In past fan posts we have argued about many different rule changes, and how they would adversely effect the sport or otherwise. Often times I have been on the side of liberalizing the rules in favor of more action, more technique, and more avenues to victory. But for the first time, I am actually frightened by what appears to be a radical new view on when a referee should stop a fight. Furthermore, this radical new view seems to be mainstream, it may even be the consensus: 'fighters should not have to defend themselves at all times'.
Some, rather non-contaversial enthusiasts, have even suggested that a fighter should even be allowed to sustain more damage after a knock out, just to see if they are still unconscious or not. For me, this is very concerning, bordering on absolutely crazy.
I know that this is not really crazy, I know exactly where the idea is coming from: 'we don't know if the fighter can continue or not, he may still even be able to win'. But should every knock out victory be followed up with hammer fists to the face of an unconcious dude? I don't think so. I know Rampage hated Silva -- but Silva got pummeled after Rampage had already won. Should that be the norm?
Now we have a case where Thiago knew he had won. He knew that Kos was out, and he acted like a compasionate human -- he gave the ref time to stop the fight before he proceeded to rape his unwilling opponent. Should this be frowned upon. Does this mean that Paulo is a pussy?
Also, what about the ref? When the referee sees that one of the fighters is unconcious, shouldn't he immediately stop the fight to prevent unnecessary damage or should he let it go on, just to be sure? If the ref yells, "ITS OVER", and then sees that the fighter recovered quickly, should he then yell, "NEVER MIND"?
Here's where I draw the line: If the referee sees that a fighter can no longer defend himself, he should stop the fight, verbally and otherwise. That stoppage should be mandatory, and final. Whether or not, the knocked out fighter's opponent is compassionate or blood thirsty, should have no bearing on the referees decision. A fighter who is unable to defend himself, is just that, and the fight should be stopped.
The fact that this post is at all controversial (and I know it is), is scary. Being able to defend yourself at all times is the only rule I absolutely agree with.