UnderGround Forums
 

UnderGround Forums >> Nakamoto's illegal knee vs. Jessamyn Duke (gif)


4/7/13 1:19 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Scott Elliott
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 04/07/13 1:22 AM
Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 3916



This happened this weekend on the Invicta card. Maybe I'm blind, but that knee looks illegal as shit. She was stunned off the first knee, Big John is keeping an eye on her, Nakamoto throws the second, illegal knee and THEN he steps in to stop the fight. After the fight, John tried to say that he called the fight after the first knee.

What SHOULD have happened is the fighters broke up, a point taken away from Nakamoto, Duke be given her 5 minutes to recover and then the fight restarted. Instead, however, Nakamoto was given the win via TKO and awarded knockout of the night.

Some are trying to argue that she was out after the first knee. First of all, that's irrelevant. If she was out, the fight should have been stopped right then. Obviously, Big John did not move in to stop the fight after that first knee BECAUSE SHE WAS NOT OUT. It was only after the second knee that he actually moves in to stop the fight. Furthermore, it's still irrelevant because at that moment, the fight was STILL ON and she throws the illegal knee to a grounded opponent!!

Notice in the video how Nakamoto reacts knowing she made an error in throwing the knee.

Obviously we are contesting this and appealing with the athletic commission, but we want as many people to see this as possible..
4/7/13 1:22 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Team GDP
402 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 04/07/13 1:23 AM
Member Since: 12/1/10
Posts: 4759

nvm looks like you got the gif to work

4/7/13 1:25 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Scott Elliott
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 3918
yep. Thanks anyway. ;-)
4/7/13 1:27 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
clattymine
481 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 2/5/05
Posts: 23184
Can't tell from that angle, the knee *could* have landed on her shoulder.

From the looks, second knee is illegal as shit, should be NC or DQ.
4/7/13 1:28 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Pilot201
1974 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 47996
isn't it the three point rule? Which is why fighters lean over to palm the canvas in this position. If they don't put the third point on the canvas they are legal to knee.
4/7/13 1:29 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Pilot201
1974 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 04/07/13 1:29 AM
Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 47997




This being illegal because the fighter knew to keep a 3 point stance, but the kneeing fighter not seeing the stance.
4/7/13 1:30 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Anderson's BBC in my Goku
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 8/6/08
Posts: 23758
Dang. That first knee was pretty vicious tho. Phone Post 3.0
4/7/13 1:31 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Scott Elliott
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 3919
Anything other than soles of the feet touching the mat is "grounded".
4/7/13 1:32 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Nocturnus
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 6/21/09
Posts: 46
She was out with te first knee Phone Post 3.0
4/7/13 1:33 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Team GDP
402 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 12/1/10
Posts: 4760

first knee that dropped her was fine, but the knee that ko'd her was clearly illegal.

you said "Duke be given her 5 minutes to recover and then the fight restarted" i disagree. she was clearly out. that is either a no contest(if deemed unintentional) or a dq (if deemed intentional).

also regarding the point about the 3 point stance. three point stance is when you are on your feet. she is clearly on both knees. 

4/7/13 1:35 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Scott Elliott
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 3920
"She was out with te first knee"

She was not. If you watch closely you can see she grabs for Nakamoto's leg with her right as she throws the second knee.

Again, however, that is not the point. Even if she WAS out, the fight had not been stopped and that's the point. The knee was thrown to a grounded opponent AND the fight was not yet stopped. Therefore ILLEGAL.
4/7/13 1:41 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Pilot201
1974 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 47998
How can you say she wasn't out, she dropped to her knees and Miriam had a clinch which kept her face turned away from BJM's view. Secondly you clearly are baiting, you post your first post as a legit question, and within a few responses the tone of your post changes completely to it being ILLEGAL. Who came up with this "sole" on the floor being legal, and anything else illegal. Then explain the three point stance every fighter knows to get into otherwise they get kneed. Or how other fighters lift the third point off the canvas in order to make the knees legal.

And after the first knee she did not reach for any part of Miriam as you suggested to show her defending herself. In regards to Miriam's reaction you see it as her admitting wrong doing because it fits your argument. Legal knee, your fighter was out and Miriam didn't have the reaction you suspected. Her reaction was no different then a fighter getting pulled off an opponent that's definitely out.
4/7/13 1:42 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
The Hyena
105 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 6/26/03
Posts: 3260
oops ... that kinda thing happens ...
4/7/13 1:44 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Team GDP
402 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 12/1/10
Posts: 4761

 

Referee Big John McCarthy clarified to announcers that ‘the first knee caused the stoppage’, which is baffling. MMA fights can’t be retroactively halted. At nearly every fighter’s meeting around the world, the combatants are told to fight until the ref stops the bout. The clock doesn’t stop running until the referee, in this case McCarthy, physically separates the two.
 
Invicta’s Shannon Knapp seemed to dismiss any wrongdoing on the part of McCarthy at the post fight press conference, saying that the referee had intended to stop the fight after the first knee. Knapp did also say she would review the footage, but aside from booking a rematch, there isn’t much that anyone but the athletic commission can do to rectify the situation.
 
This is a gross misinterpretation of the rules of MMA. In retrospect, at UFC 100, if Dan Henderson had knocked out Michael Bisping with the famous overhand right, and then before the referee stopped the bout, went over and delivered a blatantly illegal soccer kick to the face of Bisping, it would result in a DQ loss due to the foul.
 
The most damning of evidence comes from the footage itself. As you can see, McCarthy is in place before the second knee is delivered, and not only doesn’t stop the fight, but pauses, and waits for more action. Absolutely not the actions of a referee moving to halt the fight. I’m in no way attacking the competence of McCarthy, who is typically a spectacular ref, but nobody shoots 100%.
 
4/7/13 1:45 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Pessimist_Pete
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 9/3/12
Posts: 2494
Big John called it before the second knee. he just didn't let everyone know about his decision until after the second knee IMO Phone Post 3.0
4/7/13 1:46 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Anderson's BBC in my Goku
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 8/6/08
Posts: 23759
Someone post the vid Phone Post 3.0
4/7/13 1:47 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
LayzieTheSavage
199 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 3/26/09
Posts: 8327
www.middleeasy.com, Videographer
Scott Elliott - "She was out with te first knee"

She was not. If you watch closely you can see she grabs for Nakamoto's leg with her right as she throws the second knee.

Again, however, that is not the point. Even if she WAS out, the fight had not been stopped and that's the point. The knee was thrown to a grounded opponent AND the fight was not yet stopped. Therefore ILLEGAL.
I agree Phone Post
4/7/13 1:47 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
youarewhatiswrong
19 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 3/23/12
Posts: 2330
Pilot201 - How can you say she wasn't out, she dropped to her knees and Miriam had a clinch which kept her face turned away from BJM's view. Secondly you clearly are baiting, you post your first post as a legit question, and within a few responses the tone of your post changes completely to it being ILLEGAL. Who came up with this "sole" on the floor being legal, and anything else illegal. Then explain the three point stance every fighter knows to get into otherwise they get kneed. Or how other fighters lift the third point off the canvas in order to make the knees legal.

And after the first knee she did not reach for any part of Miriam as you suggested to show her defending herself. In regards to Miriam's reaction you see it as her admitting wrong doing because it fits your argument. Legal knee, your fighter was out and Miriam didn't have the reaction you suspected. Her reaction was no different then a fighter getting pulled off an opponent that's definitely out.

You are very confused about the rules regarding a downed opponent, which is surprising considering how long you have been on the forum. A single knee on the mat constitutes a downed fighter. Hence Rich Franklin's advice to drop to a knee if you think a knee is coming your way on TUF.
4/7/13 1:50 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Team GDP
402 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 12/1/10
Posts: 4762
youarewhatiswrong - 
Pilot201 - How can you say she wasn't out, she dropped to her knees and Miriam had a clinch which kept her face turned away from BJM's view. Secondly you clearly are baiting, you post your first post as a legit question, and within a few responses the tone of your post changes completely to it being ILLEGAL. Who came up with this "sole" on the floor being legal, and anything else illegal. Then explain the three point stance every fighter knows to get into otherwise they get kneed. Or how other fighters lift the third point off the canvas in order to make the knees legal.

And after the first knee she did not reach for any part of Miriam as you suggested to show her defending herself. In regards to Miriam's reaction you see it as her admitting wrong doing because it fits your argument. Legal knee, your fighter was out and Miriam didn't have the reaction you suspected. Her reaction was no different then a fighter getting pulled off an opponent that's definitely out.

You are very confused about the rules regarding a downed opponent, which is surprising considering how long you have been on the forum. A single knee on the mat constitutes a downed fighter. Hence Rich Franklin's advice to drop to a knee if you think a knee is coming your way on TUF.

lol

possibly the best advice/gameplan ever

4/7/13 1:52 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
ben236
7 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 3/8/13
Posts: 10
Here's a much better gif, in slow mo and from 2 different angles.

http://cdn2.sbnation.com/imported_assets/1540025/4_Jessamyn_Duke_vs._Miriam_Nakamoto.gif

Decision should be overturned.
4/7/13 1:55 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
weebrave
84 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 3/9/13
Posts: 37
Agree with op. Phone Post
4/7/13 1:58 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Pilot201
1974 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 47999
youarewhatiswrong - 
Pilot201 - How can you say she wasn't out, she dropped to her knees and Miriam had a clinch which kept her face turned away from BJM's view. Secondly you clearly are baiting, you post your first post as a legit question, and within a few responses the tone of your post changes completely to it being ILLEGAL. Who came up with this "sole" on the floor being legal, and anything else illegal. Then explain the three point stance every fighter knows to get into otherwise they get kneed. Or how other fighters lift the third point off the canvas in order to make the knees legal.

And after the first knee she did not reach for any part of Miriam as you suggested to show her defending herself. In regards to Miriam's reaction you see it as her admitting wrong doing because it fits your argument. Legal knee, your fighter was out and Miriam didn't have the reaction you suspected. Her reaction was no different then a fighter getting pulled off an opponent that's definitely out.

You are very confused about the rules regarding a downed opponent, which is surprising considering how long you have been on the forum. A single knee on the mat constitutes a downed fighter. Hence Rich Franklin's advice to drop to a knee if you think a knee is coming your way on TUF.

actually no, I'm not confused about it. That's what I'm asking, is that the way around the rule? There was a time where you kept seeing fighters using that palm down to avoid knees. It seemed as though it was their game plan. So, that's what I was asking, in a poor manner I guess. The only thing I'd defend is that neither Miriam nor John could see the opponents face to see if she was out, due to the clinch Miriam had.

And after the first knee she was clearly out, she did not reach for any part of Miriam as the OP stated. I completely understand his questions, and of course he should take up for his fighter. But it went from a simple curious question or a poll of sorts. Then three posts later it went from a query to a certainty. That's all...
4/7/13 1:59 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Legalize It
28 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 5/7/10
Posts: 862
This is a very clear open and shut case of an illegal knee to a downed opponent. There isnt much to discuss other than DQ or NC.
4/7/13 2:23 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
WestCoastKid
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 3/26/13
Posts: 0
Thought you only get five minutes to recover ONLY from a groin shot? Didnt think there was such a thing as "injury timeouts?" (Especially five minutes)

Usually don't they call in the Doctor and if the Doctor says they cant continue then its over. Fighter who was injured or cant continue from an illegal shot cannot lose the fight correct
4/7/13 2:23 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
stevekt
610 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 22920
She was done after the first knee but second knee was illegal. Nakamoto could have easily gotten a clean undisputed win if she had chosen her follow up a bit more wisely.

Reply Post

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