Anthony Johnson Loses Eye-Poke Appeal

by Scott C. Broussard on Sep 13, 2008 7:32 PM EDT

Fronted by Chris Nelson

Well this sucks. From MMAFrenzy:

Anthony Johnson’s appeal to the Nevada State Athletic Commission of a controversial July 19th TKO loss to Kevin Burns due to an eye poke at UFC Fight Night 14 has been denied.

"Based on advice from the Nevada Attorney General’s office, the appeal was rejected due to lack of remedy," [NSAC Executive Director Keith] Kizer revealed to MMAFrenzy.com.

How was this not overturned? Even if Johnson can't be retroactively awarded a DQ win, a NC would still be fair. He was poked in the eye several times, then when it was nearly gouged out, he was "TKOed" because he fell down screaming. I can understand Mazzagatti initially thinking he was out because usually a poked fighter will disengage, but if I've been eye-poked several times, then gouged so hard my retina detaches, my first thought wouldn't be, "Oh, I can win this by DQ now." Rather, most people would probably think, "MY GOD! MY VISION!" and crumple to the ground, which is exactly what happened.

What exactly is a "lack of remedy" anyway? It just sounds like a vague way of saying "Don't bother us."

Johnson said he wants to fight again before the end of the year. I think a rematch with Burns is justified. An eye for an eye?

The FanPosts are solely the subjective opinions of Bloody Elbow readers and do not necessarily reflect the views of Bloody Elbow editors or staff.

Tweet Comment 22 comments | 1 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

What constitutes being overturned if this situation doesn’t? The results of the eye pokes were pretty tangible. They should just not consider overturning any decision.

by Cannon Jacques on Sep 13, 2008 5:30 PM EDT reply actions

He would be a fool to take the rematch

Burns already said he’s unable to make a fist, so he is an eye gouging machine. Having survived a retina detachment with vision intact, he would be foolish to risk his health again just for some petty grudge match.

by thetakeover on Sep 13, 2008 5:34 PM EDT reply actions

Can't Make a Fist?

What happened to his hand? How does he pass his physical if he is so liable to poke other fighters’ eyes?

by Scott C. Broussard on Sep 13, 2008 5:39 PM EDT up reply actions

Good questions

That no one has been able to answer yet. :(

by mythbuster on Sep 13, 2008 8:05 PM EDT up reply actions

I don't see how this is even a conversation

for the officials. If he can’t close his fist, then he can’t issue straight strikes with that hand. Hammer-fists, back-fists and ridge-hands would be fine, but no more straights. It’s amazing to me that we haven’t heard this from any official. You’d think someone like John McCarthy would come out and discuss this.

There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt.

by misterjonez on Sep 14, 2008 12:47 AM EDT up reply actions

“Due to lack of remedy” sounds to me like they dont have a process to deal with something like this so they just throw it out and carry on with their head in the sand.

by Benicio on Sep 13, 2008 5:38 PM EDT reply actions

I didn't fall with in the rules

The guidelines for over turning a decision do not all for a result to be changed because of a “bad referee decision”

by ghettoiam on Sep 13, 2008 5:48 PM EDT reply actions

i would expect a bad judgement would have come from the CSAC (california state athletic commision) not Nevada’s. It looked pretty obvious to me that it should either have been a No-contest or DQ win for johnson.

by asmiley420 on Sep 13, 2008 6:34 PM EDT reply actions

Rematch

This has rematch written all over it, this was a ridiculous decision.

by Rob J Nathan on Sep 13, 2008 7:35 PM EDT reply actions

Who overthrew the Gomi-Diaz fight?

And ruled it a no contest because of marijuana? It makes me furious that a substance that has ZERO impact on the fight is seen as so forbidden that Diaz was stripped of his win when this bullshit decision stands and steroid abusing fighters don’t lose their wins when they pop positive. Ridiculous.

by Kid Nate on Sep 13, 2008 9:45 PM EDT reply actions

Agree totally. Things like this put such a bad taste in my mouth. The way these commissions are content to just say ‘close enough is good enough’ and not put the time or effort into this sport that it deserves.

by Benicio on Sep 13, 2008 10:21 PM EDT up reply actions

robbed, thy name is AJ....or his initials are at least

that sucks for Johnson…and wow!! just proves that the NSAC needs some informed help, asap. How could they not overturn that? Is this why this sport is constantly clawing took keep it’s legitimacy? Sorry, I know the answer to that, but that was a bad call……and an even worse review o the play.

by dugmouth on Sep 13, 2008 10:33 PM EDT reply actions

A fighter is crippled by an illegal maneuver (fortunately gets the problem fixed)

and the best the NSAC can come up with is ‘STFU?’ I can’t stay in this thread for very long..I’ll start saying bad things.

I am utterly disgusted.

There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt.

by misterjonez on Sep 14, 2008 12:49 AM EDT reply actions

This is the most obvious NC in the history of the world.

What a bunch of bullshit.

by The Ghost of Spike Owen on Sep 14, 2008 12:16 PM EDT reply actions

My lone point of solace in this

is that I truly believe that Rumble has an exceptionally bright future ahead of him. A guy with his natural power, agility, body and wrestling background is quite literally the perfect base upon which to construct an elite fighter.

If he can keep his eyes, that is..

There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt.

by misterjonez on Sep 14, 2008 12:33 PM EDT reply actions

nuckin

futz

by mythbuster on Sep 14, 2008 1:56 PM EDT reply actions

Doobie before a fight that actually makes it harder to win = NO-CONTEST
Stabbing your opponent in the Eye because you shouldn’t be fighting in the first place = WIN

by asa on Sep 14, 2008 5:10 PM EDT reply actions

Keith Kizer, ladies and gentlemen!

by Chris Nelson on Sep 14, 2008 5:23 PM EDT reply actions

Amazing

I would have bet everything I own that this would be overturned or at the least a nc.

by banter on Sep 14, 2008 6:23 PM EDT reply actions

I wonder if his manager did not provide the appeal in the correct manner. It doesn’t make sense as to why it would not have been overturned.

Someone above has already mentioned this, but when fighters are caught with drugs or steriods they keep their win (only if you are not Nick Diaz) – yet Kevin Burns got the win by way of a foul.

"My job is a decision-making job, and as a result, I make a lot of decisions." --George W. Bush, The Decider, Lancaster, Pa., Oct. 3, 2007

by lovingmma25 on Sep 15, 2008 12:46 PM EDT reply actions

I don’t know why anyone is even arguing on behalf of Nick Diaz. The guy is a professional. He knows what he can and can’t do in the weeks leading up to a fight. Period, end of story. He broke the rules.

by lbk on Sep 16, 2008 1:15 PM EDT reply actions

Excellent point.

It’s one thing to question whether or not a given rule is appropriate, but when it is a rule, you must obey it or you will be punished to the fullest extent. Nobody should get a pass simply because we may happen to disagree with the existence of the rule they broke.

It’s an established parameter of the profession, and he went outside of it. It really is as simple as that.

There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt.

by misterjonez on Sep 16, 2008 8:08 PM EDT up reply actions