ABC | UFC Betting Sites - The Best MMA Online Bookies

Conor McGregor Camp Denies Commission Claim He’s Off UFC 219

Conor McGregor caused quite the stir after jumping into the cage at Bellator 187 in Dublin last Friday and getting into an altercation with referee Marc Goddard. He issued a formal apology online today but stuck to the stance that he was simply angered that Goddard would even have considered letting Ward’s dazed opponent John Redmond continue. […]

The post Conor McGregor Camp Denies Commission Claim He’s Off UFC 219 appeared first on LowKickMMA.com.

Conor McGregor caused quite the stir after jumping into the cage at Bellator 187 in Dublin last Friday and getting into an altercation with referee Marc Goddard.

He issued a formal apology online today but stuck to the stance that he was simply angered that Goddard would even have considered letting Ward’s dazed opponent John Redmond continue.

While McGregor may have seen it as simply coming in to celebrate an SBG teammate’s big win, the powers that be saw differently. So much so that the sanctioning bodies that be are pushing for the UFC lightweight champion to be punished, essentially targeting his possible inclusion on the upcoming UFC 219 card.

ABC President Mike Mazzulli, who was cageside during McGregor’s outburst, claimed the brash Irishman has already been sanctioned by the UFC during an appearance on The MMA Hour:

“They already sanctioned him,” Mazzulli said. “So they did hit him. He’s not gonna be making any more money this year and I commend UFC for that. I really do.”

“There’s a zero tolerance for that,” Mazzulli said. “That’s why I said when you are a professional at that level, you have to handle yourself as a professional. There’s a lot of people that are looking up to you and respecting you as an individual, as a fighter. Don’t get me wrong, Conor McGregor is a great, great fighter. I’ve watched every single fight of his and that’s what I do, this is my job.

“But when it comes to what he did to Mr. Goddard and [Bellator employee] Michael Johnson, what would possess somebody to do that? Like I said, if it was at Mohegan, I guarantee you that the Mohegan Tribe Police Department would be removing Mr. Conor. There’s no doubt in my mind.”

Mazzulli continued on to offer his stance that McGregor was not bigger than the sport as a whole despite his behavior suggesting otherwise. In closing, Mazzulli said that McGregor was simply acting incredibly unprofessional, which was the stark opposite of how a champion on his level should behave at an event:

“Mr. McGregor is not bigger than MMA,” Mazzulli said. “We all know that. Mr. McGregor may not be around in five years, but MMA will still be. I think that is very important to understand, that fighter safety is the most important thing in the world. Because without fighter safety, this sport would not proceed to the next level like it always has.”

“First of all, I’m never comfortable when somebody takes it upon himself to act like a 5-year-old and jump in the cage,” Mazzulli said. “The bottom line is he was unprofessional, he was disrespectful and it was not acceptable in my eyes. In any situation. I don’t care if it’s anybody else jumping in the cage. We don’t do that as a professional.”

MMAFighting.com reached out to McGregor’s camp upon getting word of Mazzulli’s comment, to which his agent Audie Attar said Mazzulli’s claims were “not true.”

McGregor has not been officially added to UFC 219, but there have been several rumors that a fight between the lightweight champion and interim lightweight champ Tony Ferguson could headline the December 30th event in Las Vegas.

Do you believe McGregor should be punished for his actions at Bellator 187, and if so, should it go as far to remove him from potentially the biggest UFC pay-per-view event of the year?

The post Conor McGregor Camp Denies Commission Claim He’s Off UFC 219 appeared first on LowKickMMA.com.

ABC Approves Changes For MMA Scoring, Eye Pokes & Grounded Fighters

The post ABC Approves Changes For MMA Scoring, Eye Pokes & Grounded Fighters appeared first on LowKick MMA.

The unified rules of MMA certainly did a great job of making the sport somewhat ‘safer’ for fighters, but did leave a number of grey areas that were open to discussion. The term ‘grounded fighter’ has led to much debate, with many combatants exposing the fact that they needed to only have one hand touching the canvas in order to avoid kicks or knees to the head. Quite a frustrating rule, but perhaps the least in terms of influence of a fight’s outcome.

We’ve seen quite a few fights ended in no-contest or disqualification due to knees and kicks to the head of grounded fighters. This area of fighting under the unified rules, as well as eye pokes and the criteria for scoring fights were all under the microscope this week as the ABC (Association of Boxing Commissions) approved a number of definite rule changes.

27xRS[1] — Say goodbye to eye pokes, hopefully…

There had been some controversy over eye pokes, so the ABC ruled that even holding out the hand with fingers extended in standing position is now to be considered a foul. Also the scoring criteria now has definite descriptions of how to score rounds 10-9, 10-8 or 10-7. Damage, octagon control and effective striking have all been explained fully. We can also wave goodbye to female tank top in the octagon, as the ABC rules that only short sleeve rash guards are now acceptable.

As quoted by MMAFghting.com:

Grounded fighter

A grounded fighter is defined as: Any part of the body, other than a single hand and feet touching the fighting area floor. To be grounded, both hands and feet, palm/fist down, and/or any other body part must be touching the fighting area floor. At this time, kicks or knees to the head will not be allowed.

Extended fingers

In the standing position, a fighter that moves their arm(s) toward their opponent with an open hand, fingers pointing at the opponent’s face/eyes, will be a foul. Referees are to prevent this dangerous behavior by communicating clearly to fighters. Fighters are directed to close their fists or point their fingers straight in the air when reaching toward their opponent.

Female clothing

Female competitors must wear a short-sleeved (above the elbow) or sleeveless form-fitting rash guard and/or sports bra. No loose-fitting tops are allowed. Female competitors will follow the same requirements for bottom coverings as the male competitors, minus the requirement for groin protection.

Proposed MMA judging criteria by Luke Thomas on Scribd

The post ABC Approves Changes For MMA Scoring, Eye Pokes & Grounded Fighters appeared first on LowKick MMA.

The Association Of Boxing Commissions Makes some Big Changes to MMA Judging Criteria

“THE ABC IS CHANGING….oh…the MMA judging…No, no, that’s cool too…”

As some of you may know, I am working towards my master’s degree when I’m not writing for Cage Potato and currently preparing to defend my thesis. Because of this, I have been dragged into more semantics arguments than a person should ever admit to. I’ve had to defend every little “a” that could have been a “the” with Griffinesque tenacity – and I haven’t even defended the damn thing yet. Anyone who has ever attended graduate school can sympathize.

So when The Association Of Boxing Commissions (ABC) announced their newest revisions to the MMA Judging criteria at their annual conference, I read the document with skepticism. The fact that one of the new revisions removed the word “damage” from the scoring criteria partially so that opponents of MMA sanctioning can no longer point to the rulebook and say “LOOK, DAMAGING YOUR OPPONENT IS A RULE!” didn’t exactly help matters. Needless to say, I was pleasantly surprised when I saw that some of the rule changes are actually pretty damn important.

“THE ABC IS CHANGING….oh…the MMA judging…No, no, that’s cool too…”

For starters, those of you who complain about guys backpedaling their ways to victory (I’m looking directly at you, Nick Diaz fans) will be happy to know that ”effective defense” has been removed as a criterion for scoring a round. While Kalib Starnes would be pretty bummed about this one if he was still competing, I say good riddance. Honestly, I doubt many of you reading this even knew what “effective defense” meant in the first place. Frankly, I doubt anyone – judges included – agreed on whether it was more important than “aggression” when deciding which fighter won the round, or whether “effective defense” was part of “cage control” or not. It was far too open for debate to begin with, so taking it out of the rules should help judges make more consistent decisions.

Most importantly, striking and grappling are now given equal weight. I think we can all agree that it’s about time for this one. In theory, this means no more decisions like Johnson vs. Torres where the guy on top wins the round, regardless of how many submission attempts he’s trying to defend against. In theory, this puts effective striking and effective grappling on the same level. In theory, this may be the most significant rule change since the implementation of weight classes.

There’s just one problem that I see:

Too obvious?

This criteria is still in the hands of judges who, let’s face it, don’t always know what they’re even looking for in the first place. Take Cecil Peoples’ infamous “Leg kicks don’t finish fights” monstrosity: How do any of these rule changes change the fact that a person who is allowed to judge our sport doesn’t consider a leg kick to be an effective strike? They don’t. While the rule changes are a welcomed improvement when in the hands of judges who know what they’re looking for, they’re still pretty meaningless in the hands of judges who simply aren’t qualified.

In fairness though, the new revisions also clarify what constitutes effective striking, grappling, aggression and cage control. Likewise, the new revisions also tell judges how to score rounds as well (i.e. what warrants a 10-10 round; etc.), so perhaps we’ll start to see some more consistency in that department as well.

Time will tell how these rule changes actually affect the outcomes of fights, but there’s reason to be both optimistic and cynical as an MMA fan. The question now is, what side are you on?

@SethFalvo