NSAC revokes Silva’s license and imposes fine
April 8, 2011
UFC Light Heavyweight Thiago Silva waived his right to an attorney yesterday and decided to accept his fate after admitting to altering his post-UFC 125 drug test. The NSAC revoked his license for 12 months, took a percentage of his purse and rendered his fight with Brandon Vera a no contest.
MMA Junkie reports that the NSAC reduced its original punishment due to Silva’s “candor and honesty”. Silva admitted to using a “urine adulterant” when giving a sample to the NSAC officials. Apparently, owning up to his wrongdoing has granted him some leniency with the NSAC.
Via MMA Weekly:
Silva issued a statement through his camp at American Top Team explaining the situation, and apologizing for his misdeeds.
“We make decisions every day of our lives. Some are good and some are bad. When you make a bad decision, you can either make the situation worse by trying to cover it up or lie about it or just stick your head in the sand and refuse to acknowledge it even happened or you can own up to it with an honest explanation, accept the consequences of your actions, apologize to the people affected by it, learn from it and move on. I’m choosing the second option,” Silva wrote.
Via MMA Junkie:
NSAC commissioners originally recommended a fine of one-third of Silva’s “show” purse, as well as his entire win bonus, but citing the Brazilian’s “candor and honesty” eventually settled on 25-percent of his purse ($13,750) and $20,000 of the win bonus for a total fine of $33,750.
Silva dodged a bit of a bullet with his suspension, as NSAC executive director Keith Kizer recommended the 12-month suspension begin with Thursday’s hearing rather than the more traditional procedure of backdating the first day of the suspension to the date of the fight in question.
Kizer cited Silva’s reluctance to fess up to the charges until his “B” sample returned with the same findings as the first test. However, the commissioners instead elected to reward Silva for his belated admissions and chose to stick with the traditional routine. Silva is eligible to reapply for a license on Jan. 2, 2012, and he will have to provide a drug-free (and authentic) urine sample.
Despite a lackluster performance, the UFC reinstated Brandon Vera due to the questions concerning Silva’s drug test.
Payout Perspective:
Does it makes sense that he was docked only a percentage of his win bonus although the bout was changed to a no contest? Shouldn’t Silva have been stripped of the full win bonus?
Its interesting that the NSAC granted Silva some leniency even though he attempted to cheat the system and then did not admit to wrongdoing until it was apparent that he would be caught. Still, a year out of work and $33K plus in fines is a stiff penalty and serve as some sort of deterrent to those that would follow the same path as Silva. Obviously, this does not help with any of his sponsors. Will they be there when he comes back in 2012? Silva is a good fighter that did not need to cheat to win.
What this means for further drug tests is that the NSAC will have to be more intrusive in watching athletes as they submit the urine sample.
NSAC cuts out of competition drug testing
February 26, 2011
MMA Junkie reports that due to budget cuts, the Nevada State Athletic Commission has eliminated out of competition drug testing. This type of drug testing is thought to be a strong deterrent to performance enhancing drugs in pro competition.
Via MMA Junkie:
With state governments around the country tightening their belts amid a widening recession, the NSAC’s budget for out-of-competition testing was reduced to $12,000 (from $18,000) in fiscal year 2009-2010. Regulators then asked the commission to give back all of the money before the year’s end, (NSAC Executive Director Keith) Kizer said.
In fiscal year 2010-2011, there is no money in the NSAC’s budget for out-of-competition drug testing, though athletes are still tested either the day prior to an event or immediately following it, and sometimes both.
The enforcement gap has nevertheless prompted the commission to get creative in coming up with the money to reinstate the program. One solution expected to be addressed at a meeting early next month is to draw a portion of funds from the amateur combative sports program, which pays for some of the safety and administrative costs associated with amateur boxing, kickboxing and MMA. The program is funded by a “ticket fee” assessed by the NSAC at professional events that is separate from the commission’s live gate fee, which takes a percentage of the money generated by ticket sales. The ticket fee amounts to .50 per ticket with live gates totaling less than $1 million, and $1 per ticket above that figure.
Commissioners will decide during the March meeting whether to lobby legislators on changing the NSAC’s funding statutes for the next state budget, which runs from July 1, 2011 to June 30, 2013. Nevada legislators are working to close a $2.2 billion dollar shortfall in the state’s general fund, which has prompted governor Pete Sandoval to recommend harsh cutbacks in education and government spending in his budget proposal.
Payout Perspective:
The out of competition testing was a way that the commission would keep fighters honest even when not training for an upcoming fight. The elimination of this does not mean that fighters will immediately use PEDs, but it takes away a deterrent. Although I think that the out of competition drug tests are valuable, I do not think the NSAC should shortchange amateur programs to fund this testing. In a time when states are crunching budgets, a lot of tough choices will need to be made.
NSAC head Kizer responds to Rogan
December 7, 2010
Nevada State Athletic Commission Executive Director Keith Kizer responded to comments made by Joe Rogan after the controversial Nam Phan/Leonard Garcia decision. Kizer does not believe that there is a problem with NSAC officials and indicates that Rogan’s on air criticism was not warranted.
After the decision, Rogan aired out his opinion of the judges’ decision:
“You should be able to leave it in the hands of the judges,” Rogan said. “You should be able to just fight. And we should point out that that is the situation because of the Nevada State Athletic Commission. That’s what it is. It has nothing to do with the UFC, and people keep saying the UFC is corrupt. We have no say whatsoever in who judges these fights.
“Keith Kizer has denied that there’s an issue. I think there’s a huge issue, and I think he needs to clean house. There’s a few very good judges surrounded by a bunch of incompetent morons that know absolutely nothing about the sport. And they’ve got to do something about that. Because it’s ruining MMA, and it’s making people think that this sport is corrupt, and it has nothing to do with corruption. It’s sheer, complete, total incompetence.” (h/t MMA Junkie)
In a recent interview, Kizer addressedRogan’s comments. Although shocked by the judges’ decision, Kizer dismisses the argument that he needs to “clean house,” as suggested by Rogan. In his defense, he points out that the UFC continues to use NSAC judges despite the calls for a house cleaning.
In response to Kizer’s comments, Rogan posted a response.
Zach Arnold states that Kizer will lose this PR battle:
This is not a winnable war for Keith Kizer, neither in public nor in private. If the Fertitta family is angry, they have the financial muscle to make a difference. If they’re not happy with the ways things are run in Nevada, they can run shows elsewhere and help other states make money while Nevada is on the sidelines. Don’t think that the local politicians ignore this kind of thing. Commissioners come and go. but UFC and their deep pockets are not going anywhere. If you’re a betting person and had to choose between who’s going to last longer in power, Keith Kizer or the UFC in Nevada, Mr. Kizer’s drawing the short end of that stick.
Payout Perspective:
A tough week for Kizer. Last week, Chael Sonnen suggested that he told Kizer he was taking TRT but Kizer advised he need not disclose the information. Next, he comes under fire by Joe Rogan during a live broadcast for a split decision in favor of Leonard Garcia. In response to Rogan’s on air criticism, Kizer responded in defending the commission.
However, Kizer cannot win this battle. As Arnold points out, Zuffa is major business in Nevada. As we know, Dana White and the Fertittas are tied in politically in the state. They supported Harry Reid this past November. They have the leverage in this situation. I do not believe that the UFC would hold back shows in Nevada because of Kizer, but could make it known of its concern for officiating.
This situation could have been disarmed if Kizer were to have stepped back and reviewed the Phan/Garcia fight, admit that the judges made a mistake (or that the fight was a close call) and ensure that all NSAC officials refresh themselves with the MMA scoring system. Although Rogan’s comments were inflammatory, Kizer could have taken a diplomatic tact in his response as it would be beneficial for him to maintain a working relationship with the UFC.
Jones Loses Hamill Fight Appeal
December 23, 2009
Jeremy Botter of Heavy.com has the latest regarding the Jon Jones appeal with the Nevada State Athletic Commission:
Jon Jones’ appeal to the Nevada State Athletic Commission to overturn referee Steve Mazagatti’s decision in his bout against Matt Hamill earlier this month has been denied. The NSAC stated that they don’t overturn decisions and decided against ruling on the appeal.
Heavy.com confirmed the news with Jason Genet, the manager of Jones, Shane Carwin and other fighters.
Payout Perspective:
The appeal was a long shot to begin with, so the result isn’t necessarily a surprise.
It’s a tough way to lose your first fight, but Jones image and reputation won’t be hurt by this in the least. He was impressive; displaying the type of marked improvement in the Hamill fight that you look for in a young fighter. Now he’s staring at a huge fight against Brandon Vera — the main event of the UFC’s debut on Versus — where he’s got the opportunity to put himself on the map.
Not only can Jones become a contender at 205lbs., but he’s widely being viewed as one of the future stars of the UFC: a young and dynamic fighter with the ability to engage fans in and out of the cage. He’s one of that future crop that the UFC is really hoping to develop.
Jones Seeking Reversal of Hamill Fight Decision
December 17, 2009
Steven Marrocco of MMAWeekly has obtained a copy of the letter issued by the management of Jon Jones that seeks to have Jones’ decision loss to Matt Hamill reversed. Jones and Hamill fought December 5th on The Ultimate Fighter Finale where landed a series of illegal 12-6 elbows from the mount position that served as the impetus for referee Steve Mazzagatti to disqualify Jones and award Hamill the win.
The complaint does not dispute that Jones violated commission statutes by throwing multiple “12 to 6” downward elbows, but claims the blows did not render Hamill unable to continue.
“The criteria that was used to determine whether or not Mr. Hamill could continue was flawed,” the letter states.
The complaint claims Mazzagatti violated a “well-established precedent” to involve ringside physicians in deciding whether Hamill could continue or not.
The letter included a statement from Hamill issued five days after the fight where he said he dislocated his shoulder when Jones tossed him to the ground and, “knew it was probably over at that point.”
“At minimum, Mr. Hamill should have had (an) opportunity to clearly understand what was being asked of him and given the ability to respond,” the letter states. “If allowed this basic right, we believe, based on Mr. Hamill’s own admission, that his shoulder injury would have precluded him from continuing, not the perceived foul.”
Ciatoli and Marino said the vision-blurring cuts were caused by 23 legal elbows that Jones landed from the mount position, not the illegal blows.
The complaint asks the NSAC to schedule a hearing on the matter in the event that the decision is not changed.
Payout Perspective:
The complaint really brings to light the importance of being able to use instant replay correctly. The allegations may or may not come to have any merit, but this should serve as a warning to the MMA community that, just like in any other sport, video replay is a tool only as accurate as its handlers.
In this case it wasn’t necessarily how the tool was used, but the way it may have disrupted the process following the use of illegal blows in a match.
—–
An issue of this ultimately reflects upon the standard of officiating that is set by the sport, which makes it even more confusing as to why an official like “Big” John McCarthy is still not licensed in Nevada or allowed to officiate UFC competitions.
FanHouse recently spoke to Keith Kizer, the executive director of the Nevada State Athletic Commission, about McCarthy’s status in the state, and it appeared as though the commission was in no rush of reinstating arguably one of the greatest referees in MMA history.
“We have him and about 40 other people pending. It’s just a matter of when there’s the next opening and then we look at the applications and go from there,” Kizer said.
“There could be an opening in a month; there could be an opening in about three years.”
McCarthy retired from refereeing in December 2007 to pursue a career in television. During his time away from the cage, he criticized some of the decisions made by the NSAC with regards to judging and officiating, and some believe that is why he has yet to be reinstated by the commission.
TUF 10 Finale: Notes
December 8, 2009
Here’s a look at some of the business-related story lines to come out of The Ultimate Fighter Heavyweight Finale on Saturday:
- Payouts courtesy of MMAWeekly:
MAIN EVENT FIGHTERS
-Roy Nelson: $16,000 (includes $8,000 win bonus) def. Brendan Schaub: $8,000
-Matt Hamill: $46,000 (includes $23,000 win bonus) def. Jon Jones: $20,000
MAIN CARD FIGHTERS
-Kevin “Kimbo Slice” Ferguson: $25,000 (no win bonus) def. Houston Alexander: $13,000
-Frankie Edgar: $46,000 (includes $23,000 win bonus) def. Matt Veach: $5,000
-Matt Mitrione: $16,000 (includes $8,000 win bonus) def. Marcus Jones: $8,000
PRELIMINARY CARD FIGHTERS
-James McSweeney: $16,000 (includes $8,000 win bonus) def. Darrill Schoonover: $8,000
-Jonathan Madsen: $16,000 (includes $8,000 win bonus) def. Justin Wren: $8,000
-Brian Stann: $30,000 (includes $15,000 win bonus) def. Rodney Wallace: $6,000
-John Howard: $14,000 (includes $7,000 win bonus) def. Dennis Hallman: $15,000
-Mark Bocek: $30,000 (includes $15,000 win bonus) def. Joe Brammer: $5,000
ULTIMATE FIGHTER 10 FINALE DISCLOSED FIGHTER PAYROLL: $351,000
ULTIMATE FIGHTER 10 AWARDS & BONUSES
(Each fighter was awarded $25,000 per award, which is in addition to his disclosed salary.)
Fight of the Night:
-Frankie Edgar vs. Matt Veach
Knockout of the Night:
-Roy Nelson
Submission of the Night:
-Mark Bocek
- The disqualification of Jon Jones for his downward striking elbows on Matt Hamill marked the first time in MMA history that video replay was used to decide the outcome of a fight.
The Nevada State Athletic Commission utilized instant replay for the first time in mixed martial arts competition when referee Steve Mazzagatti disqualified Jon Jones at “The Ultimate Fighter 10” Finale on Saturday at the Palms Casino Resort.
NSAC Executive Director Keith Kizer confirmed that Mazzagatti made his decision to disqualify Jones after looking at replays that showed the 22-year-old delivering three illegal downward elbows to the face of Matt Hamill. Kizer made it a point to back Mazzagatti’s judgment.
“At the end of the day, they were illegal elbows; the only call he can make is a disqualification,” Kizer said. “He made the call he had to make.”
- The Kimbo-Alexander fight looked to be an utter disaster for the first seven minutes, but Kimbo likely did enough in the final eight to be of further interest to the casual fan. He showed that his time at ATT has paid dividends, especially on the ground where he exhibited some semblance – even if it wasn’t much – of a ground game.
The ratings will likely be out later today or sometime Wednesday, and they’ll likely be very good. While Kimbo isn’t a main event fighter – and probably never will be in the UFC – he would be an option for the UFC on the main card of a future PPV. That option becomes particularly more interesting in the next few months where the UFC looks to be very thin in terms of headliners.
- Something tells me that if the UFC ends up with a new television distribution deal, Mike Goldberg and Joe Rogan won’t be constantly pimping the next episode of “Manswers” or “1000 Ways to Die.” The references are par for the course on any network, but the type of show that these represent is the type of image that MMA and the UFC are also trying to shed.
UFC 106: Payout Perspective
November 22, 2009
Welcome to another edition of Payout Perspective. This week we’ll be taking a look at the business side of UFC 106 which was held on Saturday, November 21st at the Mandalay Bay Resort & Casino in Las Vegas, Nevada. The event featured the Octagon return of Tito Ortiz as he took on Forrest Griffin in the light heavyweight main event.
UFC 106 by the Numbers:
Attendance and Gate Figures
The announced attendance for the fight was 10,529, which drew a live gate of approximately $3 million (an updated figure should be available from the NSAC in the coming days).
Disclosed Fighter Payouts
- Forrest Griffin, $250,000 (including $150,000 win bonus) def. Tito Ortiz, $250,000
- Josh Koscheck, $106,000 (including $53,000 win bonus) def. Anthony Johnson, $17,000
- Amir Sadollah, $30,000 (including $15,000 win bonus) def. Phil Baroni, $25,000
- Antonio Rogerio Nogueira, $100,000 (including $30,000 win bonus) def. Luis Arthur Cane, $19,000
- Paulo Thiago — $16,000 (including $8,000 win bonus) def. Jacob Volkmann, $6,000
- George Sotiropoulos, $20,000 (including $10,000 win bonus) def. Jason Dent, $8,000
- Caol Uno — $20,000 (no win bonus, majority draw) def. Fabricio Camoes, $10,000
- Brian Foster, $12,000 (including $6,000 win bonus) def. Brock Larson, $26,000
- Kendall Grove, $44,000 (including $22,000 win bonus) def. Jake Rosholt, $15,000
- Ben Saunders, $20,000 (including $10,000 win bonus) def. Marcus Davis, $27,000
Disclosed Fighter Bonuses
- Fight of the Night: Josh Koscheck vs. Anthony Johnson ($70,000 each)
- Knockout of the Night: Antonio Rogerio Nogueira ($70,000)
- Submission of the Night: Josh Koscheck ($70,000)
MMAPayout.com PPV Buyrate Prediction
A weighted average statistical regression analysis of two different variables - viewership in Countdown to UFC and live gate revenue across 30-40 events – was used to derive a linear equation that allows us to input UFC 106’s respective Countdown (445,000) and live gate ($3 million) values in order to determine an expected buyrate figure for the event:
- Countdown Prediction: 340,000
- Live Gate: 555,000
- Weighted average: 447,000 buys
There are some rather large discrepancies in the pre-fight indicators – more so than normal – and I feel that’s largely because of the rapid fight changes that have plagued the card. UFC 106 was supposed to be another 1 million+ card for the organization given Lesnar-Carwin and Ortiz Griffin, which is why the gate fared so well (early buyers anticipated watching Lesnar defend his title). However, the Countdown to UFC figures showed a very low level of interest in the fight (445,000 is the second lowest Countdown total of the year for the UFC).
It’s really tough to get a gauge as to exactly how popular both Forrest and Tito are right now. Tito is coming off an 18 month layoff, but is one of the more charismatic sellers in the fight game. Griffin is coming off an embarrassing loss, but he’s got a remarkable amount of support within each event itself.
At this point 340k seems a little low, but anything in the 400k range wouldn’t surprise.
Business Story Lines:
- Griffin rebounds with split over Ortiz: It was a genuinely entertaining fight between two veterans looking to rebound and get their careers back on track. The series is even-up at 1-1, and the close, split decision nature of the fights almost demands a rematch between the two at some point. The crowd reaction to both fighters was interesting. Perhaps three or four years ago Ortiz would have had the support of the crowd, but Griffin seemed to be the more popular choice among fans in the arena and at the bar (save maybe in Huntington Beach).
- Koscheck and Johnson in strangest fight of the year: Johnson looked to have Koscheck on the run before delivering a knee to Koscheck’s head while he was on the ground. Koscheck fell over in agony, despite the replays suggesting that there wasn’t as much contact with Johnson’s knee as it might have seemed. Johnson was later the recipient of a few solid eye-pokes (most will recall his first fight against Kevin Burns where he was poked and dropped to the mat, at which point the ref called the fight).
It’s a little surprising that this fight was given FON honours – there were probably more entertaining bouts on the card – but it seems like there could be some political elements to the decision as it helps to smooth things over with the Koscheck and AKA camp (and reward the guy for stepping up on short notice so often).
While not a dive, the Koscheck knee did seem to be an embellishment. It’s not serious – Koscheck isn’t known for that type of behaviour – but from the perspective of a sponsor, it does bring to light the issue of accountability. These fighters are, in many cases, being paid a lot of money by sponsors, and they must be mindful to represent them in a responsible manner. It’s largely an issue MMA has been able to avoid, but as the sponsorship dollars continue to increase over the next few years, it’ll definitely be a point of contention for sponsors considering the reputation MMA has in some mainstream circles.
- Ortiz, Griffin for TUF?: The rumours have been swirling for the past few weeks about who might be asked to coach the next season of The Ultimate Fighter, and at the press conference Ortiz openly expressed a willingness to coach against Forrest on the show. It’s something the UFC will probably strongly consider, because the TUF show would help to hype a rubber match, Ortiz and Griffin would add two great personalities to the show, and it would be one of the rare instances where the series doesn’t tie up a UFC division for 8 months.
- Prospect Watch:Amir Sadollah, Brian Foster, and Paulo Thiago picked up victories and each looked pretty impressive. Thiago is probably the furthest along (having already beaten Josh Koscheck), but Foster managed to stop Brock Larson despite being fouled twice. However, Sadollah probably has the best to be the most popular fighter of the three – he’ll need a few more fights at the middle level of the division before he contends, however.
Anthony Johnson and Jake Rosholt performed reasonably well in each of their bouts but failed to pick up victories. Johnson and Rosholt both have a lot of potential, but are fairly one-dimensional fighters at this point. Johnson, in particular, is dynamic enough to be a significant draw if he can hone his skills (and develop some take-down defense).
- Various fighters wearing various UFC jocks:Paulo Thiago, amongst others, were wearing what appeared to be UFC branded jocks under their shorts. It leads me to wonder whether this might be the start of a further merchandising expansion into the equipment side of the business – something that would coincide well with the opening of several UFC Gyms in 2010.
The idea that the UFC could not only start its own line of gyms, but supply its clients with workout equipment, has the potential to be a serious revenue stream for the company. Moreover, the side benefits are enormous: the gym is a teaching tool and 24-7 advocate for the sport, and the equipment can further cement the UFC as the MMA brand.
- UFC 106 puts on a solid night of fight:the expectations of most were fairly low for this event, largely on account of Lesnar-Carwin being dropped from the card. As a result, the fights simply spoke for themselves. There were a mix of decisions, submissions, and stoppages that created a solid night of entertainment.
It was nice, for a change, to watch an event just for MMA, and not because it was the make or break of something.
NSAC Puts John McCarthy Return on Hold
September 22, 2009
Sherdog reports that the Nevada State Athletic Commission has placed John McCarthy’s referee application in the pending file, delaying indefinitely his return to officiating in Las Vegas, the Mecca of fighting:
In a mailed letter from Keith Kizer, executive director of the Nevada State Athletic Commission, McCarthy, who submitted his application Sept. 10, was informed that the state “[does] not anticipate adding any additional referees at this time. We will place your application in the pending file in case the situation changes.”
Payout Perspective:
As others are noting, it’s difficult to believe that politics are not at play here. John McCarthy has made comments perceived as critical of commission head Keith Kizer, and there have been reports that McCarthy’s application was in jeopardy due to how outspoken he’s been.
Regardless of the reason for NSAC’s refusing to grant McCarthy an immediate return, it’s absurd that the commission has decided there’s no place for the best referee in the sport to practice his vocation in its state.
As McCarthy has noted, a license is not a right but a privilege, but it’s one that he’s more than earned. The job confers a sacred duty on officials — split second decisions that can determine the difference between life and death — and with the pattern (and it’s nothing if not a pattern) of incompetent officiating in the sport, with early and, worse, late stoppages more common than they should be, any state commission should literally beg John McCarthy to work its state.
The NSAC decision is at best an embarrassment; if an MMA death occurs in Vegas, and it looks to be the result of poor officiating, the decision itself might appear to be a tragedy.
NSAC Pass Instant Replay, "BJ Penn Rule"
August 20, 2009
According to MMAweekly.com the Nevada State Athletic Commission has passed two new rules in regards to MMA:
1.) Nevada will now allow officials the use of instant replays to determine if a foul contributed to an injury which resulted in the end of a fight.
The final wording as passed: “A referee at the conclusion of a contest or exhibition stopped immediately due to an injury to an unarmed combatant pursuant to NAC 467.718 and after making a decision, may view a replay if available in order to determine whether the injury in question was caused a legal blow or a foul.”
The rule addresses several controversial stoppages in recent history where a fighter lost a contest because the referee couldn’t see an injury that forced a bout’s stoppage.
2.) Dubbed the “BJ Penn rule”, it will now be considered a foul to have any sort of foreign substance (such as vaseline) on a fighters body.
Dubbed by a commission official as the “B.J. Penn Rule,” the use of foreign substances will now be added to a list of “fouls” in the Nevada Administrative Code that address tactics illegal to fighters, such as eye gouging, small joint manipulation, or biting.
Controversy surrounding the use of Vaseline at UFC 94 threatened to overshadow welterweight champion St. Pierre’s dominating fourth round win over lightweight champion Penn.
Payout Perspective:
It’s completely understandable that a number of sports fans would cringe when hearing the words “instant replay;” the mechanism is highly subjective, interrupts the action, and often slows things down dramatically.
Fortunately for MMA, the instant replay rule implemented in Nevada is likely to be seldom used and only on occasions of dire and obvious need – as was pointed out and illustrated by the Burns-Johnson eye poke.
The sport already has enough problems with officiating and judging. Instant replay, used correctly, is a welcome addition to help curb some of the legitimacy problems MMA might face as a result of bad stoppages or unfair decisions. It’s about getting it right – that’s what fans care about and that’s what’s good for business.
On a separate note – one related to the new “BJ Penn” rule – some might be surprised to find out that, while frowned upon, foreign substances such as vaseline on a fighter’s body weren’t specifically illegal. Rather, this is one of those examples that demonstrate how many of boxing’s rules and regulations were carried over to MMA. It was simply an oversight that was long overdue to be addressed – St-Pierre vs. Penn II provided the proper motivation to revisit the rulebook.
As MMA continues to grow, the rules and regulations will continue to grow and adapt along with it. The sport isn’t even close to where it needs to be from a rules and regulations standpoint, simply because it’s young and still developing.
The Issues of Referee and Judge Certification
July 1, 2009
‘Showdown’ Joe Ferraro has an excellent piece up at Rogers Sportsnet that details his experience with ‘Big’ John McCarthy’s referee certification seminar, C.O.M.M.A.N.D. (Certification of Officials for Mixed Martial Arts National Development).
The course is broken down into three areas and participants require a passing grade of 90 percent (at minimum in all three) to be certified. As it stands today, the course has a 75 percent failure rate, as participants simply do not make the grade to officiate or judge in MMA.
Would-be referees must know and identify over 25 takedowns, 35 submissions, 25 positions and seven sweeps, reversals and transitions. They also must know the Unified Rules of Mixed Martial Arts inside and out.
After the identification of the aforementioned moves and keen knowledge of the unified rules, participants are also trained and tested on in ring / cage mechanics. This is comprised of what is required by an official before, during and after a bout. It’s not just about positioning (which is HUGE when refereeing) but dozens of other variables that are key to the safety of the athletes who put it all on the line.
All of this knowledge is paramount for one to be proficient in officiating and without it I do not understand how commissions around the world allow men and women to step into the cage/ring and ref without proving they have this type of knowledge.
If the four major sports leagues — the NFL, MLB, NBA and NHL — mandate that officials are properly trained before being allowed to step onto the playing surface, why doesn’t MMA do the same? If this sport is expected to be taken seriously then this type of certification must be the bare minimum an athletic commission requires from an applicant prior to receiving their license to ref or judge.
Payout Opinion:
It would seem as though we’re finally starting to see the issues of officiating, judging, and bout scoring come to the front of the MMA hot topic list.
Just ask yourself: what good are the rules and regulations that MMA has put into place – those designed to protect the health and integrity of the sport and its fighters – if the individuals enforcing them are incompetent or unqualified?
Yes, the sport is growing – and that’s great for a lot of reasons – but the flip side of that growth is the increasing complexity of the issues surrounding governance, regulation, officiating, and judging.
MMA cannot afford to rest on its laurels; it must adapt to the many new challenges that it faces, including the issues of consistent officiating and judging.
And, believe me, as MMA ventures more and more into the mainstream, the quality of officiating and judging WILL become an issue. Look no further than the MMA competitions of the last week: the awful officiating displays at Strikeforce; the late stoppage in the Rizzo-Yvel fight; or the controversy of Tibau-Guillard, Guida-Sanchez, and Blackburn-Garcia.
While I’m not yet prepared to advocate that ‘Big’ John’s COMMAND is the answer – not that his course probably isn’t the best out there right now - I will say that a universal testing and certification program for both officials and judges is something of a no-brainer. It would afford the sport, its fighters, and its fans the consistency that they’ve all been longing for. It would also help to further cement the legitimacy of the sport in the eyes of its critics.
