Earlier this month, the Association of Boxing Commissions held a package vote on six rule changes to the ABC’s Unified Rules of MMA. Four of the changes were uncontroversial, but two - the rule permitting heel kicks to the kidney area, and the rule changing the definition of a grounded opponent - were opposed by the New Jersey State Athletic Control Board (NJSACB).
All six rule changes were combined into a single yes or no vote. This meant New Jersey voted no to the entire package, despite agreeing with four of the six changes. In all, 42 commissions voted yes, one voted no, and two abstained. After the conference, this package method of voting drew criticism from some other commissions.
I recently spoke to ABC president Mike Mazzulli about a variety of topics, including the vote on the rule changes. This is what he had to say about the voting procedure from the conference:
ABC President Mike Mazzulli: “What we did is, we approached the rule changes on Monday, on Tuesday we reiterated what we were going to do, and [the athletic commission representatives] had that time to discuss the changes among themselves. At no point - from the first time we discussed it, until the voting process - did anyone approach the podium and request that we vote individually.
I say that, because we had New Jersey that was adamantly against the rule changes. I gave the New Jersey representative the floor and she spoke on behalf of the New Jersey athletic commission. We went to vote after that. You can see it in the minutes, and you can see it online. The whole conference is online, from start to finish. No one requested [individual votes for each change]; if it was requested, we absolutely would have done that, 110%.
So the people that are asking that? I have no idea why they didn't raise their hand if they were there in person. My assumption is some of the people that are bringing this up weren't even there in person to even offer that option. If they had asked to do that, if one commission had asked that, we would 100% do that. We would have done it without a hesitation.”
After this conversation I asked the NJSACB if they would like to respond to Mr. Mazzulli’s statement, and I received the following quote from deputy commissioner Rhonda Uttley-Herring, who represented the NJSACB at the conference:
Rhonda Uttley-Herring: “It was difficult enough to convince them to let me have the ability to speak out dissent on the issue. That itself was a struggle as was a change in the agenda timing to try and ensure my absence. Further, they made it clear this would be a package vote only”
It was also expressed to me that the deputy commissioner did request single votes, but was informed it was to be a package vote only, though it seems the request was not made at the podium. The agenda timing change was apparently that the ABC moved the vote up a day on the docket without telling her, allegedly in an attempt to have her absent. It was also mentioned that she had to argue just to be able to present her statement.
Mr. Mazzulli was offered the opportunity to comment on this, and his response is printed below.
Mike Mazzulli: "At no time did anyone from the floor request an individual vote on each MMA rule change. If that was a request it would have occurred. Ms Uttley-Herring requested to speak and she was granted the floor without a hesitation."
The rule changes are scheduled to come into effect on January 1st, 2017, but each state athletic commission has to individually implement each rule based on its own procedures for changing regulations. The majority of states present at the conference seem prepared to adopt all of the changes, but a number of states—primarily those which didn't attend the conference—appear set to opt out of implementing at least some of the revisions.
It's looking increasingly likely that there will be two or more sets of differing 'Unified Rules' in use in 2017, depending on which state a bout takes place in.