Nick Diaz Does Not Get License, off Strikeforce Card; Jesse Taylor vs Jay Hieron Instead
by Kid Nate on Aug 10, 2009 8:30 PM EDT
in News
174 comments
MMA Weekly reports:
Bill Douglas, Assistant Executive Officer of CSAC, on Saturday informed MMAWeekly.com that Diaz had not been licensed and the situation would be "a challenging process."
On Monday, Diaz's manager, Cesar Gracie, said his fighter had an informal agreement with former CSAC executive officer Armando Garcia that precluded random drug testing. Diaz, a resident of Stockton, Calif., currently holds a medical marijuana license under the state's Compassionate Use Act of 1996 and Medical Marijuana Program Act. Garcia departed the agency last November.
"They changed it without any notification," said Gracie. "No one had any time. The old guys were doing things based off of California law, and I knew California law didn't change. He's licensed... it's legal. They're own legal team came out with a ruling that said (compassionate use was allowed). Then all of a sudden they're saying we're doing drug tests, and cannabis is included, it's not just performance enhancers. To flush it out of his system, it takes 10 days, and we don't have that."
MMA Junkie has the news on the substitute for the now non-title bout:
Strikeforce CEO Scott Coker today confirmed with MMAjunkie.com that former "The Ultimate Fighter 7" contestant Jesse Taylor (13-3) will now face Diaz's original opponent, Jay Hieron.
A story breaking in the LA Times a few days ago raises the specter of continued problems at the CSAC:
The promoter of a mixed martial arts card March 7 in Tulare, Calif., confirmed Friday that one of the competitors was allowed to fight despite testing positive for Hepatitis C and having no test results on file for HIV.
Al Joslin, who has promoted nine cards in California, said he learned of the situation about a week ago, when he was leaked a copy of a memo from the California State Athletic Commission. The commission is responsible for medical clearance of all MMA and boxing shows in the state.
The Times also received an electronic copy of the memo, and confirmed its authenticity with a source who has knowledge of the situation but was not authorized to speak publicly.
"I am aware of it, and I'm very troubled by it," Joslin said. "I'm very concerned the commission never contacted us. When we found out, we hit the ceiling.
Nick Diaz is clearly responsible for his own actions, but after the surprise drug test of Josh Barnett he should have been prepared. Someone at the CSAC is clearly singling out high-profile MMA fighters who have checkered histories for special scrutiny.
0 recs |
174 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
ah hell no
is it still a title match?
by pop_gun_war on Aug 10, 2009 6:36 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
No.
Disintegration -- I'm taking it in stride.
by Eugene Schelfaut on Aug 10, 2009 6:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I didn’t even know Taylor could cut to WW. He’s a good replacement but shame on you Mr. Stockton 209 Can’t Stop Smoking Weed.
by Sokonojudo on Aug 10, 2009 6:38 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
EPIC FRICKEN FAIL, DIAZ!
Still for the Title or no? Taylor has been on a nice streak.
GSP: I pulled my groin.
Greg Jackson: I don't care Georges! HIT HIM WITH YOUR GROIN!
by xFenixKnightx on Aug 10, 2009 6:38 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
who cares if they are targeting diaz. its a violation of the rules. as dumb as it is, its still a violation and could jeopardize the fight. its impossible to take him serious at this point. even caesar gracie doesn’t know what to say about him
by stearnum on Aug 10, 2009 6:39 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I'm saying Diaz should have seen this coming
not excusing his behavior.
Follow me on Twitter @KidNate
by Kid Nate on Aug 10, 2009 6:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Huge opportunity for Taylor to get redeem himself on a semi-major stage.
Diaz’s loss is his gain.
Face it, Diaz didnt take the necessary steps to make this fight happen and now he has to pay for it. It doesnt matter if he would have failed it or not, or if it would have been for pot or PED’s… just doesnt matter. He didnt do what he had to do to make it happen.
Shame on Diaz.
A true MMA fan from the great state of Arkansas.
by MMArazorback on Aug 10, 2009 6:39 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I wonder if this will lower the probability of Diaz getting back in the UFC?
by chrisbboy82 on Aug 11, 2009 3:17 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Taylor, LnP King lately. Oh it’s gonna be boring.
GSP: I pulled my groin.
Greg Jackson: I don't care Georges! HIT HIM WITH YOUR GROIN!
by xFenixKnightx on Aug 10, 2009 6:41 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Hieron
can wrestle well enough to not get lay n prayed.
Follow me on Twitter @KidNate
by Kid Nate on Aug 10, 2009 6:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That’s my only hope. Still you have to admit stylistically Diaz/Hieron is way better for the fans. Now Hieron will just be trying to stuff and sprawl all night.
GSP: I pulled my groin.
Greg Jackson: I don't care Georges! HIT HIM WITH YOUR GROIN!
by xFenixKnightx on Aug 10, 2009 6:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I beg to differ
as much as I love watching Diaz, wrestlers have shut him down in the past.
wrestler + wrestler = action
wrestler + bjj guy = stall fest
Follow me on Twitter @KidNate
by Kid Nate on Aug 10, 2009 6:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You dont think Diaz and Hieron would have kept it on the feet?
GSP: I pulled my groin.
Greg Jackson: I don't care Georges! HIT HIM WITH YOUR GROIN!
by xFenixKnightx on Aug 10, 2009 6:46 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think they would have.
"The path to enlightenment is through suffering"
by RearNakedChoker on Aug 10, 2009 7:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
i think Hieron is smarter than to trade with Diaz
when he has a big wrestling advantage.
Follow me on Twitter @KidNate
by Kid Nate on Aug 10, 2009 7:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
But he might still be on a high from the High fight. Looking for another KO. There’s a good joke in there somewhere, with nick and his potheadedness, but I suck at making jokes.
Where are you when we need you Ubernoober?
"The path to enlightenment is through suffering"
by RearNakedChoker on Aug 10, 2009 8:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
LnP?
To which of his six stoppage wins since leaving the UFC are you referring?
by Chris Nelson on Aug 10, 2009 6:44 PM EDT up reply actions 4 recs
Oh, good question.
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
by Richard Wade on Aug 10, 2009 6:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
SNAP!
A true MMA fan from the great state of Arkansas.
by MMArazorback on Aug 10, 2009 6:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Chris Nelson 1 The rest of the world 0
by Nick Thomas on Aug 10, 2009 6:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
come on other then Fickett who is about 1/10 the former fighter he ounce was with his battles with the bottle who out of those 6 fighters is not a small show journeymen that Taylor should not of finished ? Taylor does the same thing every dam fight over handright shoot in for the double leg. He is a classic wrestler who loves to sit in guard and thorw punches. I just don’t see much action in this fight and think its destined for a decision ?
by Shocbomb on Aug 10, 2009 7:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
IMO he is still boring to watch.
So no LnP but how about Same Gameplan King? lol All he does is go for takedowns and GnPs. I saw his last few fights including the Dream fight where he was attempting to do the same thing and it wasn’t pretty. Just sayin…
GSP: I pulled my groin.
Greg Jackson: I don't care Georges! HIT HIM WITH YOUR GROIN!
by xFenixKnightx on Aug 10, 2009 10:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Watch the DREAM fight again. It literally lasts a minute and all he does is dominate Dong Sik Yoon on the ground and look for the choke; lots of action, very little laying or GnP. His two fights before that were first round RNCs, too. Just sayin’.
by Chris Nelson on Aug 10, 2009 11:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nobody is attacking these fighters… They took these substances themselves and need to pay the consequences. For him to be cutting it so close isn’t very professional….
I’m pro MJ being legalized…. But with that said, a fighter should still not have it in his system come fight night… And since it isn’t allowed for competition, shouldn’t be in his system leading up to the fight.
by AlwaysRelaxing on Aug 10, 2009 6:42 PM EDT via mobile reply actions 0 recs
again
I’m not defending Diaz, I’m saying he should’ve realized that the CSAC is stepping it up and that he’s a big target.
Follow me on Twitter @KidNate
by Kid Nate on Aug 10, 2009 6:44 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yea and the Armando Garcia excuse really makes it sound pathetic, don’t they know he hasn’t been with CSAC in darn near a year? It also doesn’t jive with what Cesar told Scott Coker when Diaz missed the original testing(which is really disturbing). Perhaps next time he won’t brag about being able to beat the test in an interview.
by who me on Aug 10, 2009 7:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, fuck me.
Whether or not you think pot should be legal (I do), everyone knows it’s part of the job of a fighter not to do it, or at least not get caught. This was an awesome fight that got scrapped because he couldn’t stay clean. At lest Hieron isn’t getting screwed out of another fight.
Shameless self-promotion! http://twitter.com/scb0212
Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try Again. Fail again. Fail better. -Samuel Beckett
by themachiavellian on Aug 10, 2009 6:43 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
To Diaz and Cesar Gracie
Actions have consequences, you should accept them.
A man should never waste an opportunity to keep his mouth shut.
by iiowyn on Aug 10, 2009 6:43 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Nice to see you back here.
"I see him beating Anderson Silva. I see him picking him apart. Him at a 131 years old...(trails off)." - Tito Ortiz on Vitor Belfort at Affliction:DOR
by Rundownloser on Aug 10, 2009 7:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
kind of an ironic first comment back
glad to have you here.
; )
Follow me on Twitter @KidNate
by Kid Nate on Aug 10, 2009 10:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I am a massive fan of irony =)
A man should never waste an opportunity to keep his mouth shut.
by iiowyn on Aug 11, 2009 2:19 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nobody from his camp was able to pick up a damn phone and make a phone call. Thats pathetic.
by steveoc24 on Aug 10, 2009 6:46 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Strikeforce's loss should become UFC's gain...
Ton of interesting fights for Diaz.
I’s love for Hughes to get a crack at him. Marketing gold. The “good ole” country boy vs. the Stockton gangsta.
Slug-fests with Hardy, Davis, Swick, Paulo Thiago sound appealing. So does a bjj/boxing show with Serra.
A true MMA fan from the great state of Arkansas.
by MMArazorback on Aug 10, 2009 6:47 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
but he should avoid Alves, Fitch and GSP like the plague.
A true MMA fan from the great state of Arkansas.
by MMArazorback on Aug 10, 2009 6:48 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Random fact:
Do not mess with Paulo Thiago in Brazil.
A man should never waste an opportunity to keep his mouth shut.
by iiowyn on Aug 10, 2009 7:03 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Weed
Nerves are a part of every fight. I only did bjj comps, but before my matches I got super nervous. Diaz may be using weed to calm his nerves. Could be considered performance enhancing.
by pwdminotauro on Aug 10, 2009 6:49 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
possession of
200 grams of marijuana in the Philippines gets you a life sentence
by theblade on Aug 11, 2009 8:31 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
He stops using before the fight so he can clean out his system. He’s not going into the fight high.
by steveoc24 on Aug 10, 2009 7:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
How grateful is Strikeforce
That Affliction folded? Just imagine if they wouldn’t have gotten Fedor and Gegard. This card went from being epic to being pretty good for hard core fans. And when Cyborg demolishes Gina it will be the fast track to splitsville for Strikeforce. In my opinion anyway. Oh, and for all those conspiracy theorists out there, especially the ones that think Forrest threw the fight, do you think good old DW slipped some money to Diaz and said “don’t do the fight”? Not me but stranger things have happened.
"I will do nothing lightly. When I walk, I will walk heavily. When I fight, I will fight with conviction. When I speak, I will speak strongly. When I love, I will love with everything"
by dedstrk316 on Aug 10, 2009 6:56 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Lol you managed to throw forrest in this mess.
You don't look like a Tanaka.
by spectaa on Aug 10, 2009 7:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
LMAO! Not Forrest just the conspiracy theorists . Anderson is my favorite fighter but I love Forrest and always will.
"I will do nothing lightly. When I walk, I will walk heavily. When I fight, I will fight with conviction. When I speak, I will speak strongly. When I love, I will love with everything"
by dedstrk316 on Aug 10, 2009 7:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Forrest could probably benefit from some weed time off right now.
by bignerd on Aug 10, 2009 7:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Fo SHO
"I will do nothing lightly. When I walk, I will walk heavily. When I fight, I will fight with conviction. When I speak, I will speak strongly. When I love, I will love with everything"
by dedstrk316 on Aug 10, 2009 7:44 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
He’s licensed… it’s legal. They’re own legal team came out with a ruling that said (compassionate use was allowed).
I’m curious to know what is Gracie’s definition of compassionate use is?
by bignerd on Aug 10, 2009 6:59 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Referral to the name of the law here in CA
BOOSH
by Farthammer on Aug 10, 2009 7:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It should also be noted that regardless of what anyone thinks it’s still not legal because federal law says it is illegal. Even in California you can get busted for it by the feds.
by who me on Aug 10, 2009 7:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
inhaling after you give someone a hug…
by mmalogic on Aug 10, 2009 8:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
As much as I dislike Nick Diaz, I have to take his side.
I am also a Medical Marijuana license holder, and if what Cesar says is true :
The old guys were doing things based off of California law, and I knew California law didn’t change. He’s licensed… it’s legal. They’re own legal team came out with a ruling that said (compassionate use was allowed).
Then Nick should be in the clear. Having Marijuana in your system come fight night would not have had any impact, positive or negative on the outcome of the fight. If he was high during the fight (which would be more detrimental to himself), it’s one thing, but the good herb takes between 14 and 60 days to completely clear out of the system. The physical effects only last from 1 to 6 hours. I definitely think this is a case of singling someone out for their previous comments, or bragging in Nick’s case.
It sounds like the CSAC is still a joke, and run by a bunch of morons, so this isn’t really too surprising. Worst part is, we all have to suffer because of it. This fight was looking to be pretty intriguing, now it’s become a big bunch of suck. :(
"The path to enlightenment is through suffering"
by RearNakedChoker on Aug 10, 2009 7:00 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
What if a fighter had a prescription for percocet? Methodone? Steroids?
All of those are legal if he has a prescription, yet they still aren’t allowed to fight with it.
The rule says no weed. I don’t care if he has a note from his mother, a note from Armando Garcia, or a note from Obama, the rule is no weed.
by Phildo on Aug 10, 2009 7:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Tim Credeur got a fight cancelled for testing positive for Aderall, and he told the commission about his prescription beforehand. No matter what or why, you gotta pass the tests.
A man should never waste an opportunity to keep his mouth shut.
by iiowyn on Aug 10, 2009 7:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You can fail a drug for taking over the counter drug medicine or eating a poppy seed muffin. All are legal, all will promptly get your licensed pulled if they show on the test. Plus, no one is going to shed a tear for the fighter/athlete.
by bignerd on Aug 10, 2009 7:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Steroids
Steroids can also be prescribed by a doctor. Why not get a prescription for nandralone?
by pwdminotauro on Aug 10, 2009 7:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I get so tired if this stance. Many of the substances on banned lists are legal, otc products that we can go buy right now. Legality has ZERO to do with it. Even high levels of caffeine come under scrutiny.
The problem is, one of the main uses of medical marijuana is as a painkiller, so it is no different than percocet, demerol or anything else. just consider it a banned painkiller. Prescription or not, it is banned. End of story.
Cesar needs to get in Nicks business and get him straight. I’ve said it before, if you can’t lay off weed for a couple of weeks prior to a big title fight, then that should tell you something. And I know it is because he missed the test, but let’s face it, he skipped the test because he screwed up.
www.knees2thehead.com
Check it out!!
by BJJDenver on Aug 10, 2009 11:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Only one fight left..
That I have any excitement for. Strikeforce is going down man.
by Razzel on Aug 10, 2009 7:02 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I am actually excited for all the fights still, but it is a shame that Diaz and his camp didn’t get their sh*t together. I feel bad for Hieron, since he deserved this tittle bout after all the crap that he went through.
by MMASuPreMaCy on Aug 10, 2009 7:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
DId Jay Hieron piss on a indian burial ground or something? It seems like his career is just cursed. At least they got him a fight with someone because actually getting to fight is a step up for him the way things have been going.
by who me on Aug 10, 2009 7:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
This will all be over soon...
Because of California’s deficit, Marijuana will probably be legalized by 2010.
by steveoc24 on Aug 10, 2009 7:03 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
That doesn’t mean that athletic commission has to allow it.
by Phildo on Aug 10, 2009 7:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yep I think people don’t realize that the vast majority of the drugs on the banned substance list are legal. Being legal for use, heck even having a prescription, is irrelevant as to what you can and can’t test positive for in MMA.
by who me on Aug 10, 2009 7:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
People have lost medals in the olympics for taking cold medicine.
A guy couldn’t play hockey in the world championships for hair loss medicine. It goes on and on.
by Phildo on Aug 10, 2009 7:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yep, athletes are responsible for knowing what they can and can’t take according to the rules. Even if it’s something like tainted supplements or taking something that causes false positives it’s still the fighters fault because they are the ones responsible for what they have in their bodies. By goodness you would think that people who’s very livelihoods depend on passing a piss test would be completely obsessed about making sure they could pass it every time instead of digging for excuses and trying to weasel out of actually following the rules.
by who me on Aug 10, 2009 7:57 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
MAIN CARD ON SHOWTIME (BEGINNING AT 7:30PM):
Gina “Conviction” Carano (7-0) vs. Cris “Cyborg” (7-1) – 145lb Female Championship Bout
Renato "Babalu" Sobral (35-8) vs. Gegard Mousasi (25-2-1) – Light Heavyweight Championship Bout
Gilbert “El Nino” Melendez (15-2) vs. Mitsuhiro Ishida (18-5-1) – Lightweight Interim Championship Bout
Jesse "JT Money" Taylor (13-3) vs. Jay "The Thoroughbred" Hieron (17-4)
Fabricio "Vai Cavalo" Werdum (11-4-1) vs. Mike "Mak" Kyle (12-6-1)
by MMASuPreMaCy on Aug 10, 2009 7:06 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Could you display the before and after card?
Maybe it’s still too soon to preview the after card.
by bignerd on Aug 10, 2009 7:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Same main event. Diaz/Riggs, Melendez/Thomson, Overeem, Werdum.
by MMASuPreMaCy on Aug 10, 2009 7:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed.
Ishida vs Melendez will be great as well. Everyone should watch their NYE bout. That was a great scrap in Japan.
by MMASuPreMaCy on Aug 10, 2009 7:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’m not too familiar with Ishida but I will take your word for it. I’ve heard people talk about him.
by steveoc24 on Aug 10, 2009 7:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I remember that. That was ridiculous.
by steveoc24 on Aug 10, 2009 7:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Damn that was pretty!
"The path to enlightenment is through suffering"
by RearNakedChoker on Aug 10, 2009 11:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I did a full Judo chop on it
Kimura Roll to Armbar check it out
Follow me on Twitter @KidNate
by Kid Nate on Aug 11, 2009 8:57 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
What I keep wondering is
Can Jesse Taylor really make 170? He doesn’t look like an undersized middleweight to me, and he’d be preparing for the cut on fairly short notice unless he was already planning to drop.
by JRN on Aug 10, 2009 7:15 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Hm, guess I was thrown off by his last fight being against Dong Sik Yoon at MW.
by JRN on Aug 11, 2009 12:49 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Swapped a stoner for a drunk.
But on a serious note how is JT$ supposed to make 170?
by MMAussie on Aug 10, 2009 7:17 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Here’s my question about this.
This is the second time Diaz has had trouble getting licensed, and Barnett got in trouble before.
I understand that being licensed probably takes time and money, but why on earth (especially Strikeforce fighters) aren’t they licensed all the time in California?
If you have a fight on August 15, and your license expires on July 25th, why not start the process earlier? Why even let the thing lapse?
by Phildo on Aug 10, 2009 7:18 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Based on accounts, it seems neither the fighter nor the camp were paying attention to the licensing process. Note to all fighters, pay attention to the sanctioning boards, their paperwork, procedures and rules.
by bignerd on Aug 10, 2009 7:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks, Nick. Really.
I wasn’t looking forward to a good fight or anything.
I specializes in grammar fail.
by a tommy point on Aug 10, 2009 7:35 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
strange things will start to happen........
it’s the law of gravitation… like in Afflictions case. Expect more of it to happen in forthcoming months. I’ve been thinking: why this crap is not happening to Dana? Interesting question. I have a strange feeling that he’s much, much more control over it – and would be aware of the situation before it happened. I cant help but see this in the perspective of UFC/Strikeforce conflict. Coker is lighyears behind Dana in this stuff and it shows… and will show repeatedly. I don’t thing it’s anything more that pure law of gravitation though. Strikeforce will finish itself like the others did
by UniversalSoul on Aug 10, 2009 7:37 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I think
that you are right. He’s in control of pretty much everything. That’s why you don’t see him taking Italian vacations, or wherever Coker went. He’s always working and always in the middle of everything. Which is usually a great thing but every once in a while it blows up in his face.
"I will do nothing lightly. When I walk, I will walk heavily. When I fight, I will fight with conviction. When I speak, I will speak strongly. When I love, I will love with everything"
by dedstrk316 on Aug 10, 2009 7:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ok so Dana White is in control of Nick Diaz’s illicit substance use. Right.
It ends in an armbar or a strangle regardless.
by capital L on Aug 10, 2009 9:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
If by in control, you mean he tries to make sure all his fighters abide by the commission’s rules so they don’t get in trouble and fuck up an event, then sure.
by EnsignFrog on Aug 10, 2009 11:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
this is exactly what I think.....
Dana is right next to them then it’s neccessary to make sure they don’t make any stupid things before fights. It works magic in most of the cases. I don’t know if anyone noticed how few incidents happen in UFC, regardless they have more top fighters and fights than everything else combined. So yes – this is exactly what I mean. Coker is not this type of a MANIAC like mr Dana. Dana breathes mma, for Coker it’s more of a business. That’s why things are happening beyond his control, and more things beyond his control will start to happen. Some people forget about what made White a guy he is now – it’s 100% dedication. If you don’t have this – you’ll be out of this game.
by UniversalSoul on Aug 11, 2009 9:44 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
is this still for the ww title or are they just gonna make another catchweight fight, they really dont have problems with making catchweight fights.
by brazary on Aug 10, 2009 7:38 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
non title fight
Follow me on Twitter @KidNate
by Kid Nate on Aug 10, 2009 7:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
What justification could the CSAC possibly have for testing for THC 10 days before a fight if not to infringe on a fighter’s personal privacy?
by George Lucas on Aug 10, 2009 7:55 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
If you have a history of problem with a substance that’s against the rules, they want to test you to make sure you don’t have it before you get licensed.
by Phildo on Aug 10, 2009 7:57 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
What business is it of theirs if he has THC in his system when he gets licensed?
by George Lucas on Aug 10, 2009 8:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Seeing as he is getting the license from them, I’d say it is very much their business.
by Steve4192 on Aug 10, 2009 8:03 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
It’s an offensive invasion of privacy with no possible relevance to fighter safety.
by George Lucas on Aug 10, 2009 8:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That is your opinion. Every state that regulates combat sports through athletic commissions disagrees with your opinion though and they have the power of law backing them up. If you don’t like it then fight to change the regulations but as long as those are in the books then those are the rules that must be followed if a fighter wants to compete in MMA.
by who me on Aug 10, 2009 9:02 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
It is on the banned list. If he doesn’t like it, there are avenues to change it but he still has to abide by the rules.
A man should never waste an opportunity to keep his mouth shut.
by iiowyn on Aug 10, 2009 8:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’m so sick of hearing this every time drug testing comes up, as if I was somehow arguing that Diaz should get off the hook. That’s not what I’m saying and I’ll thank you for not bringing up that straw man ever again.
The CSAC has no reason to test for a legal, harmless, non-performance enhancing drug, outside of its use during a fight.
by George Lucas on Aug 10, 2009 8:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Pot is on the banned substance list they are fully in their rights to test and regulate for that substance according to what is listed in the state law as MMA regulations. It’s not a strawman it’s a fact of life for MMA fighters. Getting a license is a privlege and you have to agree to abide by the state regulations in order to get and keep a license.
by who me on Aug 10, 2009 8:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Dude you need to chill the fuck out. The “straw man” I was referring to was iiowyn’s implying that I was arguing that Diaz should be cleared or something.
by George Lucas on Aug 11, 2009 2:21 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Who needs to chill out?
'He built his whole reputation as a waffle house chef. They’ve been serving him up ham and eggs with a side of canned tomatoes' - Don Frye on Fedor Emelianenko
by Well Read Idiot on Aug 11, 2009 6:45 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Um you asked what business it was of CSAC’s if he had THC in his system when he goes for a license and iiowyn gave you the exact correct answer. It is their business because that is how the rules are written. It is their responsibility to enforce those rules so that makes the THC in Diaz system their business. It’s not a strawman it was the direct answer to your question.
The CSAC has no reason to test for a legal, harmless, non-performance enhancing drug, outside of its use during a fight.
This whole statement is completely personal opinion and it’s that opinion that is the issue with all the replies. Pot is a) still not legal anywhere in the US regardless of what anyone thinks b)Yet to actually been proven to be harmless unlike what a lot of people seem to think c) it’s still on the banned substance list for a reason and they are obligated to test for it just like everything else on the list. If people want to discuss the specific issues around the legality/illegality of pot use in MMA then start a fan post but that opinion doesn’t change the facts of what went on here or that CSAC is correct in what they are doing (for once).
by who me on Aug 11, 2009 7:36 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Because regardless of what you think about it pot is still on the banned substance list. They aren’t forcing him to get a license it’s what he has to agree to in order to have the privilege of getting to fight MMA. Heck even freaken Wal Mart can test anyone any time for THC and they can fire you if you test positive regardless of what the state laws in California say. Nick can smoke all the pot he wants, he just can’t do it if he wants to work.
by who me on Aug 10, 2009 8:07 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
There’s no reasonable excuse for the CSAC to regulate the usage of Marijuana outside of a fight.
Your Wal-Mart example fails on two counts: for one, the CSAC does not employ the people it tests, for two, Wal-Mart’s drug testing is to prevent on-the-job drug use. The CSAC testing for THC weeks before a bout goes well beyond any concern about what actually happens on the day of an event.
by George Lucas on Aug 10, 2009 8:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sorry that just isn’t how things work, you got to pass the test to even get hired at Wal Mart in most places and they can yank your ass out anytime and test you, it doesn’t matter if your high or not if it’s in your system at all you are gone, if you decline to take the test you are gone. They don’t have to prove you ever used it on the job, hell they can know for a fact that you only use it at home, you can even have one of those fancy medical marijuana cards and they can put you on the street for having THC in your system. They don’t give a damn about you or your private life or your private time, THC in system means fired at most places.
CSAC licenses the fighters to fight, if you don’t have a fighter’s license you don’t fight in MMA in California and that is the end of the story. If you don’t want to follow their rules then you can’t work as a MMA fighter in California. If they say do it and you don’t do it then you don’t fight.
by who me on Aug 10, 2009 8:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks for being the voice of reason here!
Yes you.
'He built his whole reputation as a waffle house chef. They’ve been serving him up ham and eggs with a side of canned tomatoes' - Don Frye on Fedor Emelianenko
by Well Read Idiot on Aug 11, 2009 6:46 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It would probably help not to get on the radio and brag about your weed smoking and awesome abilities to beat scheduled tests.
by Steve4192 on Aug 10, 2009 8:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nick let his license lapse. It’s his own damn fault. He wouldn’t have been tested if he had taken care of this a while ago rather than waiting until the last minute.
by Steve4192 on Aug 10, 2009 8:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well because it’s on the banned substance list, not to mention he needed to renew his license. Getting a fighter’s license isn’t a right it’s a privileged, you have to agree to follow the rules in order to get one. This doesn’t infringe on any personal rights because it’s something he has to agree to do if he wants the privilege of fighting.
by who me on Aug 10, 2009 8:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
By that rationale the CSAC would be completely within their rights to deny a fighter’s license based on any arbitrary criteria they want. If it has no relevance to the fairness or safety of a fight, the CSAC has absolutely no business regulating it.
by George Lucas on Aug 10, 2009 8:44 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
CSAC can deny a fighter a license according to anything that is listed in their regulations, pot use is on the banned substance list so it falls 100% within their authority, there is no argument at all about that subject. Their authority comes from the State, they didn’t make up the regulations the state assembly voted them into law. If you want to change the MMA regulations in the state of California then perhaps you should write a state congressman and ask him to introduce a bill changing what CSAC can and can’t do. Your arbitrary definitions of what they should and shouldn’t be allowed to do is completely irrelevant and utterly meaningless unless you just happen to be a state congressman in California and you are trying to pass new legislation on the subject. Sorry that’s just how it is.
by who me on Aug 10, 2009 8:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
His reason isn’t arbitrary. It’s a pretty rational standard to judge proper testing by. And he isn’t making the claim that Diaz did not break a CSAC rule. His point is that rule should be changed. It is a prescriptive rather than descriptive claim.
"I see him beating Anderson Silva. I see him picking him apart. Him at a 131 years old...(trails off)." - Tito Ortiz on Vitor Belfort at Affliction:DOR
by Rundownloser on Aug 10, 2009 9:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’m not saying I disagree at all with that but at this point it is just his opinion about how they should be doing things, he’s making an arbitrary judgment on how and why they do what they do based on his personal opinion on the issue at hand. Changing the rule and whether CSAC did something wrong here are two completely separate discussions to have.
If Twinkies get put on the banned substance list in California and a fighter can’t stop eating Twinkies long enough to get his license then it is 100% his own fault and CSAC would be 100% correct if they refused to license Twinkie the kid (or Tim Sylvia). It’s not CSAC’s fault that Nick Daiz doesn’t follow the rules or keep up with when he needs to renew his fighter’s license, what “banned substance of choice” he enjoys is irrelevant because everything on that list is banned equally. Being pro-pot doesn’t change the fact that it’s on the banned substance list and is treated like everything else on the list by law.
by who me on Aug 10, 2009 10:44 PM EDT up reply actions 4 recs
Very good point. I agree. Rec’d
"The path to enlightenment is through suffering"
by RearNakedChoker on Aug 10, 2009 10:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Changing the rule and whether CSAC did something wrong here are two completely separate discussions to have.
That is exactly what I was saying.
"I see him beating Anderson Silva. I see him picking him apart. Him at a 131 years old...(trails off)." - Tito Ortiz on Vitor Belfort at Affliction:DOR
by Rundownloser on Aug 11, 2009 12:48 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well because it’s two different things then it should be discussed that way instead of dragging it into a discussion about what Diaz actually did or didn’t do. Saying that CSAC doesn’t have to right to do what they do is exactly what I was disagreeing with because they are fully within their rights and responsibilities to test for everything on the banned substance list at the time of license renewal.
by who me on Aug 11, 2009 7:30 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
There’s nothing arbitrary about it. You keep barking like a rabid dog about “THAT’S JUST THE WAY THE RULES ARE” as though I don’t get that.
I get it. Those are the rules.
Now justify them.
by George Lucas on Aug 11, 2009 2:23 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don’t have to justify them at all, hell I don’t have to even agree with them to understand that you have to follow them if you want the privilege of fighting. If CSAC has a regulation that says “fighters who wear black shirts to weigh ins will get their head beat in with a lead pipe” and a fighter comes to a weigh in wearing a black shirt then that is 100% his fault. Justification is irrelevant, the validity of the rule is irrelevant we are at a do or don’t situation at this point, you follow the rules or you don’t fight. It’s not some kind of invasion of privacy it’s the fact that all fighters in California have to follow the same pre-set rules if they want to be licensed to fight.
You want my personal opinion on the subject, I think pot should be illegal and don’t buy into any of that due to personal experiences with my own family. Heck part of my old job was making sure employees were drug tested, as a safety professional I take that stuff very seriously and I know that there is a reason the rules are like they are. Still I didn’t bring that opinion into this before because my opinion on it is just as irrelevant at this point. CSAC doesn’t have to justify the rules to anyone because they aren’t the ones who made them, they enforce what they are obligated to enforce.
by who me on Aug 11, 2009 7:20 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You don’t have to justify them, but don’t you think a regulatory organization should?
I am pretty surprised that people are just saying whatever the government agency says should just be blindly accepted.
Nick Diaz and his camp screwed up, in more ways than one.
But rules are rules is just a way to try to stifle any possible debate on the actual issues. Rules absolutely must be justified.
If we can’t put the rules under scrutiny after a situation like this where it has affected the lives of two fighters and the stability of an entire promotion then when can we?
And yes… I KNOW that Diaz is responsible for placing the fighters and the promition in this situation as well. Clearly it is easier to place all the blame on the visible individual who follows a lifestyle you do not agree with than the faceless government agency. This rule is suspect as well though and I want it justified.
by ruckus on Aug 11, 2009 7:45 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
The people who made the regulations did it for a reason and even if CSAC doesn’t agree with what is written they are bound by it. It is their job. The justification would come in convincing the state assembly of California to change what it is currently in the regulations not for CSAC to do in following what is already there. If you want to discuss justification then that is a discussion of why the rules as they stand should be different, that isn’t on CSAC that is on the people who want to see it changed.
I am not advocating blindly accepting anything I am saying that people have to cart in front of the horse here, if they want to see things done differently then it would be up to them to justify why it is done wrong and try to get it changed not for CSAC to justify why they are legally bound to follow the regulations as currently written. Start a fanpost, heck start a petition to the state assembly in California to change things but don’t think that CSAC owes you a personal explanation of why the rules are as they are.
by who me on Aug 11, 2009 7:53 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
“If you want to discuss justification then that is a discussion of why the rules as they stand should be different, that isn’t on CSAC that is on the people who want to see it changed.”
I disagree. The burden of proof must be on the regulators. If only for the reason that there is clearly an uneven distribution of power between the government regulator and the individual. An uneven distribution of power means an uneven distribution of responsibility. It is the responsibility of the regulator to make sure that the regulations are relevant and rational.
I must be be misunderstanding you though; are you saying that the rules as they stand do not have to be explained because they are the rules and they stand?
by ruckus on Aug 11, 2009 8:08 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The burden of proof lies with the people who want to make the change not the people enforcing what is already there. If you got pulled over doing 80 in a 55 you wouldn’t demand that the police officer justify why the speed limit was 55, if you went to court you wouldn’t demand that the judge or the prosecutor justify the legal code to you before they tried your case, it’s the same for this. CSAC is an enforcement body, they exist to enforce the regulations, their justification in doing what they do is that it is their job to enforce the rules. The people who originally voted to put pot on the banned substance list had to justify it’s inclusion at that time, now that it is there the burden of proof to would fall on the people who want to see the regulations changed.
I disagree. The burden of proof must be on the regulators. If only for the reason that there is clearly an uneven distribution of power between the government regulator and the individual. An uneven distribution of power means an uneven distribution of responsibility. It is the responsibility of the regulator to make sure that the regulations are relevant and rational.
It’s the responsibility of the regulator to enforce the regulations, it’s the responsibility of the governing body to see that they are relevant and rational. Elected representatives in the state assembly of California are the ones that represent the voice of the individual, that is what they are elected to do and that is where the burden of justification would end up being debated for a state regulation not between an athletic commission and an athlete who failed to follow the rules as written. See that is the wonderful thing about America the individual is represented in the government to start with, it’s one of our founding principles. There isn’t an uneven distribution of power because without the people voting for them to be there they have no power. If you live in California and wish to see MMA regulations amended then contact your local congressman, he is your voice in the government.
by who me on Aug 11, 2009 2:03 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
As always, you are an asset to this community.
A man should never waste an opportunity to keep his mouth shut.
by iiowyn on Aug 11, 2009 2:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You’re absolutely naive if you think bureaucratic organizations don’t create policy. This is not a legislative issue.
The CSAC has proven that they and they alone are capable of deciding both what gets tested and how it gets tested. Trying to pawn this off as a legislative responsibility is just ridiculous, or even intellectually dishonest.
by George Lucas on Aug 13, 2009 8:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Welcome to planet earth George, where have you been for the past few decades?
by MMARich on Aug 10, 2009 9:02 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Was Taylor already training for another fight? I have a feeling he’s going to win it.
by MMAInFeRioRiTy on Aug 10, 2009 9:48 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
How is it not fighter bashing when people are attacking Diaz for taking medication (weed) for a legit medical condition…it’s no joke, what he has is serious, it significantly changes lives. He’s an inspiration to all people who have the same condition as him.
If you want to say he made a mistake not knowing his license was expired that makes sense, but everything else people are saying is ridiculous…it’s not like he’s greasing during fights or all jacked up on roids. He’s not breaking any laws (like steroids) and weed doesn’t effect the outcome of a fight (like greasing).
He made a scheduling mistake at best, he and his camp deserve blame for that, but to attack him for anything other than that is stupid. He’ll fight soon enough, it’s not like we’re missing a legendary fight or anything, it’s Jay Hieron and would have been for the meaningless in mma Strikeforce WW title…
other than all that, Diaz needs to get back in the UFC so we can see him in some good fights that actually test his skills…
by Reaser16 on Aug 10, 2009 9:50 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
it's not fighter bashing to criticize a fighter
for his conduct and decision.
name calling = fighter bashing
Follow me on Twitter @KidNate
by Kid Nate on Aug 10, 2009 10:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Lots of medication for ADD is on the banned substance list too. The fact that pot is his drug of choice doesn’t change anything nor does his “prescription”. Hell you can get a prescription for steroids, ask CSAC if they will let you test positive for steroids just because you got a prescription. People confuse their own stance on the pot issue as being at all relevant here and it isn’t. He is taking a substance on the banned substance list knowing that it’s on the banned substance list and he knows that he won’t be able to get a license or be ok’d for a fight with it in his system. It doesn’t matter what the substance is, it’s on the banned list and he takes it anyway that is 100% on him.
by who me on Aug 10, 2009 10:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
who cares about a stance on the pot issue, its legal for him is all that matters…and that wasn’t even my point…
yup, substance is on the banned list for when he fights. When he doesn’t have a fight its perfectly legal for him to smoke (unlike steroids which are illegal) is my point, so him smoking weed all day everyday for his medical condition isn’t the issue. Taking an “illegal substance” isn’t the issue. The issue is not knowing his license had expired (his fault), that’s his mistake, not that he smokes weed, yet everyone wants to focus and attack him for having a legit medical condition. It makes no sense.
If his license wasn’t expired = He cycles off before pre-fight test and fight goes on against Hieron…
If he knew his license was expired = He stops smoking/drinks whatever to pass the licensing test and fight goes on.
Talking non stop about weed and him smoking it isn’t the story…
The story is he didn’t know his license had expired (his fault still)…
If you change a prescription for weed to a prescription for Adderall would there be a picture of Diaz’s face around a pill?? Would people go on and on saying he’s an idiot drug addict for taking adderall, calling him stupid and mocking his medical condition, etc??
The medication isn’t the story, the story is that he didn’t know his license had expired (his own fault)…
That was my point, attacking people for what medication they take for a legit medical condition doesn’t seem right to me…especially when that’s not even the main story…
and nice straw man about prescription for steroids, compare a (when neither prescriped) PED to a recreational drug, brilliant…
by Reaser16 on Aug 10, 2009 11:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
If the fighter was well known, and he had already been suspended once for taking adderall, and had two issues getting his license done because of it, I’m sure someone would come up with a clever photoshop, just like they did with Barnett doing the throat slash with a needle.
No one’s attacking him for having ADD, we’re attacking him for now have 3 fights called into question because he can’t get his treatment for the ADD in line with the rules of the sport.
by Phildo on Aug 11, 2009 12:04 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
People aren’t criticizing him for smoking pot (actually most people don’t give a shit what he was taking), they’re are criticizing him for being stupid when it comes to his license. Who are you arguing with? Nobody’s disagreeing with you :/
by EnsignFrog on Aug 11, 2009 12:13 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’m high and just typing my opinion, not sure if I was even arguing with anyone…
:-)
by Reaser16 on Aug 11, 2009 12:15 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ahh well, you were talking about fighter bashing (which I haven’t seen), and then you replied to “who me,” and in your post you were telling him that the article has nothing to do with pot in an argumentative fashion, even though that’s the point he just made…
Actually this whole thread is people saying over and over again it’s not about pot, but that he couldn’t keep his treatment inline with the rules, and should have done his license properly, but we seem to be arguing even though we’re all saying the same thing…
by EnsignFrog on Aug 11, 2009 12:27 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
saying same thing in different ways it appears…
by Reaser16 on Aug 11, 2009 1:51 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Diaz is the person who put himself out there as the “pot guy in MMA” it’s his fight that he chose. Blame him for being identified in that manner because he’s the guy who is always making the point about being a user.
You do have some mistakes in your thinking though. Pot still isn’t legal regardless of what California says, the feds can still arrest you and that medical marijuana card would be laughed out of federal court. Steroids aren’t illegal, you can get a prescription for them from pretty much any doctor. The fact that it is pot is 100% irrelevant to what went on here or what the vast majority of people are talking about here(including my post that you are responding to). The funny response here would be that perhaps you should lay off the pot as that may improve your reading comprehension but then you would probably get peeved about that too. My god you pot-logic guys are so defensive and touchy.
by who me on Aug 11, 2009 7:44 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Tim Credeur and Adderall.
A man should never waste an opportunity to keep his mouth shut.
by iiowyn on Aug 11, 2009 2:22 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh and do you really think Nick’s going to get back to the UFC pulling this kind of crap? He can’t even get past CSAC, NSAC actually has their act together and won’t put up with this kind of stuff. You screw up a UFC card because you can’t keep up with your own license requirements or pass a drug test and Dana White is going to blow a fuse, not to mention Keith Kizer (and NSAC is now doing random testing).
by who me on Aug 10, 2009 11:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
you think if he was in the UFC Dana would allow it to even come to this point???
by Reaser16 on Aug 10, 2009 11:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I get the feeling Dana would have been riding his ass to get his license renewed.
A man should never waste an opportunity to keep his mouth shut.
by iiowyn on Aug 11, 2009 2:24 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
my question was rhetorical, but yes, I agree…^ – that
by Reaser16 on Aug 11, 2009 4:59 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
What does he have that is so serious?
Last I check, you can just go Dr. Cannabis and get yourself a prescription for paying the door fee?
by bignerd on Aug 10, 2009 11:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’m really happy for Jesse Taylor. He didn’t deserve to get the boot from TUF (esp when you look at Junie Browning’s behavior), but he seems really humbled and he’s turned his career around.
With seven wins in a row over pretty decent competition, Jesse deserves another shot in the big show. He’s earned it.
by MMAEruption on Aug 10, 2009 10:18 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Agreed. And I think he’s going to put a world of hurt on Hieron.
by goodbones on Aug 10, 2009 10:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Jesse definitely seems to have cleaned up his act, and big props to him. He got the boot because he caused a disturbance in a public place, a casino friendly with the UFC no less, and went on and on about being a UFC fighter while doing so.
A man should never waste an opportunity to keep his mouth shut.
by iiowyn on Aug 11, 2009 2:25 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
For fuck sakes Nick, quit making us high functioning pot smokers look bad.
by Jahbulon on Aug 10, 2009 11:01 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
How come Nate never has any of these kinds of problems? Eventually when you see a pattern like this you have to look beyond the pot issue to whether it’s just about that individual. What is this the third time he’s made a mess of his career because of this?
by who me on Aug 10, 2009 11:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The guy who isn’t fighting in less than two weeks right? How many times do we have to go through this? How come his brother doesn’t have these problems even though he also smokes it? Lets face it after the third time yes it’s really getting to be an issue here.
by who me on Aug 11, 2009 7:47 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I say again, 26 year old Nick Diaz' career is not a mess
by ruckus on Aug 11, 2009 8:03 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
But it is a hell of a lot messier than it needs to be.
Nick’s pot smoking has cost him two paychecks and the biggest win of his career.
by Steve4192 on Aug 11, 2009 8:19 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
If you mean the Gomi fight then it did not cost him the win, simply the pay check. (Speaking of messy careers, Gomi has one in my opinion)
I don’t think any serious individual is putting Diaz in the same category as various ‘alleged’ steroid users.
Nick Diaz is not a cheater, I don’t think anyone is willing to say that he is. At this point all he is is a rule breaker; the fact that you can break a rule and not be a cheater, yet still face these types of consequences is frankly ludicrous.
by ruckus on Aug 11, 2009 8:24 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You might want to check Nick’s record again. You won’t find a ‘W’ next to his name for that fight versus Gomi. His pot smoking most definitely cost him a win.
by Steve4192 on Aug 11, 2009 8:56 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
sorry
I wasn’t clear in what I meant.
Yes, technically it is considered a loss. But no one thinks that Gomi beat Diaz, or that Diaz didn’t hand a beating to the highly touted Fireball Kid.
The way journalists and bloggers speak about the fight, they always refer to Diaz as winning it.
It may be a loss on his numerical record, but it is still a win in most people’s books (if not everyones). I’m sure even Gomi thinks he lost that fight.
by ruckus on Aug 11, 2009 9:00 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Again, I would advise you to look at his record. It is not listed as a win or a loss. It is listed as a no contest, meaning that for all intents and purposes, it never happened.
Do people who were MMA fans when it happened know otherwise? Sure. But in 10-20 years, we will be the only ones who remember.
by Steve4192 on Aug 11, 2009 9:51 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
For instance, 99% of current MMA fans don’t remember Bobby Hoffman knocking out Mark Robinson because they weren’t around when it happened in 2001. All they know is that he has a no contest on his record versus Robinson.
The same thing is going to happen with Diaz’s win over Gomi. In 10 years, almost everyone will have forgotten that he gogo’d the Fireball Kid. They’ll just know that the fight was a no contest. Every year that goes by will result in fewer and fewer people remembering the outcome of that fight.
by Steve4192 on Aug 11, 2009 9:56 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
also..
I entirely agree with you, it is a lot messier than it has to be. That is why this rule and others like it are dumb.
If he was a cheater we’d all say… his career is messy because it should be.
by ruckus on Aug 11, 2009 8:27 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
So why does his brother (who we can safely assume does the same thing) never has any problems at all with this kind of stuff? Nate doesn’t miss fights because he’s afraid to test or end up in trouble because he forgot to renew his fighter’s license. Heck I am sure there are a number of pot using fighters out there that somehow manage to not have it drastically effect their careers in such a manner on multiple occasions. This isn’t about the pot it’s about Nick Diaz the person.
As far as the rule being dumb or not, that is irrelevant because dumb or not everyone knows what the rule is and what the consequences are if you break it. Being an MMA fighter is a privilege not a right, you have to follow the rules if you want to do it (even the dumb ones). Heck breaking a dumb one is just as bad as breaking any of the others because they all know what they can and can’t do in this sport.
by who me on Aug 11, 2009 2:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
How many more fighters are going to piss around and do serious damage to the promoters like Barnett and now Diaz.
Is professionalism too much to ask from these guys?
"Like a ballet of violence clothed in fine Brazilian silk." ~ MMASuPreMaCy
by Benicio on Aug 11, 2009 12:25 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Seriously, where is the professionalism?
by bignerd on Aug 11, 2009 1:15 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
“Someone at the CSAC is clearly singling out high-profile MMA fighters who have checkered histories for special scrutiny.”
And catching them. YAY!
Don't believe a word I say, I don't train BJJ.
I blog at TangleBones - you should follow me on Twitter here.
by jemaleddin on Aug 11, 2009 7:48 AM EDT reply actions 1 recs
i'm disappointed
But, I kind of like Taylor. I like the fact that he turned a bad situation into a good one and has done very well for himself since TUF. He’s also in a pretty good position; he’s shown that he has the goods to win a TUF season without being given the stigma of being a TUF winner. He has also been able to actually develop since then without the accusations of Zuffa protection that is given to any TUF winner who isn’t fighting the #1 LHW in the world.
I’m also interested in a future Taylor v. Diaz match up.
by ruckus on Aug 11, 2009 8:42 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Like I said…Nick needs better management.
by madiq on Aug 11, 2009 12:24 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
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 © 2009 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.
