# Ben Rothwell Says He Was Screwed At UFC 104



## MMA Poser (Sep 30, 2009)

> There is nothing Brett Rogers can say from now on that can top Ben Rothwell's recent crazy remarks. First, I want to preface this by saying, I do agree with Ben Rothwell about the fact that the fight was stopped early. I even said so in our UFC 104 post-fight column, but I cannot figure out how anyone, including Rothwell, thought that fight was close or even that though Rothwell was going to mount comeback.
> 
> In an interview, Rothwell says the first round was extremely close and he was about to comeback when the fight was stopped. He says a lot more insane things, but I think I will let you read them for yourself. Prepare to laugh:
> 
> ...



Sound off people... how crazy is Rothwell?


----------



## 420atalon (Sep 13, 2008)

It looked like a really bad stoppage and I was close to irate when I first saw it but then after seeing a replay I think it was warranted. Rothwell just paused and stood there letting Velasquez punch him in the face a few times, he wasn't defending himself and the ref started coming in to stop the fight because of it. Just as the ref went to stop the fight is when Rothwell finally did something and pushed himself up. 

Not the best stoppage but if you want the fight to keep going you can't just stand there letting a guy tee off on your face.


----------



## flexor (Sep 25, 2009)

Probably not so much crazy as self promotional. No problem here with the stoppage.


----------



## MagiK11 (Dec 31, 2006)

I was one of the only ppl on this forum right after the fight saying it's wasn't a horrible stoppage. I mean just before the second round started the ref told him I won't let you take shots like that anymore if you don't defend well and then he got run over by a bulldozer and took shot after shot standing there and then decided to stand after the ref started moving in to stop it.

Tough balls for him...he should have attempted to move more and push Cain off or something!

So I disagree with everything he said, even though I bet on him to win.


----------



## michelangelo (Feb 1, 2009)

Azzagatti has had suspect judgment from day one. HOWEVER. You did see him issuing a warning to Big Ben at the conclusion of Rd. One. He clearly stated to Rothwell that if he didn't protect himself, he would stop the fight.

Guess what. Rothwell didn't protect himself and Azzagatti stopped the fight. Was it a great stoppage? No. But was Rothwell defending himself either? No.


----------



## xeberus (Apr 23, 2007)

I wonder how often a ref would comply if a fighter asked him "I don't want you to stop my fight early, make sure im out or I tap, no stoppage due to strikes or submission before im ready"


----------



## MMA Poser (Sep 30, 2009)

xeberus said:


> I wonder how often a ref would comply if a fighter asked him "I don't want you to stop my fight early, make sure im out or I tap, no stoppage due to strikes or submission before im ready"


Miguel Angel Torres tells all the refs before the bout not to stop the fight unless he is out cold, which could explain the few extra punches he took from Brian Bowles, but if the ref is good, he will not actually take into account anything a fighter says before a fight about when to stop it. Nor should they.


----------



## Biowza (May 22, 2007)

xeberus said:


> I wonder how often a ref would comply if a fighter asked him "I don't want you to stop my fight early, make sure im out or I tap, no stoppage due to strikes or submission before im ready"


I don't think it would happen much at all. The ref would lose his license.


----------



## joshua7789 (Apr 25, 2009)

This wasnt actually a bad stoppage by any stretch of the imagination. Along with the things already mentioned above, Mazz started to step in a split second before Rothwell started to stand up.


----------



## diablo5597 (Nov 12, 2008)

Great stoppage. He should be glad that ref stopped it cause he was gonna take a massive beating for the rest of the fight.


----------



## alizio (May 27, 2009)

i was more disappointed for Cain then i was for Ben, because it gives ppl another thing to nitpick on him and i think he was on the way to a very convincing TKO. No matter what Ben says he looked dazed, confused and gassed, ready to be taken out, Cain looked fresh.

He certainly doesnt lack confidence, im looking forward to Ben getting another shot with a good HW, i say Cro Cop but since its unlikely ill settle for Hardonk.


----------



## No_Mercy (Oct 17, 2006)

I think fighters should sign a clause where it says they're prepared to take the KO, TKO without referee stoppage. Probably not the safest route, but I can see why he was fuming. He spent 10 years to get to that level. He was losing pretty badly, but he had heart and was still fighting. He was the same referee who stopped Brock's initial fight wasn't he and gave Burns the TKO win over Johnson with the eye poke. Yah he needs to go...


----------



## Soojooko (Jun 4, 2009)

Haha! Good one Ben! 

It's like being in the playground and the big kid is getting beat down by smaller kid, before teacher jumps in. Big kid then yaps on and on about how he was gonna crush smaller kid just before teach saved his arse.

Ben. My man. You looked defeated coming into that second round whereas Cain looked like he was just ready to start your beating proper.


----------



## looney liam (Jun 22, 2007)

i agree that it was a questionable stoppage, but he was getting beaten badly out there and would have been finished sooner or later anyway. the fact is though he was taking unanswered blows, whether your taking damage or not you still need to be defending yourself.

in fact, i thought there were parts in the first round where the fight easily could have been stopped. so in a way he's lucky it got to round 2.


----------



## Nefilim777 (Jun 24, 2009)

Looks like he's just trying to ensure another fight, he was getting beat pretty bad at the time, he probably would have lasted a little longer, but not that much...


----------



## Vale_Tudo (Nov 18, 2007)

Steve warned Ben during the break that he could not let him take those kinds of shots! Ben nodded!


----------



## capjo (Jun 7, 2009)

diablo5597 said:


> Great stoppage. He should be glad that ref stopped it cause he was gonna take a massive beating for the rest of the fight.


I agree 100%!

There was nothing wrong with that stoppage!


----------



## Toxic (Mar 1, 2007)

I didn't like the stoppage but after this fight and the Kongo fight I definatly agree that Velasquez obviously punches like a grandmother.


----------



## xbrokenshieldx (Mar 5, 2007)

Vale_Tudo said:


> Steve warned Ben during the break that he could not let him take those kinds of shots! Ben nodded!


This to me is really what is important. Was it a questionable stoppage? Maybe. But Mazagatti was clear between rounds, don't take a bunch of shots in this round or I am going to stop the fight. When I was watching the fight I thought to myself "this is over".

Maybe it was questionable in that Ben was trying to stand up, but as a smart fighter, he knew the ref was going to be watching the fight closely after the first round. He should not have allowed Cain to punch his face unguarded at that point.


----------



## swpthleg (Dec 31, 2006)

capjo said:


> I agree 100%!
> 
> There was nothing wrong with that stoppage!


A lot of people are skeptical due to Mazzagati's history of questionable stoppages. 

This one was slightly less questionable, IMO.


----------



## xeberus (Apr 23, 2007)

Toxic said:


> I didn't like the stoppage but after this fight and the Kongo fight I definatly agree that Velasquez obviously punches like a grandmother.


haha

But cain has a decent chin he took two shots seconds apart that were KO punches.

OP I didn't like the stoppage but it wasn't horrible and he was taking a lot of punishment, if it would have been me I would have liked to see it go further.


----------



## HitOrGetHit (Jun 29, 2009)

Rothwell was just getting beat up anyway. It wasnt as close as he thought it was at all.


----------



## locnott (Apr 1, 2009)

Big Ben WAS ROBBED, SCREWED, RAPED and MOLLESTED, then Steve jumped in and saved him thank goodness.


----------



## Bob Pataki (Jun 16, 2007)

locnott said:


> Big Ben WAS ROBBED, SCREWED, RAPED and MOLLESTED, then Steve jumped in and saved him thank goodness.


lol :thumb02:

He's talking rubbish - "I could have submitted him, I could have knocked him out" blah blah blah. He got his ass handed to him for the whole first round, Cain was all over him and the attacks were relentless and completely unanswered. 

Why does a fighter have to be out cold or tapping the mat for it to be stopped? With the sort of mentality that Ben Rothwell has - that a fight should continue even if one fighter is taking consistent unanswered punishment, then it wont be long before someone gets put in a coma.

The simple fact is Ben, you didn't have an answer for Cain Velasquez, he's a better MMA fighter than you. He beat your ass down bad, the first round could have been a 10-8. You come out for the second and nothing has changed, you get taken down again and start getting the same treatment as the first round. Maybe if you had defended properly at times, tried some subs off your back etc then it wouldn't have got stopped. 

As far as Steve was concerned it was going to be another 10 minutes of you getting thrown around the cage and punched in the face by Cain. So them punches didn't knock you out or cause a big cut on your forehead, you ever heard of brain damage? If you want to see what happens when fighters who have got good chins get continous punishment to the head without being knocked out then watch some boxing, and take note of the times fighters get carried out on stretchers. We don't want that shit in MMA, there has to be a limit. We want fighters running out of there like Forrest Griffin after getting KTFO. So whether you were still getting to your feet or not, you were still getting punched continously and then thrown back down.

I don't know why I just started addressing Ben, its not like he's reading this but f*ck it. It was a justified stoppage, I even thought it could have been stopped in the first. Why take unecessary punishment? With this 'those punches didn't hurt' mentality, people would get seriously hurt. Unanswered punishment is not being competitive, its called taking a beating and there has to be a limit to that for safety reasons.

He needs to accept he was outclassed and move on, he'll never be competitive at the top of the UFC's heavyweight division. Harsh, but true. Cain demonstrated why.


----------



## flexor (Sep 25, 2009)

Bob Pataki said:


> lol :thumb02:
> 
> He's talking rubbish - "I could have submitted him, I could have knocked him out" blah blah blah. He got his ass handed to him for the whole first round, Cain was all over him and the attacks were relentless and completely unanswered.
> 
> ...


Great post. It's paramount that the fighters are protected from themselves at times also. Just because a fighter doesn't want to quit doesn't mean the fight isn't over.

It brings to mind Mir v Sylvia. You could tell Tim didn't give a rats ass about his arm being snapped, he wanted to keep rolling. The common point in the 2 fights being the guy getting beat not only was losing emphaticly, but had sustained enough trauma to render the contest unfair/unsafe.

Some guys just won't quit, and while that's admirable it's an invitation for some real bad advertising for the company. I'm hesitant to be critical of stoppages because the ref is in a much better position than we are to assess the fighters conditions. I'm glad they keep safety as a high priority because it's in the fighters best interests, the fans best interests, and the sports.


----------



## name goes here (Aug 15, 2007)

The stoppage protected us the viewers from having to watch Cain v Kongo all over again. Which would have been dull.

Note I'm not saying Cain's booring or something, he's very dominant, he's just undersized. But I think Rothwell would have been ko'd eventually.


----------



## SideWays222 (Sep 9, 2008)

You and BJ both brotha. We all know GSP vs Bj was stopped too early. Bj just started getting his shit together.

Hah
**** off Ben, you got owned bro. 

Oh yeah also... you are taking things away from Cain and doing it in a pathetic way.


----------



## shatterproof (Jul 16, 2008)

i don't know about crazy... he thinks he had a chance to come back. Of course he feels that way. At home, we all saw what we saw. A horrible stop to a one-sided affair.

crazy? no. Wrong about the state of the fight? Probably. I look forward to his return.


----------



## Blitzz (Apr 13, 2009)

Without the terrible stoppage I think Rothwell catches him in the third after Cain gasses.


----------



## Carlitoz3 (Oct 9, 2009)

I don't see Ben ever getting a title shot.


----------



## kay_o_ken (Jan 26, 2009)

screw the lyoto vs shogun rematch we need ben vs rothwell 2 asap!!


----------



## BrockLesnar (Aug 14, 2008)

Ben Rothwell Is A Soar Loser Of Course Cains Punches Hurt Him He Had Marks On His Face I Believe If The Match Carried On Cain Would Of Whooped His Ass All The Way Or He Would Of Knocked Rothwell Out


----------



## coldcall420 (Aug 2, 2007)

I think he should fight LesNAR next, lets face it, honestly it as stopped early and I think Ben was getting ready to explode and win that fight against Cain...:confused05: Wait, no Im serious, just kidding, but wait....


----------



## swpthleg (Dec 31, 2006)

BrockLesnar said:


> Ben Rothwell Is A Soar Loser Of Course Cains Punches Hurt Him He Had Marks On His Face I Believe If The Match Carried On Cain Would Of Whooped His Ass All The Way Or He Would Of Knocked Rothwell Out


Just a little punctuation to break things up, please. My head hurts.


----------



## cabby (Sep 15, 2006)

He has too good of chin, I think he got a little drain bramage:confused05:


----------



## Ansem (Oct 16, 2009)

OMG i was just about to unleash my wrath and the ref stopped the fight wtf!!! lol Ben's an ass.


----------



## Zenhalo (Sep 9, 2006)

He was screwed- if the ref would have allowed the match to continue- I'm sure Velasquez would've peeled off a Benjamin or at least treated him to a Subway club from the KO of the night winnings.


----------



## Seperator88 (Jul 12, 2009)

you gotta look at it from all aspects though, it was a bad stopage but the ref did warn him at the beginning of the round. and everyone keeps saying, "well the rest of the fight would've looked the same" not exactly, how many one punch knockouts have we seen from someone losing a fight, plenty. No one knows what could've happened if the fight would've went on and it was his debut in the UFC, an opportunity he has been waiting for his whole life


----------



## shatterproof (Jul 16, 2008)

yeah, i wouldn't say that Ben was likely to turn it around or anything... but for argument's sake: There have been plenty of fights where a dominating opponent gets caught with their hands down, or gassed in the later portion of the rounds.

I think Cain would have gone on to win by TKO personally... but that's not a reason to stop the fight. What maz did was basically award a decision victory to Cain, and somehow i doubt Cain was very pleased with the stop either in retrospect.


----------



## alizio (May 27, 2009)

kay_o_ken said:


> screw the lyoto vs shogun rematch we need ben vs rothwell 2 asap!!


 Ben vs Rothwell could only be trumped by Brock vs Lesnar or the ultimate, Rob vs Emerson!!


----------



## Seperator88 (Jul 12, 2009)

shatterproof said:


> yeah, i wouldn't say that Ben was likely to turn it around or anything... but for argument's sake: There have been plenty of fights where a dominating opponent gets caught with their hands down, or gassed in the later portion of the rounds.
> 
> I think Cain would have gone on to win by TKO personally... but that's not a reason to stop the fight. What maz did was basically award a decision victory to Cain, and somehow i doubt Cain was very pleased with the stop either in retrospect.



yea i highly doubt the fight would've changed much if it wasn't stopped right there. i just hate early stoppages because, no one is going to die, the guys are professionals, especially people like rothwell, he has been in wars before ya know. I think a big determining factor too, was that Ben looked like he kind of gave up coming into the 2nd round, maybe he was just tired, but he didn't have to pep in his step or even the look of confidence like he did in the first, i think he was scared of the takedown


----------



## shatterproof (Jul 16, 2008)

yeah, nevertheless... wasn't Maz's place to stop the fight where he did. It wasn't an issue of intellegent defence, he was clearly working for a better position.


----------



## jdun11 (Apr 23, 2006)

Ahahaahaah he said he lost the first round by a slim margin!!! He got blown out of the Octogon! Maz saved him from a medical suspension, he should be thanking him.

Rothwell is COOKED!


----------



## Mr. Sparkle (Nov 3, 2009)

IMHO, I would have been more than happy to see the corner throw in the towel after the first round. I truly felt that if they actually cared about Ben they would have waved it of. I think the stoppage was fine. Ben's comments are delusional and are the signs of a man obviously desperate to stay in the UFC. I am sure he will be invited back as the UFC needs gatekeepers (no disrespect to Ben, but honestly, he will never figure in the heavyweight division).


----------



## Zenhalo (Sep 9, 2006)

Carlitoz3 said:


> I don't see Ben ever getting a title shot.


Wow- you're coming out of left field with that bold prediction.


----------



## Wookie (Jul 20, 2008)

He wasn't screwed he got dominated for the first round and didn't look any better the second. Maybe he can fight Roy Nelson and we can see an old school UFC fat-boy fight.


----------



## ufcrules (Jan 11, 2007)

i don't disagree with the stoppage either. How about shutting your yap and skipping a few Cheeseburgers Rothwell...ya can.


----------



## machidaisgod (Aug 14, 2009)

Zenhalo said:


> Wow- you're coming out of left field with that bold prediction.


thanks for pointing out the obvious huckleberry


----------



## Bob Pataki (Jun 16, 2007)

Whoever negged me for my 'truth hurts' type post, all I can say is you are promoting higher chances of permanent damage in our sport - congratulations.

Also, grow some balls and put your name.


----------



## Drogo (Nov 19, 2006)

shatterproof said:


> yeah, nevertheless... wasn't Maz's place to stop the fight where he did. It wasn't an issue of intellegent defence, he was clearly working for a better position.


Wha? It was a case of intelligent defense. Getting punched in the head 6-8 times and not doing anything isn't intelligently defending yourself. He started to stand up after Maz was already stepping in to stop it. Before Maz stepped in he was leaning against the fence and eating punch after punch and showing no signs of movement.


----------



## shatterproof (Jul 16, 2008)

Drogo said:


> Wha? It was a case of intelligent defense. Getting punched in the head 6-8 times and not doing anything isn't intelligently defending yourself. He started to stand up after Maz was already stepping in to stop it. Before Maz stepped in he was leaning against the fence and eating punch after punch and showing no signs of movement.


You need to rewatch the fight my friend, because that is simply not what happened. Maz made a movement to step in as Ben got to his ass, when he takes a deep breath and begins to stand up Maz again feints stepping in, then a second later he does so at the worst possible, most illogical, time as Ben plants his arm and begins to stand. 

I'm actually quite surprised at how many people are saying this was a legit stop as it fell completely out of the guidelines for a ref stopping a fight. Ben was clearly attentive and was even more clearly working for an improved position. He was obviously losing the fight, badly, but the stop was terrible. 

Looks like some people agree with it simply because Ben was losing so badly, but the fact is that it's not the Refs job to decide a decision victory, it's his job to stop it if 1) they are not defending themselves or working for an improved position whatsoever or 2) they concede defeat or are knocked out.

Now, since there has been no definitive explanation of intelligent defence in the Unified Rules lets take a look at what the man who coined the term 'intelligent defence' and has been credited with having WROTE the unified rules has defined the term as:



> *Quote: John McCarthy*
> ...when the fighter was hurt or unconscious (and) they can't tap out...
> 
> ...If they're hurt to the point where they're out, you can stop the fight...


Now i don't necessarily support it HAVING to be a KO situation, i think that, for example, when Hughes had Gracie in a crucifix and was dropping unanswered elbows in a dominant ground position from which Gracie had no manuverability it is a legit reason to stop the fight. But getting to ones feet and eating a few punches for your trouble is what has been happening in the UFC for more than two decades and frankly, the understanding of the rules here by those who agree with the stoppage is lacking.

It was a shitty stop. One which i am sure Cain is dissipointed in as well since he may well have won KO or FOTN had the fight gone on.


----------



## HitOrGetHit (Jun 29, 2009)

well he still wasnt defending himself and maz warned ben about this before the round started and he didnt listen so oh well.


----------



## shatterproof (Jul 16, 2008)

Sorry for what is sure to be an essay man but i'd like to address it in detail for anyone else who makes the same argument, as well.



shatterproof said:


> > *John McCarthy*
> > ...when the fighter was hurt or unconscious (and) they can't tap out...
> >
> > ...If they're hurt to the point where they're out, you can stop the fight...


'Defending himself' is a shoddy term to base the stop on since it is not in the rules. Intelligent defence does not simply mean 'blocking punches' as John McCarthy alluded to, above, and the improvement of position (which is what the intelligent defence rule has morphed into the last 5-8 years) continued to clearly progress.

No matter how it's sliced, warning or not, Maz stopped the fight at a point which fell outside the definition of the rules and that's a poor precedent for the future of the sport imo.



> *Unified Rules RE: Ways to Victory*
> ...
> Knockout (KO): as soon as a fighter becomes unconscious due to strikes, his opponent is declared the winner. As MMA rules allow ground fighting, the fight is stopped to prevent further injury to an unconscious fighter.
> 
> ...


So the definition of Intelligent Defence is above (By Big John) and even without that, it was a fact that Ben was 'able' to defend himself as he was improving his position... i appreciate the argument you are presenting: that Ben was warned and was not defending himself from those particular punches... but ultimately he was operating well within the rules for the fight to continue and while Maz may have had reason to stop the fight when Ben took his deep breath on the way up... stopping it as he planted his hand and began to rise was a very poor decision. 

There are two fouls which Maz could have legitimately addressed the situation with, per the 'warning' issued between rounds, which if the fighter does not follow in the case of the first may result in the deduction of a point.



> *From the list of Fouls under the Unifed Rules*
> Flagrantly disregarding the instructions of the referee.
> Timidity, including, without limitation, avoiding contact with an opponent, intentionally or consistently dropping the mouthpiece or faking an injury.


The stoppage sets an unreasonable and unpalletable precedent, if unchallenged: that a fighter taking 5-6 strikes to the face in any circumstance is no longer 'intelligently defending himself' and this is a very poor one to set.

Used to be that a fight wasn't stopped unless the guy was out, tapped, or was visibly injured (or doc stop obviously, eventually). Then the Ref stoppage came to include if a guy was really tired and being too slow about defending himself on the ground. Then it became about 'ok, he's still in the fight but i don't think he can improve his position' which is fine, the improving position litmus test. But to now be calling fights that are getting back to the feet, just because a guy took some shots is crap, imo... the movement of this rule is no good for the sport. 

I want to see fighters -- or if need be the judges, at least there are three of them -- decide fights, not refs.


----------



## Alex_DeLarge (Sep 5, 2006)

I agree it was a bad stoppage. I wanted to see Rothwell get punched in the face more


----------



## kano666 (Nov 2, 2007)

I think shatterproof's analysis is very convincing (rep!). I felt like the stoppage was too soon and I definitely wanted to see the fight go further. Rothwell was being beaten but he wasn't in any danger.

People seem to think Mazzagati's warning should make it okay, but I disagree. The fact is that Rothwell was standing up and improving his position ie intelligently defending himself. Thanks to shatterproof for actually showing us the standard set out by the rules.

EDIT: Sorry, I didn't mean to say Rothwell "wasn't in any danger". Clearly he was being punched in the face. I meant to say IMO he wasn't in danger of being KO'd or injured at the time of the stoppage.


----------



## N1™ (Apr 8, 2007)

it wasnt a bad stoppage. everything maz does now a days gets blasted. rothwell had NOTHING. That first round could in fact be scored as low as 10-7 and it wouldnt raise that many eyebrows.


----------



## ptw (Aug 13, 2009)

Rothwell wasn't intelligently defending himself. I don't care if you're getting up or aren't knocked out etc. if you're get hit in the face like 30 times and don't do jack shit about it, and are just squirming around like a dumbass I don't want that fight to continue. I know you guys are blood hungry, and want to see him on his ass looking all retarded, but that fight was a disgrace. I've never seen someone with a size advantage like that get manhandled so easily, I'm glad they stopped it cuz it wasn't entertaining at all.


----------



## shatterproof (Jul 16, 2008)

Personally, I've never had a prob with Maz. To me, it has nothing to do with the ref and everything to do with the consistent interpretation of the rules as they were drafted -- no matter who is obviously winning or not.


----------



## N1™ (Apr 8, 2007)

ptw said:


> I don't care if you're getting up or aren't knocked out etc.* if you're get hit in the face like 30 times and don't do jack shit about it, and are just squirming around like a dumbass I don't want that fight to continue*.


hear hear !! 

repped


----------



## Xerxes (Aug 14, 2008)

shatterproof said:


> Sorry for what is sure to be an essay man but i'd like to address it in detail for anyone else who makes the same argument, as well.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Damn I must spread it first... Great post. 

As you pointed out Big Ben was *improving his position*. Bad stoppage.


----------



## Drogo (Nov 19, 2006)

shatterproof said:


> You need to rewatch the fight my friend, because that is simply not what happened. Maz made a movement to step in as Ben got to his ass, when he takes a deep breath and begins to stand up Maz again feints stepping in, then a second later he does so at the worst possible, most illogical, time as Ben plants his arm and begins to stand.


I have re watched the fight and I don't see how your description is different from what I said. Rothwell wasn't standing up when Maz stopped it. He was getting ready to stand up. Big deal. He'd been like that for a couple seconds and was taking multiple punches but you want the ref to let it go because Rothwell might stand up? He might have just stayed down and kept eating punches. 

I don't think the ref can base his decision on what Rothwell might do, he needs to base it on what Rothwell was doing, which was nothing. 



shatterproof said:


> 'Defending himself' is a shoddy term to base the stop on since it is not in the rules.


Unified Rules RE: Ways to Victory
...
Technical Knockout (TKO)
Referee Stoppage: the referee may stop a match in progress if:
a fighter becomes dominant to the point where the opponent is unable to intelligently defend himself from attacks, which may occur as quickly as a few seconds;

This isn't part of the rules? That looks like talking about intelligent defense and it is in the rules. I'm confused.


----------



## N1™ (Apr 8, 2007)

Xerxes said:


> Big Ben was *improving his position*


to what ? getting hit in the face from another angle ?


----------



## Xerxes (Aug 14, 2008)

Drogo said:


> He was getting ready to stand up.


Aka intelligent defense.



N1™;1035141 said:


> to what ? getting hit in the face from another angle ?


Getting back up from under your opponent = improving position.


----------



## alizio (May 27, 2009)

you cant just keep taking UNANSWERED shots to improve position and think thats intelligent, thats the intelligent way to get brain damage, fact is Ben let this happen to him a few times and MAZ warned him about it, so yes, it does matter, you cant infinite unanswered shots while trying to regain full guard on the ground either, claiming you were trying to improve position doesnt = intelligently defending yourself if you are taking flush unanswered shots the entire time, your better off pulling guard.


----------



## shatterproof (Jul 16, 2008)

Haha, we must have watched dif fights then man. I thought it was pretty clear he was working to stand up, as (imho) should anyone who officiates this sport.



Drogo said:


> I don't think the ref can base his decision on what Rothwell might do, he needs to base it on what Rothwell was doing, which was nothing.


Infact, it was not his job to worry about what Ben was doing whatsoever beyond him being UNABLE (i.e. his arms are unavailable to him, or he is unconscious) to defend himself as the rules clearly state. I mean, this isn't my opinion man... it's plain as day in the rules. :thumb02:

The idea of this being defined as improving ones position is much newer to the sport and actually doesn't even appear in the rules, but i will address again lower in the post. 



Drogo said:


> This isn't part of the rules? That looks like talking about intelligent defense and it is in the rules. I'm confused.


Infact, simply 'defending yourself' is not the same as 'intellegent defence' and that is the whole point. You dont HAVE to defend yourself at all times. No where in the rules does it say you must. Sure the ref says it before a fight but the truth it, it's simply not in the rules. The portion of my post which included the actual definition of 'intellegent defence' from the man who coined the term and wrote it into the unified rules addresses the actual dif in terminology. 



N1™;1035141 said:


> to what ? *getting hit in the face from another angle* ?


Well played, haha, but yeah. I think the disconnect here is that you seem to have based your opinions/comments on the fact that Rothwell was losing terribly which no one really dissagrees with -- other than Ben i guess. To me it's about the slippery slope. To reitterate:

_Used to be that a fight wasn't stopped unless the guy was out, tapped, or was visibly injured (or doc stop obviously, eventually). Then the Ref stoppage came to include if a guy was really tired and being too slow about defending himself on the ground. Then it became about 'ok, he's still in the fight but i don't think he can improve his position' which is fine, the improving position litmus test. But to now be calling fights that are getting back to the feet, just because a guy took some shots is crap, imo... the movement of this rule is no good for the sport. 

I want to see fighters -- or if need be the judges, at least there are three of them -- decide fights, not refs._


----------



## box (Oct 15, 2006)

When it happened, I felt it was a horrible stoppage. But like it's been said, Rothwell was a human punching bag that entire fight, it wasn't going to change, sadly the ref picked the worst time to stop it, but it was justified. I honestly think Rothwell has no feeling in his face, he had no cuts or marks after getting blasted over and over.


----------



## Xerxes (Aug 14, 2008)

alizio said:


> you cant just keep taking UNANSWERED shots to improve position and think thats intelligent, thats the intelligent way to get brain damage, fact is Ben let this happen to him a few times and MAZ warned him about it, so yes, it does matter, you cant infinite unanswered shots while trying to regain full guard on the ground either, claiming you were trying to improve position doesnt = intelligently defending yourself if you are taking flush unanswered shots the entire time, your better off pulling guard.


Kongo was getting battered as bad if not worse and wasn't able to improve his position once but the ref gave him EVERY chance to recover, possibly get a stand up and win the fight. 

Guess what? Beginning of each round when the fight was stood up again, he nearly KOd Cain. Although he got tooled for 3 rounds he could of pulled it off that night, multiple times. Rothwell simply didnt get that chance and imo he should have.


----------



## alizio (May 27, 2009)

Xerxes said:


> Kongo was getting battered as bad if not worse and wasn't able to improve his position once but the ref gave him EVERY chance to recover, possibly get a stand up and win the fight.
> 
> Guess what? Beginning of each round when the fight was stood up again, he nearly KOd Cain. Although he got tooled for 3 rounds he could of pulled it off that night, multiple times. Rothwell simply didnt get that chance and imo he should have.


 Kongo was trying to cover up, not "trying to improve position" while taking multiple unanswered shots more then once, it happened in the 1st round 2x aswell. Like i said, i tihnk Ben would have been better off pulling guard and covering up, esp considering the fact he was warned about taking unanswered shots right before the round started. I dont consider improving position to be intelligently defending yourself if it makes you take 10 unanswered shots everytime you do it, it seems like he was running more on instinct to get up then trying to defend himself imo


----------



## shatterproof (Jul 16, 2008)

I know that people hate to acknowledge the slippery slope argument but per a number of the comments here on the 6 unanswered blows. This classic Don Fry fight starts with one answered blow, then 6 unanswered... and goes on to show an utter lack of self defence... intelligent or otherwise. Of course, no one would have stopped this fight... but under the precedent set by allowing a fight to stop simply because of a lack of defence and in the face of a fighter clearly able to continue and not caught in a precarious position it very well could have been.

I realize people have framed their opinions on the fact that Rothwell was clearly losing the match but truth be told, that is not a test of the rules. The rules are quite clear, it's the judge and the corner's place to end a fight based on that factor by, respectively, presenting a decision or by throwing in the towel. It's not the ref's job or privlage to do so.


Fight starts at 1:16







anyway, we can all enjoy this classic, no matter which position we take :thumb02:


----------



## marcthegame (Mar 28, 2009)

for some crazy reason i taught ben would have won that if the ref would have not stopped it. He would have pulled a rocky and came back stop/


----------



## DahStoryTella (Jul 11, 2009)

He got his ass whooped anyways, don't need another terrible Mazzagatti stoppage to overshadow that.

Rothwell got styled on.


----------



## HitOrGetHit (Jun 29, 2009)

that was like a hockey fight! just holding and swinging.


----------



## Alex_DeLarge (Sep 5, 2006)

Yeah, Rothwell was getting tooled. Had no interest in seeing that fight continue.


----------



## shatterproof (Jul 16, 2008)

HitOrGetHit said:


> that was like a hockey fight! just holding and swinging.


That fight was the real exclamation point on the largely, otherwise, boring event. Well, that and Fedor's first fight in Japan/Pride (as well as televised to North America) where he sub'd a heavily favored Semmy -- which earned him his fight for the HW strap he held from then on.


----------



## HitOrGetHit (Jun 29, 2009)

shatterproof said:


> That fight was the real exclamation point on the largely, otherwise, boring event. Well, that and Fedor's first fight in Japan/Pride, as well as televised to North America, where he sub'd a heavily favored Semmy.


yeah i have never seen that before. Thanks for posting!:thumbsup: I'd rep you but i have to spread it more.


----------



## Drogo (Nov 19, 2006)

shatterproof said:


> Haha, we must have watched dif fights then man. I thought it was pretty clear he was working to stand up, as (imho) should anyone who officiates this sport.
> 
> 
> Infact, simply 'defending yourself' is not the same as 'intellegent defence' and that is the whole point. You dont HAVE to defend yourself at all times. No where in the rules does it say you must. Sure the ref says it before a fight but the truth it, it's simply not in the rules. The portion of my post which included the actual definition of 'intellegent defence' from the man who coined the term and wrote it into the unified rules addresses the actual dif in terminology.
> [/I]


I understand your point about him improving his position. If he had been then he would have a case for a bad stoppage. I don't think he was or if he was that it wasn't obvious or wasn't happening fast enough. 

As for the intelligent defense argument it seems like you are splitting hairs. The intent of the rule is clear so even if the semantics aren't perfect it seems like a textbook example to me.

I certainly agree that the fact that Rothwell was losing badly and would have continued to lose shouldn't impact the decision to stop a fight. I'm not suggesting that (although I'm sure it would be very difficult for a ref not to be influenced by that during a fight).


----------



## GMK13 (Apr 20, 2009)

even if he didnt stop the fight when he did, rothwell still would have lost he was getting destroyed.


----------



## cabby (Sep 15, 2006)

I understand that he's a fighter and everything but come on man did he really feel he had anything to offer at that point? Just because he wasn't out doesn't mean he wasn't getting tooled.


----------



## Xerxes (Aug 14, 2008)

alizio said:


> Kongo was trying to cover up, not "trying to improve position" while taking multiple unanswered shots more then once, it happened in the 1st round 2x aswell. Like i said, i tihnk Ben would have been better off pulling guard and covering up, esp considering the fact he was warned about taking unanswered shots right before the round started. I dont consider improving position to be intelligently defending yourself if it makes you take 10 unanswered shots everytime you do it, it seems like he was running more on instinct to get up then trying to defend himself imo


Your saying it was a good stoppage, I'm saying it wasn't. 

The single fact that this thread generated so much back and forth debate here and on every other mma forum out there just shows you that the stoppage was questionable at best. The same thing happens every single time a referee makes a questionable call and stops a fight early. 

+ big Ben is no fan favorite. In fact, his fan base is minuscule. If he was a popular fighter, I guarantee you this thread would have twice the amount of posts it has now and A LOT more people would be b*tching about the stoppage.

Note: just ftr I'm no Rothwell fan. I was actually pulling for Cain as I had some coin on him. Just giving you my honest opinion.


----------



## vandalian (Oct 14, 2006)

I don't get the "he was gonna lose anyway" thing. 

Point is hadn't lost, and he deserved the chance to turn things around.

We've all seen guys take a beating and then pull out a win.


----------



## alizio (May 27, 2009)

Xerxes said:


> Your saying it was a good stoppage, I'm saying it wasn't.
> 
> The single fact that this thread generated so much back and forth debate here and on every other mma forum out there just shows you that the stoppage was questionable at best. The same thing happens every single time a referee makes a questionable call and stops a fight early.
> 
> ...


 yea agree to disagree, as a Cain supporter i was disappointed in the stop tbh, i wanted Cain to finish it convincingly and im positive he was on that route. For a guy with pillow hands he has alot of stoppages btw


----------



## _RIVAL_ (Mar 7, 2008)

I'm not a big fan of Mazz, but I do remember him telling Rothwell before the second round that he wasn't going to continue letting him take that kind of punishment. Ben should have heeded that warning. Wrong or right, Mazz gave him a warning shot there.


----------



## Xerxes (Aug 14, 2008)

alizio said:


> yea agree to disagree, as a Cain supporter i was disappointed in the stop tbh, i wanted Cain to finish it convincingly and im positive he was on that route. For a guy with pillow hands he has alot of stoppages btw


Exactly. 

The sad part about this stoppage is that in the eyes of some people (haters mostly) it kinda takes away from Cain's performance even though he completely tooled Rothwell from start to finish. 

If Mazz stopped it at a better time, nobody would debate about it or question it.


----------



## steveo412 (Sep 27, 2006)

lol he says he lost first round by a small margin it was like a 10-6


----------



## kano666 (Nov 2, 2007)

Xerxes said:


> Exactly.
> 
> The sad part about this stoppage is that in the eyes of some people (haters mostly) it kinda takes away from Cain's performance even though he completely tooled Rothwell from start to finish.
> 
> If Mazz stopped it at a better time, nobody would debate about it or question it.


Exactly. I feel like it was an early stoppage, but I certainly don't blame Cain for it. He put on an impressively dominant performance. I'm not even anti-Mazzagati, I just wish we could've seen more of the fight. I think Rothwell still had a chance to get some miraculous turnaround, but more likely Cain would've finished decisively. Either result would've been better than the early stoppage.


----------



## Alex_DeLarge (Sep 5, 2006)

vandalian said:


> I don't get the "he was gonna lose anyway" thing.
> 
> Point is hadn't lost, and he deserved the chance to turn things around.
> 
> We've all seen guys take a beating and then pull out a win.


Normally I'd agree with this, but the only future Rothwell had in that fight was getting more exhausted then he already was and getting punched in the face. It's a fair stoppage. Taking punches in the face is not defending yourself especially when that's all you're doing the entire fight.

It's like...why bother complaining about it? It was one of the more lopsided fights I've seen in a long time to which Rothwell could literally do nothing. I know I know, it's MMA and one punch can end it. Truth is, I doubt Rothwell even had one punch left in him. He was done, finished.


----------



## kc1983 (May 27, 2007)

*sigh*
Really???

Rothwell was a human punching bag in this whole fight. 

He was not close to winning the first round. 

The fight was ALMOST stopped in the first round. 

Maz warned Ben at the start of the 2nd that he will stop the fight if he doesn't defend himself. He didn't, so the fight was stopped. So what if he was getting up?

This was such a one-sided, decisive beating. If the first round was back/forth then sure there's more reason to establish an argument but it wasn't. 

I think part of the reason this is such a big deal was because Maz was the ref and he doesn't have the best track record lately. 

Glad I put all my points in Cain!


----------



## mma_official (Feb 6, 2009)

xeberus said:


> I wonder how often a ref would comply if a fighter asked him "I don't want you to stop my fight early, make sure im out or I tap, no stoppage due to strikes or submission before im ready"


I actually get asked that a lot. Sometimes by the fighter, but more often by the corner. It usually goes like this: 
Corner: "My kid gets in a lot of tight spots, but he's tough as nails so don't stop it if he's getting pounded a little."
Me: "If it's a little its not a problem, but if he's in trouble I'm going to stop it."
Corner: "Just give him a chance to recover."
Me: "I do that, but if he's in real trouble I'm pulling the plug." 
Corner: "No I'm telling you his head is like concrete and he doesn't mind getting beaten!"
Me: "So beat on him in the gym all you want for as long as he'll let you. I have a job to do, is there anything else I can do for you."
Corner: "He's a tough kid, I'm just sayin'! He's tough...mumble mumble
Me: "Okay, good luck tonight."



J.P. said:


> I'm not a big fan of Mazz, but I do remember him telling Rothwell before the second round that he wasn't going to continue letting him take that kind of punishment. Ben should have heeded that warning. Wrong or right, Mazz gave him a warning shot there.


That and you hear him warning him that he doesn't get into the fight he's going to stop it. Rothwell has no one to blame but himself.


----------



## swpthleg (Dec 31, 2006)

mma_official said:


> I actually get asked that a lot. Sometimes by the fighter, but more often by the corner. It usually goes like this:
> Corner: "My kid gets in a lot of tight spots, but he's tough as nails so don't stop it if he's getting pounded a little."
> Me: "If it's a little its not a problem, but if he's in trouble I'm going to stop it."
> Corner: "Just give him a chance to recover."
> ...


This was fascinating. I have heard a lot of talk from my teacher and people that he coaches to fight from the amateur level, but never a breakdown as concise and to the point as this.


----------



## mma_official (Feb 6, 2009)

swpthleg said:


> This was fascinating. I have heard a lot of talk from my teacher and people that he coaches to fight from the amateur level, but never a breakdown as concise and to the point as this.


LOL Glad you enjoyed it. I added a TREMENDOUS amount of value to the conversation didn't I? 

In all honesty the thread is a little tired anyway. People can argue all they want about he validity of the stoppage, but it doesn't change the outcome. People can talk about how good/bad Mazz is but the reality is it doesn't appear that he's going anywhere.


----------



## HitOrGetHit (Jun 29, 2009)

mma_official said:


> LOL Glad you enjoyed it. I added a TREMENDOUS amount of value to the conversation didn't I?
> 
> In all honesty the thread is a little tired anyway. People can argue all they want about he validity of the stoppage, but it doesn't change the outcome. People can talk about how good/bad Mazz is but the reality is it doesn't appear that he's going anywhere.


agreed. everyone just keeps arguing the same points now...


----------



## shatterproof (Jul 16, 2008)

i don't think it has anything to do with whether he would have won or lost, and i have absolutely no opinion on Mazz as a ref personally. There are refs i don't approve of... but Maz is not one of them.

To me, and i think to a fair number of others in this thread, it is simply about applying the rules consistently, uniformly and fairly in ALL cases. 

There should be no divergence in the application of the rules, whatsoever. Sure, mistakes happen -- but when they do it's important to point them out to avoid them in the future.


----------



## mma_official (Feb 6, 2009)

shatterproof said:


> i don't think it has anything to do with whether he would have won or lost, and i have absolutely no opinion on Mazz as a ref personally. There are refs i don't approve of... but Maz is not one of them.
> 
> To me, and i think to a fair number of others in this thread, it is simply about applying the rules consistently, uniformly and fairly in ALL cases.
> 
> There should be no divergence in the application of the rules, whatsoever. Sure, mistakes happen -- but when they do it's important to point them out to avoid them in the future.


The problem is that you don't have a minimum set of standards for officials. Every referee (and judge) should have to be tested on the rules and their application. Every referee should have to show a knowledge of positions and submissions. Every referee should have to show a knowledge of mechanics and methods in the ring. John McCarthy tried to establish that with the Association of Boxing Commissions with his COMMAND cources. But trying to get directors of commissions to agree to something like that is about as easy as herding cats! 

I took the command course and I can tell you there are many, many, many officials today that would not pass that course.


----------



## shatterproof (Jul 16, 2008)

For sure, obviously there is an issue of training, and an issue of interpretation... but there is interpretation, then there is outright denying/ignoring the rules altogether, and/or reading things into them that do not actually exist there.

it's not a very fine line in my opinion. the rules are pretty clear in so much as this application: if one is ABLE to defend one's self, then the fight should not be stopped by the official (barring other circumstances like fouls, etc). actually, actively, defending one's self or not is not a criteria to stop the fight. Now i'm not saying there are not circumstances where it would be appropriate (if someone turtles and just covers up for example) but this is not the case as it pertains to this fight. this was a case of an official, having warned a figther to not take punches (something unaddressed by the rules), calling a fight ebcause he felt it was one sided. It was one sided... but that's simply not his place. that's the judges, the figther or his corner's place -- and in some cases that of the doctor.


----------



## tg2k9 (Nov 5, 2009)

some guys just dont no when to let their pride go and admit when there beat. think ke should quit his moaning. anyway i dont think he has what it takes to make it in the ufc. ive seen his fights in ifl and strikeforce and there nothing to write home about.


----------



## TERMINATOR (Jul 6, 2008)

It was stopped prematurely for sure but still only seconds away from a true stoppage by the way it looked to me. ROthwell was just lucky it was stopped early.


----------



## mma_official (Feb 6, 2009)

shatterproof said:


> For sure, obviously there is an issue of training, and an issue of interpretation... but there is interpretation, then there is outright denying/ignoring the rules altogether, and/or reading things into them that do not actually exist there.
> 
> it's not a very fine line in my opinion. the rules are pretty clear in so much as this application: if one is ABLE to defend one's self, then the fight should not be stopped by the official (barring other circumstances like fouls, etc). actually, actively, defending one's self or not is not a criteria to stop the fight. Now i'm not saying there are not circumstances where it would be appropriate (if someone turtles and just covers up for example) but this is not the case as it pertains to this fight.


Well I'll tell you I've reffed a lot of fights. I was second ref for one last year. The ref stopped the fight. Both fighers were swinging away. It's late in the 3rd rd. and both fighters are swinging for the fences. There is about 1 minute left in the rd. The ref stops and the crowd goes absolutely bonkers. I asked the ref why he stopped and he said, "Man, I just don't know, the guy's eyes just didn't look right to me." After they interviewed the winner and loser, the loser was leaving the cage and he collapsed and could not be revived. The kid was transported and ended up being ok. The ref has to have the lattitude to make those kinds of calls. There is NO doubt in my mind that ref saved that kid's life. After the fight was over people came up from the crowd and apologized to the ref. 

The kid WAS intelligently defending himself, but that was instinct and training taking over.


----------



## shatterproof (Jul 16, 2008)

mma_official said:


> Well I'll tell you I've reffed a lot of fights. I was second ref for one last year. The ref stopped the fight. Both fighers were swinging away. It's late in the 3rd rd. and both fighters are swinging for the fences. There is about 1 minute left in the rd. The ref stops and the crowd goes absolutely bonkers. I asked the ref why he stopped and he said, "Man, I just don't know, the guy's eyes just didn't look right to me." After they interviewed the winner and loser, the loser was leaving the cage and he collapsed and could not be revived. The kid was transported and ended up being ok. The ref has to have the lattitude to make those kinds of calls. There is NO doubt in my mind that ref saved that kid's life. After the fight was over people came up from the crowd and apologized to the ref.
> 
> The kid WAS intelligently defending himself, but that was instinct and training taking over.


see that's a fine example of extenuating circumstances but really... he should have been sent to the Doc if there was a question of 'whether he could continue or not'. Refs are not doctors, or judges. By the sounds of it he did the right thing in stopping the action but as a point of rule it should have been escalated to the doctor.

If he was wrong, he'd have robbed the fighter of an opportunity and the crowd of a finish. it's easy to point to that and say that 'it was a matter of life or death, man -- your entertainment is noth worth that', you know, but at the end of the day we are still talking about consenting parties and there is relief in place for just that circumstance. Everyone's got a job to do there -- it is not the ref's job to play doctor, judge or cornerman in my opinion (and visa vie the rules).


----------



## mma_official (Feb 6, 2009)

We have the discression of bringing in the doctor, but we can stop a fight any time we have concern for the fighters' safety.


----------



## shatterproof (Jul 16, 2008)

mma_official said:


> We have the discression of bringing in the doctor, but we can stop a fight any time we have concern for the fighters' safety.


When it's hard to say... emote it, haha: :sarcastic10:

The crux of this issue seems to be vague and divergent terminology and standards. there is a doctor there for medical stoppages, judges to decide decisions, a cornerman and fighter who can stop the fight for their welfare and a ref to rule on fouls, TKO/KOs.

Vague and sweeping generalities and/or opinions pertaining to the 'safety' of a consenting combatant who has wilfully chosen to continue the fight do nothing for the legitimacy and growth of the sport. Not that a death in the ring would either but again, rothwell was in no more danger than anyone else who steps into the ring at the time the fight stopped.

Why have judges if the refs are to decide fights for everyone involved, without check or balance. Rules are like laws... they need to be fairly and uniformly applied in all cases or they lose all credibility. There is no room for vague or unqualified opinions.


----------



## mma_official (Feb 6, 2009)

shatterproof said:


> When it's hard to say... emote it, haha: :sarcastic10:
> 
> The crux of this issue seems to be vague and divergent terminology and standards. there is a doctor there for medical stoppages, judges to decide decisions, a cornerman and fighter who can stop the fight for their welfare and a ref to rule on fouls, TKO/KOs.
> 
> ...


----------



## SideWays222 (Sep 9, 2008)

You have no right to argue with a ref ShatterProof. Your argument is also kinda funny to me because your playing "ref" by telling them how to do their job yet your arguing that their playing "doctor". Maybe im a bit off here but i have to agree with the ref on this one.


----------



## shatterproof (Jul 16, 2008)

RE: The willingness to continue
To be clear, that is not a peg i hang my argument on, but a single determining factor. Ultimately i would still assert as the rules do that it is the ref's job to halt the action and the doctor's job to decide if the fighter can continue or not in this instance.

RE: The Qualified Opinion
That wasn't a jab at you man, that was to say that (as above) it should be the doctor rendering a medical decision. Not someone with what equates to an anecdotal education in medicine as it is applied to combat sports, at best.



SideWays222 said:


> You have no right to argue with a ref ShatterProof.
> 
> ...*Maybe im a bit off here*...


Agreed, on the later. :thumbsup:


----------



## mma_official (Feb 6, 2009)

You know what, I love it! I love that you guys are so passionate about it! I love that you guys care about not only the fighter's safety but their livelihood too! You guys are the reason we have a job! I am glad you guys are demanding better officiating! I am glad you guys want to see this stuff discussed.

I'd love to see a groundswell toward standardization of qualifications for all officials! This is good stuff! Shatter keep it up!


----------



## shatterproof (Jul 16, 2008)

mma_official said:


> You know what, I love it! I love that you guys are so passion it about it! I love that you guys care about not only the fighter's safety but their livelihood too! You guys are the reason we have a job! I am glad you guys are demanding better officiating! I am glad you guys want to see this stuff discussed.
> 
> I'd love to see a groundswell toward standardization of qualifications for all officials! This is good stuff! Shatter keep it up!


haha, yeah i think it's pretty clear that this issue is a tough one to nail down, from either side of the argument. Appreciate the quality chat on it man, it's been a slice. 

i'd rep ya again, but already did on the last page for your thoughtful/intriguing point of view -- dispite our obvious divergence of opinion on these particular perticulars. :thumb02:


----------



## mma_official (Feb 6, 2009)

RE: The Qualified Opinion
That wasn't a jab at you man, that was to say that (as above) it should be the doctor rendering a medical decision. Not someone with what equates to an anecdotal education in medicine as it is applied to combat sports, at best.

If a referee has not been trained or does not understand the nature of combat sports-related injuries he/she has no business being in the cage or ring.



shatterproof said:


> RE: The Qualified Opinion
> That wasn't a jab at you man, that was to say that (as above) it should be the doctor rendering a medical decision. Not someone with what equates to an anecdotal education in medicine as it is applied to combat sports, at best.


Thanks for the feedback man. You know the funny thing is I've worked fights with doctors that are new to MMA, and often times they freak out initially. Often times its us and the paramedics that calm them down. "Nah, doc he's good. See it's just a cut on his nose and its not bleeding in his eye." or "it's just a little hematoma, his eye response is still good, he's not concussed, he's good to go." The medics usually just shake their heads and smirk at you when the doc walks away. 

Overall most of the docs and medics I've worked with have been awesome, but there are a few stories I could tell you.

BTW, Shatter I tried to PM you but it said I didn't have permission.


----------



## swpthleg (Dec 31, 2006)

Try not to double post, use the handy edit button, mmkay?


----------



## _RIVAL_ (Mar 7, 2008)

swpthleg said:


> Try not to double post, use the handy edit button, mmkay?


Merged em. No big deal, thanks for the insight mma_official.:thumbsup:


----------



## Xerxes (Aug 14, 2008)

mma_official said:


> .....


Just skipped through the last few pages quickly and apologize in advance if I missed it but I was just curious as to what your thoughts were about the Cain/Rothwell stoppage?


----------



## _RIVAL_ (Mar 7, 2008)

To the bottem of the ladder for Mr. Rothwell.


----------



## Alex_DeLarge (Sep 5, 2006)

That's kind of where he was. I don't even consider him gatekeeper status.


----------



## alizio (May 27, 2009)

Im reserving judgement on Ben for now, he looks like a tough SOB for sure, i dont know what else to take from that fight positively for him but Cain is an animal. I look forward to Ben fighting a striker like the Mirko fight that has been mentioned, he is a BIG guy and hits hard he simply has no answer for those TDs, i still think he could be a crowd pleaser if you lined him up with a kickboxer like Barry or Kongo, CroCop or even Kimbo Slice ;P


----------



## mma_official (Feb 6, 2009)

Xerxes said:


> Just skipped through the last few pages quickly and apologize in advance if I missed it but I was just curious as to what your thoughts were about the Cain/Rothwell stoppage?


In all candor I did not see the fight live or in its entirety, as I was reffing that night. I did see most of the second round. I didn't see anything that made me think it was a crazy stoppage, although perhaps a tad early. The thing you have to remember is the ref is the only guy who can see his eyes and the eyes tell you everything about where a guy is at. 

I am not suggesting that this is the case in this instance but one thing you should know is that in most cases the referee gives the fighers an out. By that I mean the referee tells the fighters if you tell me "xxxx" i will stop the fight by referee stoppage. That allows the fighter to save face and prevent being injured, and not have it count as a verbal submission. I will tell you more than a few "bad stoppages" in the UFC have happened that way. Its funny a guy will ask you to stop it, then MF you up and down and then after the fight he'll thank you. It's crazy!


----------



## shatterproof (Jul 16, 2008)

another interesting factoid, about the 'out word'. im going to start watching for that on stops i consider bad, cheers man.


----------



## machidaisgod (Aug 14, 2009)

Well Baby Ben's whinning got him a great fight that he might actually be able to win. If Mazogotti had just let him get pummeled unconscious we probably would never have got to see Ben and his amazing submissions some more.


----------



## Xerxes (Aug 14, 2008)

mma_official said:


> a tad *early*


There you have it folks. It was an early stoppage. 

That's all I wanted to hear :thumb02:




> I am not suggesting that this is the case in this instance but one thing you should know is that in most cases the referee gives the fighers an out. By that I mean the referee tells the fighters if you tell me "xxxx" i will stop the fight by referee stoppage. That allows the fighter to save face and prevent being injured, and not have it count as a verbal submission. I will tell you more than a few "bad stoppages" in the UFC have happened that way. Its funny a guy will ask you to stop it, then MF you up and down and then after the fight he'll thank you. It's crazy!


Hehe interesting.. 

Do you think you could tell us which fights were reffed that way in the UFC? I'd understand if you couldn't though.


----------



## HitOrGetHit (Jun 29, 2009)

HAHA i got neg repped for simply stating that Rothwell was losing the fight like 8 pages ago. And the message was so thoughtful!

Man UltraMax, you are late on the neg rep AND that means you must have been thinking Rothwell was winning.:thumbsdown:


----------



## kano666 (Nov 2, 2007)

mma_official said:


> I am not suggesting that this is the case in this instance but one thing you should know is that in most cases the referee gives the fighers an out. By that I mean the referee tells the fighters if you tell me "xxxx" i will stop the fight by referee stoppage. That allows the fighter to save face and prevent being injured, and not have it count as a verbal submission. I will tell you more than a few "bad stoppages" in the UFC have happened that way. Its funny a guy will ask you to stop it, then MF you up and down and then after the fight he'll thank you. It's crazy!


That's really interesting, I hadn't heard that. Could you give an example or two of high-level fights stopped this way? I'd love to rewatch them and look for this. I don't think there's anything wrong with fighters taking this out (sometimes you're just beat, no dishonour in that) but it's pretty low to badmouth a ref if that's the case.


----------



## cabby (Sep 15, 2006)

HitOrGetHit said:


> HAHA i got neg repped for simply stating that Rothwell was losing the fight like 8 pages ago. And the message was so thoughtful!
> 
> Man UltraMax, you are late on the neg rep AND that means you must have been thinking Rothwell was winning.:thumbsdown:


BOO ULTRAMAX and ROTHWELL BOOOOOOO these men


----------



## mma_official (Feb 6, 2009)

kano666 said:


> That's really interesting, I hadn't heard that. Could you give an example or two of high-level fights stopped this way? I'd love to rewatch them and look for this. I don't think there's anything wrong with fighters taking this out (sometimes you're just beat, no dishonour in that) but it's pretty low to badmouth a ref if that's the case.


I'm not going to out any fighter that way. We give them our word that it's between them and us. I give you my word that it has happened with virtually every named referee you've seen at the UFC level. 

As far as badmouthing us, we truly, honestly don't care. We are not there to be popular or even to make anyone happy. We are there to protect the fighters and enforce the rules and that's it.


----------



## swpthleg (Dec 31, 2006)

mma_official said:


> I'm not going to out any fighter that way. We give them our word that it's between them and us. I give you my word that it has happened with virtually every named referee you've seen at the UFC level.
> 
> As far as badmouthing us, we truly, honestly don't care. We are not there to be popular or even to make anyone happy. We are there to protect the fighters and enforce the rules and that's it.


TBH, I save all my best badmouthing for college football refs.:thumb02:


----------



## Black SunShine (Nov 9, 2009)

*Racists Shouldn't be allowed to Fight???*

Cain valaskez is a huge racist with his "Brown Pride" tattoo if I went in there with "White Pride" tattooed on my chest all heck would brake loose.


----------



## swpthleg (Dec 31, 2006)

That's your first post, huh.


----------



## UrbanBounca (Sep 13, 2009)

swpthleg said:


> That's your first post, huh.


Priceless. :laugh:


----------



## Black SunShine (Nov 9, 2009)

Yeah I just got done watching this matchup and wanted to rant,it's a crazy country we live in when that doesn't bother anyone.


----------



## HitOrGetHit (Jun 29, 2009)

Black SunShine said:


> Cain valaskez is a huge racist with his "Brown Pride" tattoo if I went in there with "White Pride" tattooed on my chest all heck would brake loose.


I do agree with the post somewhat. I'm not sure how out of control it would be but it would definitely be frowned upon. I don't think he is a racist at all though. He is just proud of where he comes from.


----------



## Brutus (May 27, 2007)

HitOrGetHit said:


> I do agree with the post somewhat. I'm not sure how out of control it would be but it would definitely be frowned upon. I don't think he is a racist at all though. He is just proud of where he comes from.


Hitler was also very proud of where he came from and of his heritage, not comparing Cain and Adolf tho but i doubt they would allow a guy with *********** tatooed on his chest to even fight in the UFC.


----------



## shatterproof (Jul 16, 2008)

Well this thread has taken a rediculous turn. SWP ftw.


----------



## Black SunShine (Nov 9, 2009)

Sorry for taking over the thread about this,but Brown Pride is a very rough gang and should be frowned upon. I am done take care everyone can't wait for the free fight on spike this weekend!!!!!


----------



## HitOrGetHit (Jun 29, 2009)

shatterproof said:


> Well this thread has taken a rediculous turn. SWP ftw.


Oops when i saw the post I responded to I actually thought I was in the thread about Cain thanking his fans and not all fans.


----------



## alizio (May 27, 2009)

Brutus said:


> Hitler was also very proud of where he came from and of his heritage, not comparing Cain and Adolf tho but i doubt they would allow a guy with *********** tatooed on his chest to even fight in the UFC.


 you prob think hitler is from germany lol


----------



## SideWays222 (Sep 9, 2008)

alizio said:


> you prob think hitler is from germany lol


Well he was born just across the border of germany. His heritage as i know is pretty mixed and is actually kinda ironic as i remember.


Anyway just wondering... what does that have to do with anyone's post??


----------



## alizio (May 27, 2009)

that if you are comparing him to Hitler at least know something about Hitler, he wasnt German. Cain is American, he loves America. He is proud of his heritage, big deal... maybe if you let mexicans or african americans enslave and treat you like dirt for a few hundred years they will let you tat *********** on your chest without complaining, but since Whites have had all of the power for along time, i see no need


----------



## HitOrGetHit (Jun 29, 2009)

alizio said:


> that if you are comparing him to Hitler at least know something about Hitler, he wasnt German. Cain is American, he loves America. He is proud of his heritage, big deal... maybe if you let mexicans or african americans enslave and treat you like dirt for a few hundred years they will let you tat *********** on your chest without complaining, but since Whites have had all of the power for along time, i see no need


That is in the past. Nobody that is Cain's age was enslaved. They did not suffer at all, they were educated just like everyone else and they have jobs just like everyone else. To say that they should be allowed to pull the race card because people were enslaved before their time is just flat out ignorant.

For the record, I do not think that Cain is racist at all. I am just trying to make a point.


----------



## swpthleg (Dec 31, 2006)

We already discussed this.


----------



## HitOrGetHit (Jun 29, 2009)

...I cannot believe I have made the mistake of thinking I am in a different thread two times now...:thumbsdown:


----------



## shatterproof (Jul 16, 2008)

alizio said:


> you prob think hitler is from germany lol





alizio said:


> that if you are comparing him to Hitler at least know something about Hitler, he wasnt German. Cain is American, he loves America. He is proud of his heritage, big deal... maybe if you let mexicans or african americans enslave and treat you like dirt for a few hundred years they will let you tat *********** on your chest without complaining, but since Whites have had all of the power for along time, i see no need


This was a great, quality, thread before this worthless bull started. quit hijacking the thread. :thumbsdown:


----------



## HitOrGetHit (Jun 29, 2009)

Yeah, i'm sorry I lost track of what thread I was in a couple of times.

But there is already a thread to discuss this in alizio. Go and find that one.:thumbsup:


----------



## ufcrules (Jan 11, 2007)

I think Maz was doing us a favour by not making us have to watch more of that fight.


----------



## SideWays222 (Sep 9, 2008)

ufcrules said:


> I think Maz was doing us a favour by not making us have to watch more of that fight.


Personally i love watching Cain laying beatings on people. I was excited as shit seeing how good he was doing.


----------



## vandalian (Oct 14, 2006)

From Ben Rothwell to Hitler, huh?

sigh...


----------



## swpthleg (Dec 31, 2006)

vandalian said:


> From Ben Rothwell to Hitler, huh?
> 
> sigh...


That's just how we roll on here.


----------



## HitOrGetHit (Jun 29, 2009)

SideWays222 said:


> Personally i love watching Cain laying beatings on people. I was excited as shit seeing how good he was doing.


Yeah he is looking good thus far. I can't wait to see him fight again.

And Rothwell is supposed to fight Cro Cop. What if Rothwell loses this fight too? Is he out of the UFC? And does that mean Cro Cop is back if he wins handily?

Or what if Rothwell wins? Does that signal the end for Cro Cop?


----------



## shatterproof (Jul 16, 2008)

i'm really torn on the CC matchup. He's one of my favourite fighters, top 5. I was kinda happy for him that he was apparently retiring after his last match... hate to see him lose. On the other hand, it's a great matchup for him, potentially.

Ben should be hungry after the Cain fight, especially given his feelings on the stop.


----------



## alizio (May 27, 2009)

I personally think it was more about Cain being just that good moreso then Ben being that bad, i think he will look a ton better when he isnt facing a true takedown artist like Cain. Watch the AA fight if you havent, it was a war.


----------



## shatterproof (Jul 16, 2008)

Wait... this post lacks pointless hitler referances & _Lesnar > Fedor _fodder... haha

welcome to the light side alizio. keep up the positive contributory posts and you'll fare much better this time around.

as for the content of the aformentioned post; I think a war with CroCop is really what all parties would want. Ben could gain some cred in the eyes of casual fans and hardcore fans alike, the UFC loves their wars, Mirko could show that he's still a striking force. win-win-win. For my part... i just can't take another Mirko loss. emotionally i mean, i'm fragile.


----------



## alizio (May 27, 2009)

shatterproof said:


> Wait... this post lacks pointless hitler referances & _Lesnar > Fedor _fodder... haha
> 
> welcome to the light side alizio. keep up the positive contributory posts and you'll fare much better this time around.
> 
> as for the content of the aformentioned post; I think a war with CroCop is really what all parties would want. Ben could gain some cred in the eyes of casual fans and hardcore fans alike, the UFC loves their wars, Mirko could show that he's still a striking force. win-win-win. For my part... i just can't take another Mirko loss. emotionally i mean, i'm fragile.


 i agree, in another thread coldcall and i were discussing possible futures for Ben and Cain i mentioned a CroCop fight could be a war and i would want to see it, it all hinges on CroCop training properly both physically and mentally tho. If we see the same shaken and seemingly frightened man we saw against JDS i fear this will be the end of CroCop.... i almost rather see him take the big $ and fight Fedor if that's how he is gonna go out. But you never know, he might just kick Ben in his fat head


----------



## shatterproof (Jul 16, 2008)

alizio said:


> ...he might just kick Ben in his fat head


one can certainly hope :thumb02:


----------



## name goes here (Aug 15, 2007)

I want CC to win. I have no good reason why. lhk ftw


----------

