One thing I didn't get from the ppv...at first, Dan (ref) was going to deduct a point from Daley for the knee to the head. But after the rest break, it seems like Dan changed his mind because he saw that the knee didn't really hit Josh in the head.
Are you allowed to use the replay in determining if a foul occurred or not? Has it always been like this?
So it was actually implemented by the athletic commission? That rule is explicitly written?
According to a new rule passed by the Nevada State Athletic Commission Wednesday, referees in Nevada now have the opportunity to get a second look at a fight's end to determine its legality.
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.
A referee may now use instant replay to determine whether the action that caused the injury was legal or a foul and make a decision on the fight's result. Only a referee can decide whether to order a replay.
So, this rule must have been passed in Canada as well?
Only reason Im asking is I thought it would be wild if a fighter pretends he cant continue fighting; and the ref isn't allowed to look at a replay which obviously shows the fighter's bs'ng
crowbar ->A referee may now use instant replay to determine whether the action that caused the injury was legal or a foul and make a decision on the fight's result. Only a referee can decide whether to order a replay.
In this case there was no question as to the legality of the blow, only wether or not it connected. DM was using replay to determine if he should take a point away or not.
IMO knees to downed opponents and stomps should be seen as fouls even if the fighter misses.
that having been said, I think Kos trying to ham it up was weak.
In this case there was no question as to the legality of the blow, only wether or not it connected. DM was using replay to determine if he should take a point away or not.
IMO knees to downed opponents and stomps should be seen as fouls even if the fighter misses.
that having been said, I think Kos trying to ham it up was weak.
There should be absolutely nothing illegal about feigning shots. That would be retarded. If a fighter wants to fake a headstomp, step over, then come down with a hammerfist I see nothing wrong with it... as long as the stomp doesn't connect.
maybe Dan seeing the replay is what Joe wanted cause he asked for it to be replayed a LOT..ha ha ha
what a joke that was