UnderGround Forums
 

UnderGround Forums >> Pellegrino: Head plant knocked Camoes out


3/28/10 9:48 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
koreviewz
1 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 11/22/08
Posts: 672
MMA Product Reviews, OWNER
 Mike, my credentials are that I can read.  
3/28/10 9:48 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Kirik
1832 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 40189
Mixed Martial Arts LLC, President
Sortilege - 
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.


I apologize if I misconstrued your statement as being heated or being made up on the spot. However, I strongly disagree with your interpretation.

It is an interpretation I have heard dozens of times, as I am also a long time MMA competitor and coach. Normally it's in response to an armbar or triangle from Guard and slamming your way out but the backmount is a different animal. If you want to let go of an armbar just relax and it will let go all by itself, you cannot do the same with the backmount once you put a hook in. Especially if someone is holding on to you...

I've had numerous discussions with everything from Atheletic comissioners to amateur referees. What Pellegrino did was dangerous, you're saying that his opponent had time to recognize what was going on, let go and protect himself all in about the span of about a second - I find that ridiculous.

I think that since you've been in this sport for such a long time and have done so much to help it, it would behoove you (and me) to do what we can to ensure that it is as safe as it can be. I'm not saying strap pillows to every fighter and let them go at it but clarifying the rule the way the International Judo Federation has done would be a step in the right direction IMO...

http://www.intjudo.eu/?Menu=Static_Page&Action=List&m_static_id=42&lang_id=2&mid=7&main=12

[you will be disqualified if you...] "dive" head first, onto the Tatami by bending forward and downward while performing or attempting to perform techniques such as Uchimata, Harai-goshi, etc. or to fall directly backwards while performing or attempting to perform techniques such as Kata-guruma whether standing or kneeling.
(33) To intentionally fall backwards when the other contestant is clinging to his back and when either contestant has control of the other's movement.

The only thing I would add is that it's illegal to intentionall fall forwards whent he other contestant is clinging to his back and when either contestant has control of the other's movements.

That doesn't sound crazy, especially considering head/spine attacks like Pellegrino engaged in are extremely dangerous / life threatening.

 My hope in this regard would be to educate fighters as to their responsibilites as far as being fouled. We live in a culture of rights, rather one of responsibilities. That is harmful in any number of ways, from the philospohical to matters as practical as landing on your head.

You have the right in a fight to not get punched in the back of the head. But you also have a responsibility to not turn your head so a shot lands there. You have a right to no get spiked on your head, but you also have responsibility in this regard. If you are choking someone and they drop forward or backward, protect yourself. If you hang on, you can get hurt.

To suggest that a fighter at the UFC level cannot move his forearm to block in a second is, as you said, ridiculous.

Judo prohibits the head from being touched for reasons or safety. The sport also for the same reason prohibits all leg locks. It is not where I generally turn for direction on rules.

Please don't get me wrong on any of this. I fight. Most of my favorite people on the planet fight. I always hope both guys win, and that no one is hurt. But as far as this issue goes, I think the sport's best efforts would be in reminding and reenforcing fighters understanding of their responsibilities in the cage, to themselves and to their well being.

I also respect positions like yours that are contrary.
3/28/10 9:51 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
gorillagrappling
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 7/20/07
Posts: 6186
I rarely disagree with Kirik either. But last time I did he gave me a free pro membership so what the hell. I think that was completely illegal. Clearly, the rules are pretty cut and dry on this one. Some rules seem to leave room for interpretation. This one may well too. The question would be, "was that a spike or not? NOT "was it a legal spike because the guy had control" That's just retarded. We have gone past questioning if it was, in fact, a spike. We all believe It to be a spike. Some of you just seem to think that the rules allow for spiking to be okay as long as the spiker is not in control. That is ridiculous. If the spike itself were questionable I think it would have been left up to the ref to determine if it was legal or illegal. It was clearly a spike though. And the rules say that spiking is illegal.

To be hypothetical and all referees think that the controller of the situation can legitimately be spiked to death, the fight shoulc be stopped as if a guy took an illegal, yet un intentinal blow to the ding a ling.
3/28/10 9:52 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Kirik
1832 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 40190
Mixed Martial Arts LLC, President
gilbertfan - Kirik,

I think one is on thin ice when one interprets the unified rules this way. If Camoes suffered a career ending injury it might color interpretation here. As for universal interpretation by ACs, I am not really sure what that means. I certainly don't interpret them that way. Rules are interpreted based on intent and the intent was clear.

 Guya, I am not making this stuff up as I go along. I am just trying to convey how the rule is interpreted in the regualting ACs across the country. I happen to think it is the correct interpretation, but I am just the messenger.
3/28/10 9:58 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Kirik
1832 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 40191
Mixed Martial Arts LLC, President
gilbertfan - Kirik,

A good example of interpretation of intent would be Herb Dean allowing the knee to Buentello's head when Buentello put his hand down. Clearly Buentello's head was struck by Kongo's knee yet no foul was issued. This is Herb interpreting intnt of the what is considered a downed opponent. Nowhere in rule 18 of the unified rules do I see anything about having control or a submission dialed in. If one is going to remain a literal interpreter or just an intent interpreter one has to choose his interpretitive style. Not choose the one that wins the discussion.

 Herb is one of the best refs in the business. I have cornered where he was the ref several times, and I have appreciated him about 1,000 times on tv. But I think he made a mistake here. If a guy is worried about getting kneed in the face, putting down a hand seems reasonable.

Same thing comes up in folkstyle in hs where you can't body locka  downed opponent. Some guys in a back bodylock will reach down and touch and the hold has to be broken. Some refs call it some don't.


3/28/10 9:59 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
gorillagrappling
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 7/20/07
Posts: 6188
Kirik, don't make me drag this one out for 50 pages. Give me that pro membership already. LOL.
3/28/10 10:07 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Mike Russell
147 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 3/24/07
Posts: 6780
koreviewz -  Mike, my credentials are that I can read.  

 Here's something for you to read.

Kurle - Clarifying document which can be seen here...

http://boxing.nv.gov/aspnet_client/docs/MMA%20RULES%20Expained.pdf


Spiking an opponent to the canvas on his head or neck.
Any throw that has an arc is a legal throw. A fighter may not pick up their opponent, invert them placing the fighter's feet straight up in the air and their head straight down and pile drive their opponent into the canvas. When a fighter is using a takedown or a throw against their opponent they are allowed to throw their opponent to the ground without worry as to whether their opponents head makes contact with the canvas before another part of their body

3/28/10 10:18 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
TekNyc
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 10/24/07
Posts: 340
They need to fix this before someone gets paralyzed quick!!!
3/28/10 10:19 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
TheParrot
52 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 9/10/09
Posts: 376
koreviewz -  I can't believe how many people, including Kirik, are totally wrong on this.  The rules simply state that you can not spike an opponent on his head...period.  Doesn't say anything in the unified rules about who is in control of who.

I've always thought that was a bitch move, dangerous and totally illegal.

Camoes should file for a no contest, I can't see how he could lose.

 This is just silly, it doesn't need to.   Control is an integral part of slamming someone.  If you are not controlling them, then you are not spiking them. 
3/28/10 10:20 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
HexRei
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 6/4/07
Posts: 4099
Mike Russell - 
koreviewz -  Mike, my credentials are that I can read.  

 Here's something for you to read.

Kurle - Clarifying document which can be seen here...

http://boxing.nv.gov/aspnet_client/docs/MMA%20RULES%20Expained.pdf


Spiking an opponent to the canvas on his head or neck.
Any throw that has an arc is a legal throw. A fighter may not pick up their opponent, invert them placing the fighter's feet straight up in the air and their head straight down and pile drive their opponent into the canvas. When a fighter is using a takedown or a throw against their opponent they are allowed to throw their opponent to the ground without worry as to whether their opponents head makes contact with the canvas before another part of their body



/thread
3/28/10 10:23 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
gorillagrappling
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 7/20/07
Posts: 6191
^^^This thread is not over until you all agree with me.
3/28/10 10:24 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Foos
68 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 03/28/10 10:25 PM
Member Since: 6/24/05
Posts: 2728
Control or no control, ALL spikes should be banned.

There's no good reason to ever drop a guy on his head. I don't care if you're caught in a deep armbar or someone is stuck on your back.
3/28/10 10:30 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
HexRei
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 6/4/07
Posts: 4100
^^^I think those are great reasons to drop a guy on his head. He could always, you know, let go.
3/28/10 10:44 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Biggy
29 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 6557
Orcus is correct. Spiking is when they come straight down on their head. If the move has an arch component, as with suplexes, then they are legal even if people do land on their heads.

Its not the the landing on the head that is illegal, its the straight down, controlled motion onto someones head that is illegal.

Nate's move should have been called. What Sapp did to Nog would have also been illegal in the states.
3/28/10 11:17 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
dakotajudo
38 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 6/5/09
Posts: 53
rockfists - 
No offense, but it is obviously close to questionable, or else the thread would have ended after your first post.

The ruling is not questionable at all. It was a legal technique.

The questionable part that keeps the thread going is the lack of understanding of the meaning of the action "spike". Kirik is simply elaborating on the correct interpretation of the term.
3/28/10 11:19 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
HexRei
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 6/4/07
Posts: 4101
rockfists - 
No offense, but it is obviously close to questionable, or else the thread would have ended after your first post.  

If that wasn't illegal, it should be.   I hope they fix that. 


You know, usually when I am posting I try to remember to check the end of the thread as well since by the time it's four pages in, they sometimes have answered the topics you are unsure about. Sometimes I forget, but it does help avoid stuff like this:

http://boxing.nv.gov/aspnet_client/docs/MMA%20RULES%20Expained.pdf


Spiking an opponent to the canvas on his head or neck.
Any throw that has an arc is a legal throw. A fighter may not pick up their opponent, invert them placing the fighter's feet straight up in the air and their head straight down and pile drive their opponent into the canvas. When a fighter is using a takedown or a throw against their opponent they are allowed to throw their opponent to the ground without worry as to whether their opponents head makes contact with the canvas before another part of their body
3/28/10 11:41 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
FJJ828
1 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 2882
NAPLES BRAZILIAN JIU JITSU L.L.C., Owner
Maybe not illegal but shitty and dangerous for sure.
3/28/10 11:43 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
koreviewz
1 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 11/22/08
Posts: 684
MMA Product Reviews, OWNER
Ok, where are all the people calling this technique "legal", getting their information from?

The rules clearly state you cannot spike a person on their head.  Period.  Show me something from the rules that says otherwise 
3/28/10 11:43 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
HexRei
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 6/4/07
Posts: 4103
whoa, dangerous? yikes, that has no place in mma!
3/28/10 11:45 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
HexRei
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 6/4/07
Posts: 4104
koreviewz - Ok, where are all the people calling this technique "legal", getting their information from?

The rules clearly state you cannot spike a person on their head.  Period.  Show me something from the rules that says otherwise 

are you joking? Three times on this page appear the language that defines the spike (which makes it clear that Pellegrino's move was not illegal) AND it contains a link to the NSAC site where you can read it for yourself.
3/28/10 11:50 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
koreviewz
1 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 11/22/08
Posts: 686
MMA Product Reviews, OWNER
 The fight was in NJ, not Nevada.  Check the NJ rules.
3/29/10 12:01 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Mike Russell
147 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 3/24/07
Posts: 6784
koreviewz -  The fight was in NJ, not Nevada.  Check the NJ rules.

 Since you're an expert on the topic of MMA rules, I'm guessing you know about something used in most states called THE UNIFIED RULES? Why would NJ have a different interpretation of rules on spiking than NV?
3/29/10 12:02 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
HexRei
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 6/4/07
Posts: 4105
koreviewz -  The fight was in NJ, not Nevada.  Check the NJ rules.

You're grasping. They both use the same Unified Rules and in fact New Jersey SACB was involved in drafting them along with the NSAC.
3/29/10 12:03 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
K Rod
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 2/12/05
Posts: 329
first and foremost, kurt did a totally leagal move and busted that nigga up. I woulda did the same fuckin thing if i had another bjj black belt on my back. secondly, i love all u wimpy ass white namers that are sulking about it. wah wah wah he almost broke his neck,its fuckin mma. Get over it nancy, he did what he had to do to get his win money and it also led to a sub of the night bonus. All that is, is rising to the occasion stupid. Go get an education in mma then come argue you dicktouching spectator nerds.
3/29/10 12:03 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Mike Russell
147 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 3/24/07
Posts: 6785
HexRei - 
koreviewz -  The fight was in NJ, not Nevada.  Check the NJ rules.

You're grasping. They both use the same Unified Rules and in fact New Jersey SACB was involved in drafting them along with the NSAC.
He's looking for a loophole since he already checked NJ's rules on their site and noticed they didn't explain the rule as NV did.
 

Reply Post

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