Quoteworthy: UFC 96 Main Event Judge
by Kelvin Hunt on Mar 9, 2009 11:13 AM EDT
in News
Email
PrintVia Sherdog:
“One of the judges told me I lost the fight in the last 10 seconds, and that’s pretty hard to take.”
That's what one of the main event judges told Keith Jardine after the fight. Say what? What fight was he watching? I honestly can't even fathom that a judge could let this statement come out of his mouth. Now, I'm a huge Rampage fan admittedly, but there's no way Jardine could have won that fight on the scorecards. He didn't land anything of any significance during the entire fight. Unless you bought into the horribly biased commentary that is. As the fight was taking place I scored it each round while doing the discussion thread here on MMA4Real. Here's how I scored the fight:
Round 1-Very close round no doubt. Neither fighter really landed anything significant aside from a couple of leg kicks via Jardine and a flurry that Jackson lands that back Jardine up a bit. However, Jackson stalks and controls the octagon so I give him the edge in Round 1.
Round 2-Rampage drops Jardine and flurries landing several hard shots. Jardine survives....Rampage hits the double leg takedown(does nothing with it) then they trade punches later in the round with both guys eating shots....
Round 3-Jackson with a takedown(does nothing with it)...Jardine lands some kicks with little on them...Jackson tags Jardine...Jackson is stalking Jardine...they clinch...Jackson stuns Jardine with punches....he drops Jardine right before the bell sounds...
I suppose it all goes back to quantity vs. quality or should I say quantity landed vs. damage caused, and a perfect example of why you can't leave it up to the judges to decide. For those of you that watched the fight, how did you see each round and do you agree with the judges statement to Jardine?
21 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Man, I don’t know what’s worse….refereeing or judging….shit at least judges have to make split second decisions…so I can forgive them moreso….but how hard is it to look at a fight and tell who won what round? Of course you have close rounds…in that case just call it a 10-10…it’s not that difficult.
http://www.mmaforreal.com
The first round was close, I thought Jardine did enough to take it, but I may need to watch it again. Regardless of what happened in the final 10 seconds of the fight though, I thought Rampage clearly won the second and third to take the victory.
Steve
Right, I don’t really have a problem with Jardine taking the first…it was a close round no doubt…but this judge is off his rocker!
Of all people Cecil Peoples scored the fight most accurately IMO….lolol.
http://www.mmaforreal.com
But if that's the case...
…and you give Jardine the first, then your scorecard matches the judge’s.
If you see Mark Coleman in person, drop $5 on the floor and watch the fun as he tries in vain to bend down and pick it up.
I don’t have a problem with it being scored 29-28 and giving Jardine the first round. It was a very close round as I’ve stated. However, I DO have a problem with a judge telling Jardine that aside from the last ten seconds of the last round he basically won the fight. That’s crazy talk.
http://www.mmaforreal.com
But he didn't say that.
He said he ‘lost the fight’ in the final ten seconds. Meaning, until then, it was close.
I agree with what he said. Jardine could have taken that round with a flurry at the end.
If you see Mark Coleman in person, drop $5 on the floor and watch the fun as he tries in vain to bend down and pick it up.
In so many words that’s what he said….otherwise he wouldn’t have even made the statement to Jardine.
http://www.mmaforreal.com
Whatever he meant, the judge probably should have kept that to himself.
I was half drunk in a loud bar when I watched it, so I could be wrong, but like Ozzz said, I think if Jardine would have done to Rampage what Rampage did to him in the final 10, you could make an argument to give Jardine the round. However, if the just circled each other and nothing happened, then I think it still would have been Rampage’s.
That’s not how it happened though so it doesn’t really matter, but the judge shoudn’t have told Keith that, whether it was accurate or not. Obviously, its just going to make him feel worse. The guy just lost, why make it worse?
Maybe Jardine sought him out.
Telling a guy what he needed to improve would help him in future fights, no?
If you see Mark Coleman in person, drop $5 on the floor and watch the fun as he tries in vain to bend down and pick it up.
Going against consensus here
I honestly thought Jardine won the first round, Rampage took the second, and the third was far from inevitable until that last twenty seconds. A late flurry from Jardine would have got my 10-9, just as I think that late flurry from Jackson earned one.
Jardine was punching and kicking, Rampage was counterpunching, so regardless of who was moving forward, I give Jardine points for being more aggressive.
Yes, Jackson went for a kick and a takedown (shocker!) but just because he never tries such things usually doesn’t make one of each rewardable.
Bottom line – I can see how a judge would have called it 30-27, but I can also see how a judge would call it 29-28. It’s not exactly a stretch that a judge should be pilloried for.
NB: I also thought Clay Guida should have lost his last fight – lying on someone is not ‘control of the Octagon’ in my book, and I would have said Sanchez/Stevenson was a lot closer than most called it.
So maybe it’s just that I see things differently than most.
If you see Mark Coleman in person, drop $5 on the floor and watch the fun as he tries in vain to bend down and pick it up.
I thought Guida should have lost as well. However, I understand why he won. The Sanchez/Stevenson fight wasn’t close at all IMO. Sanchez threw and landed more shots and more powerful shots than Stevenson.
My whole thing with Jardine/Jackson..is yea Jardine threw kicks etc. but they were not causing any damage….in fact I’d say that the kicks Rampage landed were more devastating…in regards to Rampage counterpunching and Jardine being aggressive. Rampage controlled the cage and landed more shots.
http://www.mmaforreal.com
Controlling the cage is so subjective.
A guy backpedaling but getting the first shots in, to me, is playing a totally workable fight plan more effectively than a guy coming forward but getting tagged before each punch he throws.
Guida ‘controlled the cage’.. he also hid and stalled.
If you see Mark Coleman in person, drop $5 on the floor and watch the fun as he tries in vain to bend down and pick it up.
Guida and Rampage did two totally different things…Rampage also landed way more strikes than Jardine did….plus more power shots…
http://www.mmaforreal.com
You and I will disagree on that one.
I thought Jardine threw more, by virtue of the fact he kicks too.
And Rampage was counterpunching, so you’ve gotta admit that would indicate he was punching after Jardine had already thrown.
Maybe his punches were cleaner, harder, but more? I’m gonna say that’s not how I saw it.
If you see Mark Coleman in person, drop $5 on the floor and watch the fun as he tries in vain to bend down and pick it up.
I gave Jardine the first round…although it really could’ve been a 10-10 round, the rest was basically Rampage, though I saw one glaring hole in Rampage’s defense and that was he’s susceptible to uppercuts ‘cause Jardine caught him good and he kinda stumbled for a little bit….I’m sure Greg Jackson will note that
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.
