View Single Post
Old 01-15-2013, 06:35 AM   #28
Haggis McJackass
Semi-neutralist Overseer
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: From the Lands Down Under.
Posts: 2,594
vCash: 177
Default Re: The cage-fighting boom - all that's missing is the cage

Quote:
Originally Posted by Koa View Post
No doubt, if it were up to me I'd adjust what the ring is according to styles. I don't think that having a ring would stop wall n stalls or lnp. But it would take away from tools a guy can dip into. Think John Jones vs. Evans.. Would Evans have been able to push Jones against the cage and waste time in a ring? I think Jones would have knocked Evans out if they fought in the ring.. It's just speculation, but really think about it.

I would have hated watching the refs reset, and pull Evans off the ropes... But, I would have been delighted to watch the two of them fight, for more than 2-3 minutes of a 25 minute fight.
The cage is simply an enclosed area. The ring is an unnatural environment for a full-contact fight. Whichever environment they fight in, a fighter who is skillful enough can neutralize his opponent's offence and make it a dull fight. If that's what he wants to do.

But your argument against the cage basically boils down to "I don't like the odd wrestler using their wrestling to control their opponent's movement."

But that's not enough. If you look at the case for and against on both sides, it's not even a contest. The cage is the superior environment. Better flow of the fight, doesn't involve spectators physically interacting with the fighters, and better for fighter safety as well.

Haggis McJackass is offline  Top
Reply With Quote