...when it was basically the same?
Both in the heat of the moment.
Both against people who had been chatting shit.
Bispings knee was what, maybe a half inch higher. The rule is a joke anyway and everyone knows it. 
One was illegal.
The other wasn't.
Silva's was on the chest, Bisping's was on the face. Anderson aimed for the chest, Bisping aimed for the face. Big difference. 
wiggum - One was illegal.
The other wasn't.
End of thread.
minotauro11 - Silva's was on the chest, Bisping's was on the face. Anderson aimed for the chest, Bisping aimed for the face. Big difference.
Are you a mind reader? Didn't think so.
I think bisping was aiming for the chest. This raises an interesting point though - could sonnen have ducked into the knee to get Silva dq'ed?
I think Bisping's plum clinch and guiding the head of a downed oponent shows massive intent.
op are you serious???
frederic - I think Bisping's plum clinch and guiding the head of a downed oponent shows massive intent.
....Or better technique?
Bisping/Silva will be a Muay Thai clinic for sure.
Terrible troll job.
2/10
Trollbenius
UGCTT_LnPninja - Terrible troll job.
2/10
Piss off, it was serious question. Mods need to clamp down on people who spam legit threads with this x/10 shit.
Chimonos Revenge - Trollbenius
I was trying to make people reconsider their opinions, maybe recognise a bit of the hypocrisy surrounding any bisping discussion.
I'm not trying to troll anyone, I'm trying to be an ambassador for UK mma.
but this isn't a legit thread...... Anderson's was legal, Bisping's was 100% illegal. This coming from a hater of both Anderson and Bisping.
Yeah, a "Legit" thread eh?
Why don't we post up the GIF of both then and break down the angle of trajectory.
Straight into the chest. Knee itself is on line with Sonnen's sternum the whole way:
Compared to Bisping, who grabe the HEAD in a plum, and already admitted he was aiming for the head in the heat of the moment:
Look at the line the knee came up on and explain how it is ANYWHERE near a line of trajectory that could have been to the chest:
Like I said, 2/10 troll job. That or you are a VERY VERY stupid and rabbid fan. Which is it?
The whole knee to a downed opponent rule is such a legal grey area:
Rumble/Koscheck - infamous knee that brushed Koscheck's face was ruled a foul by the ref.
Daley/Koscheck - the even more infamous knee that totally missed Koscheck's face was ruled a foul by the ref.
Sonnen/Silva II - knee clipped the face as it impacted the chest that was immediately followed by strikes by Silva, was not ruled a foul by the ref.
Different ref. under different circumstances produces a different call.
MdGeist - The whole knee to a downed opponent rule is such a legal grey area:
Rumble/Koscheck - infamous knee that brushed Koscheck's face was ruled a foul by the ref.
Daley/Koscheck - the even more infamous knee that totally missed Koscheck's face was ruled a foul by the ref.
Sonnen/Silva II - knee clipped the face as it impacted the chest that was immediately followed by strikes by Silva, was not ruled a foul by the ref.
Different ref. under different circumstances produces a different call.
Good post, the rule is a joke and impossible to enforce since the intention makes all the difference and there's no way for the ref to know.
^^^^ His upper thigh is the only thing that touched Sonnen's face.
The Refs are trained on incidental contact.
The tip of the knee is what made contact (or appeared to ) in those other examples.
i had forgot about how obvious bispings cheating was.
no wonder i dont like the douche
al neri - how is this even a question?
Because Frobenius makes constant Bisping troll-threads? He's the ghost of uktt past
Taking bets on troll or retarded.