Dana White Shouldn't Be Allowed to Complain About Referees Until He Rehires Big John McCarthy
by Kid Nate on Mar 8, 2009 12:21 PM EDT
in MMA News
Email
Print
Steve Cofield reports on the problematic refereeing at UFC 96 and Dana White's outraged response at the post-fight press conference:
The officiating inside the cage at UFC 96 was a big topic in the aftermath. Referee Rick Fike started the night off in dubious fashion and Yves Lavigne almost got Pete Sell killed. That prompted UFC president Dana White to go on a tirade. He's so unhappy with the state of officiating in mixed martial arts that he stated there's only three good referees. And even those guys, he had trouble recalling.
In his rant, Dana names Herb Dean as a quality referee (can't argue there), Mario Yamasaki, says Steve Mazzagatti is NOT but leaves one name noticably unmentioned -- the consensus best referree in the history of MMA: Big John McCarthy.
There simply are not enough top-notch experienced referees in the world for the UFC to continue blackballing McCarthy. I don't care what the man said while he was commenting for the Fight Network, there is too much at stake for Dana to keep the best referee in the biz out of the Octagon.
According to Big John its up to the Athletic Commissions and the UFC.
Do the right thing Dana, bring back Big John:
70 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I know what Yves did was not what was dictated by the ref’s responsibilities, and I personally think they should always err on the side of caution. However, if he had just stopped the fight initially, there would be the same sort of outcry from people, saying it was an early stoppage. Not saying that is right, simply what would be being said today.
If you're not submitting, you're just rolling around with another guy.
A little late is better than too early. I’m still sticking to that. And I’m still an Yves Lavigne fan.
I beg to differ
a little late can get a fighter killed.
Early stoppages suck but for the most part they’re preferable to late stoppages, especially grisly late stoppages like Brown/Sell.
"the spirit of your average dumbass with more overblown rhetoric" OR "the self-appointed savior of MMA"
When was the last time a fighter got killed because the referee was a little late? Isn’t that hyperbole?
Plenty of times...
in boxing the ref or cornerman lets a guy take punishment after he has already suffered significant brain trauma and it results in brain damage and sometimes death. You can pull the “but boxers get hit more” thing but it’s irrelevant as the point is once a guy’s brain has suffered significant trauma every blow afterward increases the danger. Yeah, it didn’t happen this time…but it is well within the realm of possibility.
Contributing Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
by Brent Brookhouse on Mar 8, 2009 1:00 PM EDT up reply actions
We all know the dangers of boxing. However, we all know MMA =/= boxing. So I don’t even know why you use that to back up late stoppages are bad.
1. Bad stoppages has never caused anyone to be seriously hurt in MMA.
2. Boxers get brain damage due to continuously getting hit in the head.
3. The ratio of punches to the head in MMA VS boxing is bordering on something ridiculous like 25:1
4. No known boxers have had brain damage from flash KO’s but through continuous punches to the head after an 8 count, repeatedly.
5. Boxing fights tend to last rounds after rounds; MMA usually end in the 1st or 2nd.
Now, there’s been 15 years of MMA records to go in. But let’s throw that away and think logically.
We all know MMA is a dangerous sport, regardless of its safety records. The point of the game is WIN through submission, KO’s, or TKO’s. Submissions = putting the opponent in a move that could potentially break or damage a person’s limb/breathing. KO is to knock a person out. A TKO is hitting a fighter so much that he’s unable to defend himself intelligently.
Now, this sport is not golf. The purpose is to win definitively by hurting the other person. The rules doesn’t state that a fight is won when the referee feels like it. The fight ends when one fighter wins definitively. The notion that it’s better to end a fight prematurely than knowing definitely if a fighter has won is silly. The purpose of the sport is for one fighter to hurt the other fighter in a way that the fighter can no longer defend himself/herself intelligently. It is what it is. Let’s not sugar coat MMA to make ourselves feel better for watching what is basically 21st century gladiators fighting it out. Let’s not be ashamed of what we love here and try to make it out to be safer than what is really is.
by cyph on Mar 8, 2009 1:14 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I completley agree with what you said here Cyph. But in this perticular case it was OBVIOUS sells wasnt intelligently defending himself throught most of that fight. This fight went on just too long.
When a fighter who is completely jacked up on adrenaline and is trained to fight until he is stopped looks at the ref with his arms in the air something is wrong.
You're ignoring...
that what happened to Sell was the equivalent of getting a standing 8 count and then going back and taking more punishment.
Again, it doesn’t take 8 rounds of punishment…it takes a traumatized brain taking significant punishment. In reality Sell’s legs were buckling over and over, he couldn’t correctly pass messages from brain to muscle. That is a sign to stop the fight.
Throwing out boxing results is ignorant and honestly, kind of dumb. The amount of punches to the head are different, but it doesn’t change that the damage done to the brain by strikes is the same.
Pretending that it is ONLY long fights that can result in damage is WRONG
Contributing Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
by Brent Brookhouse on Mar 8, 2009 1:35 PM EDT up reply actions
So your position is better to have early stoppages than late stoppages because injury may result from late stoppages? Injury may result from getting punched in the face, period. There is no way around the danger of fight sports. In order to prevent injury, you have to take submissions and KO’s out of the game. That is the only way to prevent it.
I'd rather have guys..
who are clearly having problems with signals moving from their brain to their muscles be stopped from taking further punishment. Koscheck, Sell…etc
Contributing Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
by Brent Brookhouse on Mar 8, 2009 1:41 PM EDT up reply actions
Then you have to show that late stoppages cause brain damage. You haven’t established this fact other than using boxing results to back up your point. You’re a boxing fan who’s mixing the danger of the two sports. Obviously MMA is dangerous, but it’s not dangerous to the point that you believe.
I'm using...
repeated blunt trauma to the head of a combat athlete as proof.
lets just stop because it’s obvious that we’re not going to budge from our positions.
I like to see guys go on to live happy, productive lives…you like to assume that because things haven’t happened yet they won’t happen. cool…moving on
Contributing Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
by Brent Brookhouse on Mar 8, 2009 1:50 PM EDT up reply actions
It’s easy for you or anyone of us to say “Let him just take a couple hits more” when we are sitting on our couches or sitting behind computer screens. I understand that these people are fighters, and this is their job, but it is just being an “armchair quarterback” and somewhat naive to say that “obviously MMA is dangerous, but it’s not dangerous to the point that you believe.” You don’t know that, and MMA hasn’t been around long enough to know the long term effects of having a career in MMA. If refs err on the side of caution as per the status quo, and we discover that later on that these fighters’ health is not negatively affected, then it just shows that erring on the side of caution is the right thing to do.
MMa has been around for a long enough time to see end results of long term careers. you only have to look as far as people like Frank Shamrock, tank abbot, and Cabbage to see what kind of results we will have. And these are guys that started when there was little to no concern to fighter safety, including strikes to the back of the head. Much like the ones that Kendall delivered to finish his fight I might add. Now I now most of you are saying right now that it would be hard to tell if the said fighters have received any brain damage since none of them appear to have all their faculties to begin with, but they don’t seem any worse off now then they did before. Maybe I’m wrong, but it’s my two cents. BTW I do think that Yves dropped the ball a little on that fight, but I think he was reacting to he first bout where it was stopped way to early. He made a mistake, but I doubt he’ll make it again, Dana needs to bring back “Big” John, if only to teach these guys what to look for and how to tackle fighters.
I don't think...
it’s been long enough at all. The sample size is WAY too low.
Contributing Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
by Brent Brookhouse on Mar 9, 2009 12:29 PM EDT up reply actions
MMA has been around for near 20 years, I realize thats a fraction of boxing, but I would think we would be seeing some results. I’ll agree that more time is needed to get a broader range, but the point I was trying to make is that we should have an idea of what to expect or at least have some insight.
You know, I didnt have a real problem with what happened, except it probably outside the guidelines for reffing. i do think it probably should have been stopped a little sooner than it was eventually.
Perhaps refs should be able to step in, quickly evaluate (just like they quickly evaluate a situation when stopping a fight), then decide whether to stop/continue the fight?
It looked to me as though Sell was prepared to defend initially and the fight should not have been stopped. Of course, following the next onslaught, it should have been stopped immediately.
On a side note, Brown looked amazing and Sell looked amazingly bad. I imagine news of his release will follow shortly.
If you're not submitting, you're just rolling around with another guy.
A little late is better than too early. I’m still sticking to that.
Not to be a dick, but that’s one of the dumbest things I’ve ever seen written on this site. A little early can lead to some controversy, big deal. A little late can lead to death, which one is worse?
A little early can lead to some controversy, big deal. A little late can lead to death, which one is worse?
Honestly, I think this point is a false dichotomy, or at least misleading. The impact of stopping a fight early, especially in the UFC, is a far more serious thing for the fighter than “some controversy” and the additional impact of a couple punches is not a sudden 1000% increase in chance of death or serious injury. Glib quips are catchy but I don’t think they are really doing justice to the actual circumstances.
"I see him beating Anderson Silva. I see him picking him apart. Him at a 131 years old...(trails off)." - Tito on Belfort at Affliction:DOR
You’re right, just because nothing serious has happened yet that means that it will NEVER happen. Let’s just keep pushing the envelope until something bad actually happens inside the octagon, then our sport will get legislated back to the old days when we couldn’t even see it on PPV.
That is not even within the region of my point. My point was that this sentence
A little early can lead to some controversy, big deal. A little late can lead to death, which one is worse?
(which many have used, so this isn’t solely directed at you) is far too simplistic a phrase to be of any use in the discussion of late/early stoppages. The phrase suggests a chasm of difference between the impact of an early stoppage and a late one. This is just not the case.
An early stoppage does not just lead to a momentary controversy, it can dramatically affect a fighter’s career. They can lose, through no fault of their own mind you, their spot on a main card (which can be a great deal of money in terms of sponsorships) or even be booted from the UFC entirely (which can be a very severe blow to one’s pocketbook). And the harm is hardly only financial.
Both early and late stoppages have devastating effects of the fighters and to trivialize early stoppages to trumpet your concern for the safety of fighters like you’re the caring one is to accomplish nothing.
So this little diatribe
You’re right, just because nothing serious has happened yet that means that it will NEVER happen. Let’s just keep pushing the envelope until something bad actually happens inside the octagon, then our sport will get legislated back to the old days when we couldn’t even see it on PPV.
Has absolutely nothing to do with my point. I didn’t advocate a position or come down on either “side” of the issue (because apparently this is third grade, and we have to stake out our territory).
"I see him beating Anderson Silva. I see him picking him apart. Him at a 131 years old...(trails off)." - Tito on Belfort at Affliction:DOR
Two things
First, one early stoppage has probably never cost someone their contract in the UFC. It may have put them over the top when they already had one foot out the door. To imply that someone might go from being in the UFC’s good graces to booted after one early stoppage is alot of hypebole.
Second, the difference between the internet drama of an early stoppage and all the consequences you mention that could come alone with verses serious physical damage are still a no brainer…STOPPING THE FIGHT EARLY IS STILL BETTER.
Wow this sounds so much like a conversation I’m having on another site with someone using big words like dichotomy. And the point being made here is fighter safety is paramount. We don’t have brain dead fighters walking around from mma yet, but if we let something go too long, and as proven on here by an excellent article on brain damage, one punch is all it takes to cause severe damage. Now as Rundoenloser points out, yes, an early stoppage can cause a financial loss, is correct. I’m sure though that a fighter would rather collect half the purse than walk around for the rest of his life like Mohamed Ali. Do you think that they are going to can a good fighter do to an early stoppage, not likely. As Razreshat points out, you’ve got to be pretty much out the door anyway.
Ugh...
"I see him beating Anderson Silva. I see him picking him apart. Him at a 131 years old...(trails off)." - Tito on Belfort at Affliction:DOR
The difference is...
okay…he let it continue. I have no problem with that…its as Brown is tagging Sell repeatedly and Sell’s legs keep buckling….then he FALLS DOWN WITHOUT BEING HIT and Yves makes Brown tag him twice more
Contributing Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
by Brent Brookhouse on Mar 8, 2009 12:58 PM EDT up reply actions
I am more pissed that he stopped Brown after the first knock down, then Sell moves and Yves just kind of says ‘fuck it, nevermind the fact that I just physically restrained you from attacking.’ I would have hopped out of the fucking cage at that point.
by Derek Suboticki on Mar 8, 2009 1:32 PM EDT up reply actions
When Brown pushed Sell and Sell was obviously dazed beyond belief, Lavigne should have said enough is enough. I think letting Sell continue from the original knockdown was fine, but after that, I’m skeptical.
Editor-in-chief of MMA-Analyst.com
by Leland Roling on Mar 9, 2009 1:18 PM EDT up reply actions
The only problem I had with Yves is that he did not seem like he had any authority.
He was second guessing his own decisions and that can jeopardize (but thankfully did not) fighter safety.
He made a mistake, it is not the end of the world. People shit all over Mirgialiotta (spelled it wrong I bet) but he has gotten better since his ludicrous stoppages, but he erred on the side of caution usually and got just as much shit as Yves did.
What people want is GOOD stoppages, and nobody was better at those than Big John.
There must be better refs out there, I’ve seen a few on the UK shows that are not as bad as the ones they have on the US cards. Perhaps BJM can make a seminar for NSAC/CSAC referees and some guidelines on stoppages, what to look for.
I’ve always stood by the idea that you can see it in a fighters eyes when they are in danger, sometimes they can intelligently defend themselves, but you have to be ready to stop it when they eat that additional shot that reduces their ability to do so.
War BJM!
My hatred of Dan is limited to his non-stoppage of Kimbo/Thompson
by Derek Suboticki on Mar 8, 2009 1:33 PM EDT up reply actions
he also poked herring in the eye, but i dont see you getting mad at that cause it could've helped brock. haha. :D
http://weoweoweo.deviantart.com/
by Anton Tabuena on Mar 8, 2009 10:57 PM EDT up reply actions
He also cold shouldered Gono out of the air twice against Hardy.
"I see him beating Anderson Silva. I see him picking him apart. Him at a 131 years old...(trails off)." - Tito on Belfort at Affliction:DOR
by Rundownloser on Mar 8, 2009 11:31 PM EDT up reply actions
I remember that – and Brock did a decent job of fucking Herring’s eye up all by himself.
by Derek Suboticki on Mar 9, 2009 4:15 PM EDT up reply actions
Why is the UFC allowed to decide who does and doesn’t referee? That should be AC’s and the AC ’s decision only.
Do they get to pick the judges too?
I am the bastard love child of Junie Browning and Diamond Dave Kaplan.
Well..
a lot of people aren’t familiar with this but it’s like in boxing. You can specifically say “we won’t let ____ ref the fight” to the AC. This can be due to HOW he refs (lets guys take extra punishment, get away with fouls..etc) or past history involving the fighters or promoters (if they think they won’t be given a fair shake because of past history).
Contributing Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
by Brent Brookhouse on Mar 8, 2009 1:13 PM EDT up reply actions
I'm not sure if that is the case with the UFC/BJM
but I’m just saying even if it is a case of the AC dictating who refs the UFC could say no to one of the AC’s preferred options
Contributing Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
by Brent Brookhouse on Mar 8, 2009 1:13 PM EDT up reply actions
Like Maz reffing a Lesnar fight, for example.
by Derek Suboticki on Mar 8, 2009 1:34 PM EDT up reply actions
Throwing off Brent’s “three comments” comment…
Bolts from the Blue // "Game over." - Jamal Williams
Bloody Elbow // "Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats." - H.L. Mencken
lol. :D
http://weoweoweo.deviantart.com/
by Anton Tabuena on Mar 8, 2009 10:59 PM EDT up reply actions
Ahhh...
Thanks for clearing that up gents.
I am the bastard love child of Junie Browning and Diamond Dave Kaplan.
I was also under the impression that the AC is who the referees are employed by. So the UFC has nothing to do with the highering or firing of any of the refs.
see three comments above this one...
Contributing Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
by Brent Brookhouse on Mar 8, 2009 1:37 PM EDT up reply actions
As for Big John ...
The Nevada commission has been steadfast about not allowing refs to work for promotions, which would create a conflict of interest. McCarthy ignored this and worked as a commentator for Affliction. You cannot have have people who took paychecks from a promoter then go officiate matches, anymore than you’re going to see an NFL team employee go out and become an NFL ref. This is really cut and dried, McCarthy made his career choices and now he has to live with their consequences..
by andherewego on Mar 8, 2009 2:03 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Ummm … no. The Nevada commission was one of the country’s most influential long before MMA ever existed.
So if UFC has the power to dictate officials, why does Nevada keep sticking Steve Mazzagatti on shows in Vegas, even though Dana has openly said he wants Mazzagatti gone?
Well..
I’m pretty sure that in a state like California they could request that BJM not be involved due to his vocalizing his feelings on the promotion and saying that they feel it compromises his ability to be even handed in working for the promotion.
As for the Maz? I would assume that if the UFC has requested he not work their events they weren’t able to provide adequate reasoning to the athletic commission.
Contributing Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
by Brent Brookhouse on Mar 8, 2009 9:21 PM EDT up reply actions
I thought
The athletic commissions were the ones responsible for hiring the referees for MMA bouts. I can see how Dana could say to the commission that he doesn’t want a certain referee in the octagon but I didn’t think that the UFC hired the referees. Yves Lavigne is a good ref. He just had a bad match. But you really can’t afford something like that when somebody’s livelihood, or even their life, is at stake. Big John needs to focus on getting a training course for these refs and they should go through licensing every year or so. That wouldn’t hurt for judges either.
I missed the Sell/Brown fight, but...
It sounds like that one was more than just a “little” late. I’m actually inclined to agree that a couple punches too late is better than an early stoppage, but I’d much rather have an early stoppage than it going to the point where “the fight should have been stopped three or four times already,” to quote one reporter.
This may be old. I may be late.
The thing is, McCarthy has only applied for reinstatement in California. Since UFC has not had any shows in California since his reinstatement as a referee, McCarthy hasn’t had the opportunity to referee any UFC events.
Referees are assigned by the athletic commissions, so unless the UFC is fighting someplace without a commission (i.e. Europe), the UFC has no say over who referees matches on their events. So, when the UFC heads back to California, I’d expect to see Medium John refereeing on that event.
None of this explains why Medium John wasn’t refereeing any matches on the January 25, 2009 WEC event, which took place in San Diego.
"BJ on the BE" - Kierkegaard
Again..
unless the rules are different for the UFC than boxing (which I’m pretty sure they are not) a promoter and/or fighter can request that certain refs not work their fights due to prior history or reffing style. It happens all the time in boxing.
Contributing Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
by Brent Brookhouse on Mar 8, 2009 6:13 PM EDT up reply actions
I just watched this fight today (girlfriend spilled beer on cable box and had to download the whole thing) and wow Sell was not able to defend or even comprehend what was happening. He got caught and continued to eat brutal shots, it should have been stopped, and on the same side I was one of the fans who felt Koscheck was robbed. I guess it all comes down to how fast you recover and what the fighter does when he hits the ground. I don’t think flash knockouts should call for an immediate stoppage, but it you are just awake enough to continue taking shots as opposed to blocking and defending then you are done. Being a ref means you need to stick to your gut, Yves had the right idea when he jumped in the first time. Refs have it hard so I won’t trash him, but I am inclined to agree with Dana ( I feel dirty all over for saying that).
Forrest Petz refs fights in Ohio. I think guys like him and other fighters make for the best refs as well.
If I'm not mistaken Herb Dean
has a professional record of 2-4 (or something along those lines) and Big John was a BJJ instructor and combatant before he ever was a ref. Alot of these ref’s already come from one fighting background or another.
Yves is usually an excellent referee...
But I think the earlier stoppage from that night, and the whole Kos stoppage, had him a bit confused. More info here: http://blog.mmaratings.net/2009/03/knocked-out-or-just-poor-refing.html
by orlis on Mar 9, 2009 12:06 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Agreed..
I think this is a point that is overlooked and excellent. The previous stoppage in the first fight of the night was fucking ridiculous. You can see a replay of it in Dana White’s video blog, but it was unreal. Riley was completely robbed.
Add that to the already controversial stoppage in Koscheck’s fight, and I think Lavigne didn’t want to make that mistake and get thrown through the grinder for stopping it early. The first knockdown of Sell, I felt that he could continue, but once Brown pushed him and Sell nearly fell, I think Lavigne should have stepped in so the ensuing kick and punches weren’t a factor, but he didn’t.
Either way, Lavigne is still a top referee. Calling for his FIRING is ABSURD. People make mistakes.
Editor-in-chief of MMA-Analyst.com
by Leland Roling on Mar 9, 2009 1:17 PM EDT up reply actions
I'm not calling for Lavigne to be fired
especially for any specific in ring performance.
However, if the MMA “press” and blogging community are getting in his head and making him second guess himself in the ring…then something probably should be done. Not necessarily a firing, but he might need a break.
Ref’s need to act with confidence and not second guess themselves. They are in the business of making tough calls and need to be able to handle that pressure.
Not you, but I’ve heard people stating Lavigne should be fired.
Editor-in-chief of MMA-Analyst.com
by Leland Roling on Mar 9, 2009 2:16 PM EDT up reply actions
I didn't think you meant me, but
I’ve seen it written on numerous entries here that people wonder if all the hot air after the Kos fight was making him hesitate.
I’m saying that if that is the case, then something does need to be done about him.
MMA need decisive refs that aren’t going let the ravings of annoymous people on the internet cause them to second guess the execution of their duties; protecting the fighters…even from themselves.
Honestly, I think the Riley vs. Nelson stoppage made Yves hesitate. It was horrendously early, and I seriously can’t believe it was called in that fashion. Riley looked like a typical fighter on his back trying to stop someone from pounding him. He was clearly not CLOSE to being out.
Editor-in-chief of MMA-Analyst.com
by Leland Roling on Mar 9, 2009 3:34 PM EDT up reply actions
I think McCarthy should be appointed...
As a head of some type of organizational body that trains, teaches, and reviews MMA referees nationwide. The UFC should be the force behind the organization, and it should cause commissions to use the organization for their appointed referees.
The organizational body should have some sort of review system, seminars for all referees yearly, specific criteria for ending fights, experience… using regional promotions to train the referees to be as best as they can be. McCarthy at the head of this type of body would allow his great common sense in the cage to trickle down and teach these guys.
Editor-in-chief of MMA-Analyst.com
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
MMA Rankings
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
