ILKR - Nate is tough as...and would no-doubt have kept on fighting but the blood from the ear and the depth & position of that cut are problematic - better he gets the chance to run it over than risk irreparable damage.
Shit to see but I think a good call.
lol. Fuckin new guys
I’ve been watching a lot longer than you kid. (And that means nothing, dumbass.)
Sure ya have. If you think that cut justified a stoppage than its clear that this is in fact your 1st rodeo.
We have seen 100’s of cuts the same if not worse not stop a fight. NY behind in the MMA times.
Neine.
Every cut is different, snowflake (there’s a pun in there, but you probably didn’t get it).
Judgement of cuts has nothing to do with your MMA miles (and my machine is smashing yours, btw.).
What the fuck are you talking about? Your responses are cracking me up. You sound like a dumb shit that thinks he’s actually smart. Your playful condescending and try hard “intelligence” is sad.
"nUh uH kId, yOu JuSt oNe oF dEm DeR sNoWfLaKes"
Right, quickly, try to get it:
I made the comment that not every cut is the same followed by ‘snowflake’ because all snowflakes are unique (and I find it a little amusing to use snowflake in an ironic fashion, particularly when it ties in neatly to a pun, like this).
That then made your randomly upper-cased (kidnapper-esque) comment seem particularly retarded (oops) as it just displayed your comprehensive inepitidue further. (Soz. Lol.)
I also made a reference to my machine smashing yours (which had nothing to do with my argument but is a nod to Mr Kerr - I assume you get the ref but if not, then oh my…).
I’m off. Later, loser.
It’s funny that you responded to the same comment twice. You realized after the 1st reply that your first response was indeed stupid. You then sat and tried to come up with something witty but again shit to bed. Oh and keep editing, you get it right princess.
No, I just thought you needed some assistance and that chastising your stupidity wouldn’t achieve much other than embarrass you more than you have already achieved on your own.
This is your ‘1st rodeo’, isn’t it? And now you’re being ridden out, into the sunset, by the same horse you managed to trot in on (one of total stupidity). Goodnight, cowboy. (You never stood a chance.)
Bad stoppage and everyone involved besides the doc realized that. Rogan even made a point to say it wouldn't have been stopped in Vegas.
The doctors job is to protect the fighter. The cut presented zero danger to Nate’s health and it wasn’t impairing his vision.
Rogan is experienced but not a doctor.
How experienced was that doctor with combat sports? The doctor was qualified to determine how many stitches he needed and not much else. They receive zero training to make a judgment like this and experience is the best qualification.
I imagine his medical training supercedes all when it comes to safety and well-being of a human. If he felt the cut was in danger of becoming critical and threatening to Nate making a full recovery, then fair one. Unless we have an opthalmologist weighing in, who had examined Diaz, I suppose we can only speculate (and either of us could be right).
ILKR - Nate is tough as...and would no-doubt have kept on fighting but the blood from the ear and the depth & position of that cut are problematic - better he gets the chance to run it over than risk irreparable damage.
Shit to see but I think a good call.
lol. Fuckin new guys
I’ve been watching a lot longer than you kid. (And that means nothing, dumbass.)
No you haven’t.
Yes it does.
No, it doesn’t.
If you’ve not got a concrete argument to present, then move on. This is boring already.
BORING.
Diaz gets cut like that every single fight retard.
Soul Gravy - He's not going to die from a cut. He's not going to lose an eye. There is absolutely zero danger from the cut other than some scarring. And if Nate's not worried about being pretty, it's not the doc's job to worry about it.
Bad stoppage and everyone involved besides the doc realized that. Rogan even made a point to say it wouldn't have been stopped in Vegas.
The doctors job is to protect the fighter. The cut presented zero danger to Nate’s health and it wasn’t impairing his vision.
Rogan is experienced but not a doctor.
How experienced was that doctor with combat sports? The doctor was qualified to determine how many stitches he needed and not much else. They receive zero training to make a judgment like this and experience is the best qualification.
I imagine his medical training supercedes all when it comes to safety and well-being of a human. If he felt the cut was in danger of becoming critical and threatening to Nate making a full recovery, then fair one. Unless we have an opthalmologist weighing in, who had examined Diaz, I suppose we can only speculate (and either of us could be right).
You keep bring up his medical experience like an idiot. You don’t know shit about how this stuff works. He could have been an MD 50 years and still not be qualified as an AC ringside physician. In the case of a cut above the eye it is about obstructing sight. The cut wasn’t even bleeding.
Nate's eye was not badly swollen (even minimally swollen) and the blood was not only stopped in easily in the corner, but it was not even running into his eye.
Nate was cut on the outside corner of his eyebrow and another under his eye. Terrible call due to the inexperience of the NY commision in MMA.
Seems like there is a similarly bad experience due to governance every time the UFC is in NY because it is newly legal.
I live in NY, was able to go to Brooklyn for the worst event in the companies history, and have watched every one. I'd rather fly out to Vegas to see a card than buy tickets knowing it could be ruined by the local authorities.
Bad stoppage and everyone involved besides the doc realized that. Rogan even made a point to say it wouldn't have been stopped in Vegas.
The doctors job is to protect the fighter. The cut presented zero danger to Nate’s health and it wasn’t impairing his vision.
Rogan is experienced but not a doctor.
How experienced was that doctor with combat sports? The doctor was qualified to determine how many stitches he needed and not much else. They receive zero training to make a judgment like this and experience is the best qualification.
I imagine his medical training supercedes all when it comes to safety and well-being of a human. If he felt the cut was in danger of becoming critical and threatening to Nate making a full recovery, then fair one. Unless we have an opthalmologist weighing in, who had examined Diaz, I suppose we can only speculate (and either of us could be right).
You keep bring up his medical experience like an idiot. You don’t know shit about how this stuff works. He could have been an MD 50 years and still not be qualified as an AC ringside physician. In the case of a cut above the eye it is about obstructing sight. The cut wasn’t even bleeding.
Bad stoppage and everyone involved besides the doc realized that. Rogan even made a point to say it wouldn't have been stopped in Vegas.
The doctors job is to protect the fighter. The cut presented zero danger to Nate’s health and it wasn’t impairing his vision.
Rogan is experienced but not a doctor.
How experienced was that doctor with combat sports? The doctor was qualified to determine how many stitches he needed and not much else. They receive zero training to make a judgment like this and experience is the best qualification.
I imagine his medical training supercedes all when it comes to safety and well-being of a human. If he felt the cut was in danger of becoming critical and threatening to Nate making a full recovery, then fair one. Unless we have an opthalmologist weighing in, who had examined Diaz, I suppose we can only speculate (and either of us could be right).
You keep bring up his medical experience like an idiot. You don’t know shit about how this stuff works. He could have been an MD 50 years and still not be qualified as an AC ringside physician. In the case of a cut above the eye it is about obstructing sight. The cut wasn’t even bleeding.
OK, if I’ve got this wrong then apologies (I haven’t got the rules to hand) - but I was under the impression that if the doctor deems the fighter’s health to be seriously injured, that they can bring the bout to a close.
The only reason to stop the fight for a cut is if blood is going to run into the eye, or if there's blatant risk of it causing permanent damage to the eye.
The "argument from authority" is a tremendously poor one. The man being a doctor does not mean he made a good call. Doctors are human and they can make mistakes. Referees make mistakes, simply saying "well he"s a referee so obviously he's always making the right decision" is ignorant. The guy ringing up your groceries is going to occasionally double scan an item, and you'll have to point it out to them. They don't get to tell you that they're a cashier and you are not, therefore you have no place to determine that they made a mistake. That's utter nonsense.
This doctor made a bad call on this fight.
Very true. I'm making the argument that we are not doctors and perhaps it is jumping the gun to assume that he made a bad call without us having the appropriate training, skills and being present to examine Diaz.
(of course, the argument to the contrary (with regard to it being a good call) is also true.)
Bad stoppage and everyone involved besides the doc realized that. Rogan even made a point to say it wouldn't have been stopped in Vegas.
The doctors job is to protect the fighter. The cut presented zero danger to Nate’s health and it wasn’t impairing his vision.
Rogan is experienced but not a doctor.
How experienced was that doctor with combat sports? The doctor was qualified to determine how many stitches he needed and not much else. They receive zero training to make a judgment like this and experience is the best qualification.
I imagine his medical training supercedes all when it comes to safety and well-being of a human. If he felt the cut was in danger of becoming critical and threatening to Nate making a full recovery, then fair one. Unless we have an opthalmologist weighing in, who had examined Diaz, I suppose we can only speculate (and either of us could be right).
You keep bring up his medical experience like an idiot. You don’t know shit about how this stuff works. He could have been an MD 50 years and still not be qualified as an AC ringside physician. In the case of a cut above the eye it is about obstructing sight. The cut wasn’t even bleeding.
OK, if I’ve got this wrong then apologies (I haven’t got the rules to hand) - but I was under the impression that if the doctor deems the fighter’s health to be seriously injured, that they can bring the bout to a close.
Is that not the case?
Overall health factor in a lot of things. A cut stoppage is about vision impairment, or long term damage to the eye which I’ve got to man up and say after seeing several pictures from a Monday morning QB perspective it was a lot worse than it looked in the moment. The stoppage wasn’t ridiculous by any means, but was still deep in a gray area and not a definitive requirement like you are saying. I no longer feel it was a shitty stoppage though.
Bad stoppage and everyone involved besides the doc realized that. Rogan even made a point to say it wouldn't have been stopped in Vegas.
The doctors job is to protect the fighter. The cut presented zero danger to Nate’s health and it wasn’t impairing his vision.
Rogan is experienced but not a doctor.
How experienced was that doctor with combat sports? The doctor was qualified to determine how many stitches he needed and not much else. They receive zero training to make a judgment like this and experience is the best qualification.
I imagine his medical training supercedes all when it comes to safety and well-being of a human. If he felt the cut was in danger of becoming critical and threatening to Nate making a full recovery, then fair one. Unless we have an opthalmologist weighing in, who had examined Diaz, I suppose we can only speculate (and either of us could be right).
You keep bring up his medical experience like an idiot. You don’t know shit about how this stuff works. He could have been an MD 50 years and still not be qualified as an AC ringside physician. In the case of a cut above the eye it is about obstructing sight. The cut wasn’t even bleeding.
OK, if I’ve got this wrong then apologies (I haven’t got the rules to hand) - but I was under the impression that if the doctor deems the fighter’s health to be seriously injured, that they can bring the bout to a close.
Is that not the case?
Overall health factor in a lot of things. A cut stoppage is about vision impairment, or long term damage to the eye which I’ve got to man up and say after seeing several pictures from a Monday morning QB perspective it was a lot worse than it looked in the moment. The stoppage wasn’t ridiculous by any means, but was still deep in a gray area and not a definitive requirement like you are saying. I no longer feel it was a shitty stoppage though.
Absolutely fair enough, man.
We all have initial and rash responses but it always takes a few days for things to settle and the full picture to become clear.
Gutted it ended the way it did but glad that Nate can fight on (if he chooses) and maybe we’ll be treated to a re-match down the road.