just giving your credits away.


500k creds please. I don't take checks.


----------



## Calminian (Feb 1, 2009)

Jumanji said:


> 500k creds please. I don't take checks.


LOL! good think I didn't take that bet. I was tempted. you blew it. should have pushed. I'd have gone for it.

shame though. they should have held their ground.


----------



## RangerClydeTheBlue (Jul 11, 2012)

Seriously, if anyone thinks this overshaddowed UFC 199 then you are not an MMA fan. Dan Henderson eating a cheese burger overshadows Dana White being a dick and Ariel crying on camera.


----------



## Calminian (Feb 1, 2009)

Wonder what changed their minds? Maybe they just wanted to send a message. Maybe they were moved by his tears?


----------



## RangerClydeTheBlue (Jul 11, 2012)

Calminian said:


> Wonder what changed their minds? Maybe they just wanted to send a message. Maybe they were moved by his tears?


Seems like they spoke with SBNation who changed their minds.


----------



## DonRifle (Jan 18, 2009)

Lol what a sham. Helwani blubbers for 90 mins like a little bitch, in MMA of all sports, supposedly the toughest and he gets his credentials put back. Respect lost for both parties in this shambles. Helwani's balls are so small Im surprised he's been able to produce enough sperm to manufacture children. Not only that he admitted he was taking a paycheck from the UFC, and then blubbers about not being a corporate shill. Next week he should call his show The MMA Shower and put "Golden" in brackets before the last word.


----------



## Spite (Jul 7, 2009)

DonRifle said:


> Lol what a sham. Helwani blubbers for 90 mins like a little bitch, in MMA of all sports, supposedly the toughest and he gets his credentials put back. Respect lost for both parties in this shambles. Helwani's balls are so small Im surprised he's been able to produce enough sperm to manufacture children. Not only that he admitted he was taking a paycheck from the UFC, and then blubbers about not being a corporate shill. Next week he should call his show The MMA Shower and put "Golden" in brackets before the last word.


Lol harsh 

I actually thought Helwani buried himself in the interview, but this shit has gone mainstream and the UFC has received widespread condemnation. His being allowed back probably has a lot to do with the sale.

I'm pleased he's back though, his interviews with the fighters are easily the best in the business and if Ariel reports something, you can take it as fact. He's the only proper journalist in the business, and although he comes across as a bit of a wuss, he also showed balls by releasing stories and even going back to events after being assaulted by security.


----------



## DonRifle (Jan 18, 2009)

Spite said:


> Lol harsh
> 
> I actually thought Helwani buried himself in the interview, but this shit has gone mainstream and the UFC has received widespread condemnation. His being allowed back probably has a lot to do with the sale.
> 
> I'm pleased he's back though, his interviews with the fighters are easily the best in the business and if Ariel reports something, you can take it as fact. He's the only proper journalist in the business, and although he comes across as a bit of a wuss, he also showed balls by releasing stories and even going back to events after being assaulted by security.


Harsh but fair! 

I'm pretty sure the reason the UFC flipped so fast is because of Fox. Fox is a news organisation first isn't it? So they can't be seen to shut down reporters, even if there is a conflict of interest. 

I agree his interviews are the best, and when he reports something it is true. But he is not a proper journalist. He was taking his paycheck from the company he is reporting on. Thats an employee and a PR agent. Its 100% not a journalist. He does not go to competitors events or report on those fights because he's not allowed to. He lied about that on his show last night saying he doesn't have the time. Not even to go to one other event of the sport he loves? Lying shill. 
He is a paid reporter for the UFC, and all his blubbering about how he wrestled with that, but then eventually decided to take the paycheck is an utter sham. For him to sit there and talk about journalism ethics when he was taking his salary from the UFC is an incredible farce. Its a complete conflict of interest. Shower. Golden.


----------



## Spite (Jul 7, 2009)

DonRifle said:


> Harsh but fair!
> 
> I'm pretty sure the reason the UFC flipped so fast is because of Fox. Fox is a news organisation first isn't it? So they can't be seen to shut down reporters, even if there is a conflict of interest.
> 
> ...


Thats not all correct, or at least not as black and white and you claim it to be.

When he took the fox job he clearly said the FOX were paying the UFC, but the UFC signed the checks and that he still wasn't comfortable with it. He also said he often had to sit news at the UFCs request.

He's not with them now anyway. He's free to report on what he wants and the Conor v Diaz and Brock return news were all fair game that every single reporter in the biz would have reported that news if they had got it first.


----------



## DonRifle (Jan 18, 2009)

Spite said:


> Thats not all correct, or at least not as black and white and you claim it to be.
> 
> When he took the fox job he clearly said the FOX were paying the UFC, but the UFC signed the checks and that he still wasn't comfortable with it. He also said he often had to sit news at the UFCs request.
> 
> He's not with them now anyway. He's free to report on what he wants and the Conor v Diaz and Brock return news were all fair game that every single reporter in the biz would have reported that news if they had got it first.


That just semantics. The UFC were the ones signing the check, therefore they were paying him. He even said it himself, he wrestled with it because he knew it was unethical and conflict of interest, but he still went ahead with it! 

I think he should leave MMA now and try get an 11am show where he can blubber on the couch with other people who have been 'wronged'. Can be the new Jewish Oprah. The housewives would love him! "Imagine what he can do with that nose!' is what they would giggle to eachother over their midmorning tea and biscuits!


----------



## Voiceless (Nov 8, 2010)

DonRifle said:


> That just semantics. The UFC were the ones signing the check, therefore they were paying him. He even said it himself, he wrestled with it because he knew it was unethical and conflict of interest, but he still went ahead with it!


It's certainly problematic. It's an issue of monopoly there. He turned down every approach to do any pure UFC things where money directly came from the UFC and where the UFC didn't just play the distributor of FOX money.


----------



## Spite (Jul 7, 2009)

DonRifle said:


> That just semantics. The UFC were the ones signing the check, therefore they were paying him. He even said it himself, he wrestled with it because he knew it was unethical and conflict of interest, but he still went ahead with it!
> 
> I think he should leave MMA now and try get an 11am show where he can blubber on the couch with other people who have been 'wronged'. Can be the new Jewish Oprah. The housewives would love him! "Imagine what he can do with that nose!' is what they would giggle to eachother over their midmorning tea and biscuits!


Yeah he made a mistake with that one, I can see why he did it but he should have stuck with his instincts. Anyway you can't bury a person because of one mistake.

Anyways, kind of cool after the Burt and Stitches scenario. Ariel took on the UFC and won.

It's well known amongst journalistic circles that you you don't fúck with the Helwani


----------



## Sportsman 2.0 (Jul 10, 2012)

Part of his money being paid by UFC means shit and clearly didn't change the way Ariel works as a reporter, that is a fact.

He reported those news based on reporter instincts and priorities only, period. If he would be afraid of pissing off those who were paying him, that ban would never happen. How can people miss that and call the guy unethical when he was doing his job?


----------



## DonRifle (Jan 18, 2009)

Spite said:


> Yeah he made a mistake with that one, I can see why he did it but he should have stuck with his instincts. Anyway you can't bury a person because of one mistake.
> 
> Anyways, kind of cool after the Burt and Stitches scenario. Ariel took on the UFC and won.
> 
> It's well known amongst journalistic circles that you you don't fúck with the Helwani



My problem is not with his mistake, its blubbering about it like and going on like he is somehow in the right. He should just hold his hand up and say I shouldn't have done that and not grey up the area like he did yesterday, and not pretend to be on a journalistic pedestel which he basically did in the same breath. 
But yeah he is proper gangster lol


----------



## Spite (Jul 7, 2009)

DonRifle said:


> My problem is not with his mistake, its blubbering about it like and going on like he is somehow in the right. He should just hold his hand up and say I shouldn't have done that and not grey up the area like he did yesterday, and not pretend to be on a journalistic pedestel which he basically did in the same breath.
> But yeah he is proper gangster lol


I can't agree with the way he handled things but...

The UFC have bullied and intimidated a little 140 pound man. He's turned the tables on them, and made them look bad. I can't help but think this is a victory for the little guy.


----------



## DonRifle (Jan 18, 2009)

Spite said:


> I can't agree with the way he handled things but...
> 
> The UFC have bullied and intimidated a little 140 pound man. He's turned the tables on them, and made them look bad. I can't help but think this is a victory for the little guy.


It is a victory for the little guy I'd agree with that. Pity he embarrassed himself yesterday. If he had not done that show and got his credentials back he would actually look like a gangster lol


----------



## Voiceless (Nov 8, 2010)

Maybe they didn't want him to fully disclose the "physical" incident. That one might really make them look bad.


----------



## Spite (Jul 7, 2009)

Voiceless said:


> Maybe they didn't want him to fully disclose the "physical" incident. That one might really make them look bad.


If you believe Front Row Brian, then its already been disclosed. One of Dana's Bodyguards throw him against a wall and choked him - because he asked Chuck if he'd fight Jones.


----------



## edlavis88 (Jul 12, 2009)

He can be a pompous asshole but FrontRowBrian is usually pretty acurate on these things. Think he was there at UFC 199 too.


----------



## Joabbuac (Jan 31, 2009)

edlavis88 said:


> He can be a pompous asshole but FrontRowBrian is usually pretty acurate on these things. Think he was there at UFC 199 too.


FrontRowBrian is like an Ariel Helwani who never checks his sources... a lot of shit he puts out ends up being complete bullshit, with the occasional thing being correct.


----------



## jonnyg4508 (Jan 30, 2010)

1. Ariel looked pathetic on his show. Shed a tear? OK. About to cry for 90 min straight? Come on..

2. He wasn't wrong. UFC can't just ban anyone for reporting if they want to be a real sport.


----------



## kantowrestler (Jun 6, 2009)

Agree on number two because of the fact that other reporters are going to ask if they'll be next. Dana White and Lorenzo Fertitta acted on emotion. They jumped before they looked and realized that they created a PR nightmare.


----------



## Voiceless (Nov 8, 2010)

Spite said:


> If you believe Front Row Brian, then its already been disclosed. One of Dana's Bodyguards throw him against a wall and choked him - because he asked Chuck if he'd fight Jones.


But it could become a lawsuit for assault. And if it somehow turns out that the bodyguard acted on White's order, that could become ugly.


----------



## kantowrestler (Jun 6, 2009)

Basically Dana is in trouble with this whole situation.


----------



## edlavis88 (Jul 12, 2009)

I cant think Ariel will push the assault accusation any further, firstly he's got his credentials back and everything is back to normal and secondly you never get anywhere on something like that unless there is clear evidence, i'm sure most of us either know someone or personally have suffered what could be called assault at the hands of nightclub bouncers, it's a pointless thing to pursue if it's not on camera.


----------



## kantowrestler (Jun 6, 2009)

Things aren't necessarily back to normal. The UFC knows that they can't simply push someone out for fear of a major backlash. Also regardless of Ariel saying he holds no ill will, his and Dana's relationship won't be the same.


----------

