Wow. Just. Wow. This is the kind of thing that counters all the work that’s been done to legitimize the sport. The person who am most upset with his the referee for letting it go on. Second in line is the fat kid. Dude has no business in an MMA fight.
*
The fight that most viewers considered the real headliners for Saturday’s K-1 Dynamite!!!!!!!!!! turned out to be more of a fizzle than a KABOOOM! Admittedly it was cool to see Royce and Sak live, but the fight itself left much to be desired. They should have left it as it was or just set up some cage match at the Gracie family ranch or something.
These guys had 7 years to think about this fight… and how does it go? Exactly like it did the last time, except thank God this time there was a time limit. As a friend of mine commented during the fight: “It’s exactly like the first fight, but somehow lamer.”
We have two submission masters who are pushing or already hit 40 years of age. I guess it would be unreasonable to expect anything more than hugging and hip-blocking. Shame on the crowd for booing. The only time I booed was when the decision was announced. Oh wait, also when All 4 One was announced… but the decision:
“Unanimous decision for Royce Gracie!”
*blink blink*
Um… What?
Were you guys watching this fight even? Royce did absolutely nothing to put Sak in danger. Perhaps the judges were distracted by the DJ talking DURING THE GODDAMN FIGHT. WTF?!?!@? Maybe some of you can tell me if there is ANY sporting event where a DJ tries to get the crowd to “make some noise” during the competition because I’m at a loss.
*
Time for another think-out-loud fest by yours truly. Let’s get down to some MMA nerdery, shall we?
Rami Genauer (MMAWeekly.com) has written the first of a series of articles about the often controversial issue of safety in MMA.
Genauer’s first article tackles the question of whether the cage is safer than a ring. In it, he argues that the cage, with it’s superior containing ability, is safer when it comes to a sport where the action can occur standing or on the ground. With a ring, there is a higher probability that fighters can fall out and be seriously injured. So logically, the cage is the safer choice. The dillemma lies in the fact that to the general public, the use of a cage crosses the line between sport and brutality. They’d rather see a ring.
Genauer says that it’s more of a semantic and ideological issue more than anything else. The idea of putting two men in a “cage” is something that is generally not acceptible. Cages are for rabid animals. If it’s an Octagon™ or a ring, that’s a different story. The argument Genauer lays down is that these are all containment methods, it’s just a matter of choosing the safest one, right? Or is it choosing the one that appeals most to general society?
Here’s my deal. There has to be a line we draw on how “civilized” we want to make something that is inherently uncivilized. Fighting is brutal. Of course it shouldn’t be life-threatening, but to package and distill it into something that a suburban housewife finds digestible is something that’s equally unacceptable. I like that MMA is brutal. I like that we have an avenue to exhibit such an honest, raw form of human interaction. In our 9-5 commerce-driven lives, it’s an escape that many of us can appreciate.
Yes, we do need the support of the general public, but we simply can’t completely rationalize out the danger in MMA. It’s just not possible. We can improve it to a point, but beyond that we compromise the combat aspect of combat sports. Based on its recent history, I think MMA is on a non-stop ride to (almost)mainstream and society will simply have to come to terms with it. Hopefully it’s society that does the bending and not MMA.
*
XML
