UnderGround Forums
 

UnderGround Forums >> Pellegrino: Head plant knocked Camoes out


3/28/10 1:50 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
FCTV808
302 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 10/1/03
Posts: 48578
happens in judo quite a bit.
3/28/10 2:01 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
TheParrot
55 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 03/28/10 2:01 PM
Member Since: 9/10/09
Posts: 364
... 
3/28/10 2:04 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
puddlesmith
1 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 10/8/04
Posts: 1695
TheParrot - 
puddlesmith - It's blatantly dangerous, if it's not included in the rules than I'd say let's open up the rules to other "dangerous" things like knees on the ground and soccer kicks.

 so what would the actual rule be?  No front roll when the opponent has your back?  GTFO!


The rule is already written: Spiking an opponent to the canvas on his head or neck. Regardless of how you do it.
3/28/10 2:12 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Mike Russell
146 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 03/28/10 2:16 PM
Member Since: 3/24/07
Posts: 6749
puddlesmith - 
TheParrot - 
puddlesmith - It's blatantly dangerous, if it's not included in the rules than I'd say let's open up the rules to other "dangerous" things like knees on the ground and soccer kicks.

 so what would the actual rule be?  No front roll when the opponent has your back?  GTFO!


The rule is already written: Spiking an opponent to the canvas on his head or neck. Regardless of how you do it.

 Not true. Where does it say "REGARDLESS HOW YOU DO IT"? Ask any ref about how the rule is to be interpreted. 

Camoes was in control, so in essence couldn't be spiked on his head. He could have let go if he wanted to.

Kirik is a ref and he clarified that what Pellegrino did was well within the rules.
 
3/28/10 2:18 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
CaptainAhab87
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 10/31/08
Posts: 1138
yeah that was horrid, but frickin amazing at the same time!! good win batman!!
3/28/10 2:22 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Kirik
1928 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 40178
Mixed Martial Arts LLC, President
Sortilege - I rarely disagree with Kirik but that moves was clearly illegal.

The rules state that you can't spike someone on their head or neck and that's what Pellegrino did.

It doesn't matter that Camoes was on his back, he couldn't let go of Pellegrino because *Pellegrino* was holding onto Camoes - scroll up look at the pics. Pellegrino grabs Camoes arms, holds him in place and then plants Camoes onto his neck.

They were also about 2 feet off the ground are you suggesting that Camoes should be alert enough, to choke Pellegrino out and within the space of 2 feet be good enough to disentangle himself from a person holding on to him while being hurled headfirst into the ground?

Morever, if what Pellegrino did *wasn't* illegal could you give me an instance where spiking someone on their neck would be illegal?

 No disrespect, what so ever, but you are factually incorrect. I have a professional familiarity with the Unified Rules, and if for example, you have an arm bar, and are spiked, it is not illegal, as you have control of where you are. The time it takes to get spiked from an armbar is less than what Camoes had.

The move was legal, and smart.
3/28/10 2:22 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
toshii
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/31/09
Posts: 4740
"Spiking an opponent to the canvas on his head or neck"

LOL at people trying to "interpret" that foul by adding qualifications.  Oh, only if the opponent has "control".  whatever
3/28/10 2:22 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Freqman
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/9/03
Posts: 1144
I have a ton of respect for Kirik but disagree with him here.

There's no where in the rules that specifies any type of control as a qualifier for what is or isn't a foul.

For example, eye gouges are also fouls, but if this spiking is deemed legal because of some non-existent "control" issue, then Pellegrino could've also reached back and "legally" started gouging Camoes in they eye.
3/28/10 2:23 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
toshii
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/31/09
Posts: 4741
Mike Russell - 
puddlesmith - 
TheParrot - 
puddlesmith - It's blatantly dangerous, if it's not included in the rules than I'd say let's open up the rules to other "dangerous" things like knees on the ground and soccer kicks.

 so what would the actual rule be?  No front roll when the opponent has your back?  GTFO!


The rule is already written: Spiking an opponent to the canvas on his head or neck. Regardless of how you do it.

 Not true. Where does it say "REGARDLESS HOW YOU DO IT"? Ask any ref about how the rule is to be interpreted. 

Camoes was in control, so in essence couldn't be spiked on his head. He could have let go if he wanted to.

Kirik is a ref and he clarified that what Pellegrino did was well within the rules.
 
Where in the rule does the word "control" show up?  Fact, Pellegrino caused his opponent's head to be spiked on the canvas.
 
3/28/10 2:23 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
jqvwxyz
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 6/21/07
Posts: 396
I was under the impression that this was an illegal move. If not, it most definitely should be.

Shouldn't matter who had "control". Camoes was angled head down, spine perpendicular to the ground, and was driven down directly on his head. With really no chance to stop it. That is a spike.

Using the "in control" arguement, you could also say a guy who is on top, should be allowed to be upkicked and kneed by the guy on the bottom. After, guy on top is in control and could stand up to avoid it, right?
3/28/10 2:27 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
ajl416az
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 03/28/10 2:27 PM
Member Since: 4/11/07
Posts: 3609
toshii - "Spiking an opponent to the canvas on his head or neck"

LOL at people trying to "interpret" that foul by adding qualifications.  Oh, only if the opponent has "control".  whatever

lol, by "people", do you mean the licensed referee discussing the rules on this thread?
 

but i suppose you know more, because you're a fan.  lol.
3/28/10 2:31 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
FreightTrain
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 404
Wednesdays - Should be illegal IMO. Could easily break someone's neck like that.


I'm sure this thought crossed a lot of people's minds.

Based on the moves which are currently illegal, it seems inconsistent that something like this isn't illegal.

3/28/10 2:32 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
toshii
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 03/28/10 2:32 PM
Member Since: 1/31/09
Posts: 4744
ajl416az - 
toshii - "Spiking an opponent to the canvas on his head or neck"

LOL at people trying to "interpret" that foul by adding qualifications.  Oh, only if the opponent has "control".  whatever

lol, by "people", do you mean the licensed referee discussing the rules on this thread?
 

but i suppose you know more, because you're a fan.  lol.
With all due respect to Kirki and other referees, are you saying that licensed referees have a better understanding of plain english than the general population?  Are licensed referees are allowed to insert additional language into the rules?
  
3/28/10 2:35 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
MasterDebater
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 4/14/03
Posts: 1565
refs don't write rules, they do as their told by the respective commisions.

If the commissions aren't interpreting it as such, that is the commissions issue.

It was clearly dangerous. Should have kept his head tucked in.
3/28/10 2:35 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Mike Russell
146 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 3/24/07
Posts: 6754
ajl416az - 
toshii - "Spiking an opponent to the canvas on his head or neck"

LOL at people trying to "interpret" that foul by adding qualifications.  Oh, only if the opponent has "control".  whatever

lol, by "people", do you mean the licensed referee discussing the rules on this thread?
 

but i suppose you know more, because you're a fan.  lol.
Armchair quarterback and forum super poster Toshii is more qualified than Kirik, who has reffed for the past 13-14 years...Err...
 
3/28/10 2:37 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
toshii
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/31/09
Posts: 4746
Mike Russell - 
ajl416az - 
toshii - "Spiking an opponent to the canvas on his head or neck"

LOL at people trying to "interpret" that foul by adding qualifications.  Oh, only if the opponent has "control".  whatever

lol, by "people", do you mean the licensed referee discussing the rules on this thread?
 

but i suppose you know more, because you're a fan.  lol.
Armchair quarterback and forum super poster Toshii is more qualified than Kirik, who has reffed for the past 13-14 years...Err...
 
The rule is a very short sentence in plain English.  WIth all due respect to Kirik, Im not sure how being a referee helps you read those words any better than the average joe.
 
3/28/10 2:37 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
THATSCRAPTASTIC
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 12/6/03
Posts: 1660
Camoes was never the same after that. He was definitely lethargic the rest of the fight.
3/28/10 2:38 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Mike Russell
146 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 3/24/07
Posts: 6755
 

Rules variations

Each organization determines its own rules (in accordance with government regulation). Below are some of the significant differences in the rules of the popular MMA organizations.

Ultimate Fighting Championship

  • Allows elbow strikes except downward elbow strikes with the point of the elbow.
  • Prohibits spiking a fighter onto his head during takedown or slam.
  • Prohibits stomps, soccer kicks and knees to the head of a grounded opponent (more than feet touching ground). A fighter on the ground can kick upwards at their opponent's head only if their opponent is standing.
  • Prohibits shoes, shirts and pants.
  • Uses three 5-minute rounds. Championship bouts are five 5-minute rounds.
  • No longer uses a tournament format.
  • Has five weight classes: Heavyweight (<265 lbs), Light Heavyweight (<205 lbs), Middleweight (<185 lbs), and Welterweight (<170 lbs) a Lightweight (<155 lbs) class.
  • Tests fighters for steroids and other illegal substances in championship bouts.
Was Pellegrino taking Camoes down or slamming him, genius???

3/28/10 2:40 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
toshii
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/31/09
Posts: 4748
 "Prohibits spiking a fighter onto his head during takedown or slam."

Very simple language here.
3/28/10 2:44 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Mike Russell
146 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 03/28/10 2:45 PM
Member Since: 3/24/07
Posts: 6756
How is it a takedown or slam when Camoes had his back and had control?

Since you are ignoring officials who are versed with the rules and are taking the literal verbiage at face value, the rule actually states that  "deliberately spiking the opponent on the head" is illegal.

Prove that Pellegrino did it deliberately. He couldn't see if Camoes head would impact the mat when he rolled since Camoes was on his back.
 
3/28/10 2:55 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
puddlesmith
1 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 10/8/04
Posts: 1696
From the article: "Batman then executed a defense not taught in gi class - he dove forward, with their combined weights driving Camoes straight onto his head."

It could have very easily rea: "Batman then executed a defense not taught in gi class - he dove forward, with their combined weights driving Camoes straight onto his head BREAKING HIS NECK."

It'll happen someday if it's not deemed illegal.
3/28/10 3:09 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Kirik
1928 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 40182
Mixed Martial Arts LLC, President
toshii - 
ajl416az - 
toshii - "Spiking an opponent to the canvas on his head or neck"

LOL at people trying to "interpret" that foul by adding qualifications.  Oh, only if the opponent has "control".  whatever

lol, by "people", do you mean the licensed referee discussing the rules on this thread?
 

but i suppose you know more, because you're a fan.  lol.
With all due respect to Kirki and other referees, are you saying that licensed referees have a better understanding of plain english than the general population?  Are licensed referees are allowed to insert additional language into the rules?
  

 Yes, licensed refereees have a better understand of the rules than does some who knows how to use the gpogle.

No, licensed referees are not allowed to insert language into the rules. However, words necessarily have interpretation. The rules prohibit "downward" strikes with "the point of the elbow". Does that mean anything that moves downward and hits with the point of the elbow is forbidden? Well, no. The rules prohibit strikes to the back of the head. Does that mean you divide the head into front and a back and then everything that lands on the back half is prohibited? Well, no. And so on.

I appreciate very much all this dialogue about safety. I am just a little taken aback by the people who think I am making this up on the spot, or am heated. I am just trying to explain how the rules have been for more than ten years.
3/28/10 3:20 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
TheClips
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 2/20/08
Posts: 2710
Samoanpowr - I don't remember who he did it with but a guy had Faber's back but he was upside down and Faber was standing. Faber sat down to spike his head into the mat. Who was "in control" in that situation (if you remember it)?


I remember that match. Isn't it called an Iranian lift or something? I know he referred to it as an atomic butt drop after the fight.

That's a tough one, because Faber's opponent had Faber's head scissored, I believe, and Faber actually stood up from a downed and arguably "controlled" position to execute the technique.

That being said, it could probably be ruled a defensive technique because Faber's intention was to sneak out the back door (if I remember correctly) and the dude stopped him, so Faber stood up and dropped him.

Whatever the ruling, it was awesome!
3/28/10 3:26 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Nicdom
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 3/7/10
Posts: 131
Don't wanna get slammed on you head? Don't ride high on the back and use your hands to defend yourself instead of worrying about the choke.

As was said previously, this isn't No-gi BJJ.
3/28/10 3:31 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
toshii
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/31/09
Posts: 4761
Kirik - 
toshii - 
ajl416az - 
toshii - "Spiking an opponent to the canvas on his head or neck"

LOL at people trying to "interpret" that foul by adding qualifications.  Oh, only if the opponent has "control".  whatever

lol, by "people", do you mean the licensed referee discussing the rules on this thread?
 

but i suppose you know more, because you're a fan.  lol.
With all due respect to Kirki and other referees, are you saying that licensed referees have a better understanding of plain english than the general population?  Are licensed referees are allowed to insert additional language into the rules?
  

 Yes, licensed refereees have a better understand of the rules than does some who knows how to use the gpogle.

No, licensed referees are not allowed to insert language into the rules. However, words necessarily have interpretation. The rules prohibit "downward" strikes with "the point of the elbow". Does that mean anything that moves downward and hits with the point of the elbow is forbidden? Well, no. The rules prohibit strikes to the back of the head. Does that mean you divide the head into front and a back and then everything that lands on the back half is prohibited? Well, no. And so on.

I appreciate very much all this dialogue about safety. I am just a little taken aback by the people who think I am making this up on the spot, or am heated. I am just trying to explain how the rules have been for more than ten years.
Google allows you to look up the rule and see that it is a short and plain statement that says no spiking.  I don't see how expertise in grappling or refereeing allows one to interpret a rule to say something other than what it says.  If there is any ambiguity about this, the MMA commission should resolve it, not each referee's own personal discretion.

Reply Post

You must log in to post a reply. Click here to login.