although I don'y think he's too bad of a commentator, I can't stand when he get's mad when the refs stand guys up when they are stalled on the ground. He thinks if a guy has someone pinned on the ground and there is no action that's it's tough cookies for the guy on the bottom and it should stay like that for the whole round. I totally disagree since they have brought the "stand up" rule in it has helped out the sport tremendously.I don't care to see Dan Severn vs Hoyce Gracie ever again, fights like that turn alot of people away from the sport.When there is no action and no progress is being made I think it's a great move by the ref to bring them to their feet.....anybody think Rogans opinion should be followed
I'll totally agree with what you are saying. There is nothing more frustrating to watch than one guy laying ontop of another guy for the majority of a round without much happening. Of course, for a fight like Koscheck/Sanchez, they should have made them go to the ground since nothing was happening when they were standing up!
For that matter Arlovski-Werdum and fights like that there should be "yellow" cards, kind of what they did in pride and withhold a percentage of the pay.Nothing worse then having 2 guys pose for the whole fight.
I agree with Rogan, and don't believe that their should be any stand-ups. The thought of forcing a man out of dominant position, to give the other guy an upper hand is a bit too much. In reality, if the ref's never allowed stand-ups then the action on the ground wouldn't be so boring. The only reason that the action gets stalled out so badly on the ground, is because the bottom guys knows that if he just plays defense, and leaves no openings, and clings on, then the ref will eventually stand them up. Now, if the man on bottom knew that the ref wasn't going to stand them up, then he would have to be active off of his back, and look for his own solution. With the man on bottom now being active, this leaves openings for the man on top to take advantage of as well, so he wouldn't just clam up on top of the man. Now you would have a situation where when the two men hit the ground, the one on bottom would always be looking for an escape, a reversal of position, or a sub, leaving the guy on top openings to strike, reacting to the sub attempts, and looking to capitalize on a mistake and advance position himself. So, while I don't go nuts, or really say anything when fights are stood up... I don't exactly agree with it at all. Take the fight between Arlovksi and Werdum for instance. Arlovski had a clear advantage on their feet, and we all knew that Werdum's world was on the ground. How would everyone have reacted if since the fighting was so stalled out on their feet, the ref forced a "lay down" and put the guys on the ground to restart? What is the difference? If you are going to stand people up because one guy is just controlling another on the ground in a boring way... then why not force those who are stalling out on their feet to fight on the ground, in the other man's world?
Yea, they gota force action other ways. Widdowmaker makes it perfectly clear with "lay down" example. Plus, i've never heard Joe Rogan say that.
he says it all the time and I brought it up because he said it during the Sylvia- Couture fight which I just rewatched. And Widdow says guys on the bottom would just hold on for a stand up? i'm sure that happens, but what about guys who lay on top and just pin A guy down doing very little but enough to win the round
and the arguement about guys stalling on their feet and being forced to go to the gound is stupid, the point is they wern't even coming into contact with each other. you have to come into contact before you go to the ground.
The point is, one or the other is taking one guy out of his world into another guys world. If Nog vs Crocop fought, and crocop would just hold on to dear life just to get stood up, that would be unfair. Just as if Nog would just turn around and ran in circle just to hear ref say "ok guys, no action goin on. CC you go in Nogs guard." Sounds pretty unfair, no?
Joe's point is that you won't see things like that, the rounds are only 5 minutes, you get an automatic standup every 5 minutes, if that isn't enough, you shouldn't get any extra help.
the point is when 2 guys are stalled on the ground, on the feet is a different story. If 1 guy has a another pinned down and is not doing anything and the guy on the ground is being contained but not being hurt should they have a reset or should they be allowed to just lay there all round
Stand ups are ridiculous. If a ground fighter finally gets a guy down and keeps him pinned then he is supposed to stand up? Sure, but only if a stand up fighter is forced to go to the ground if he moves about too long. Its ridiculous.
If the bottom guy knew that holding on for a standup would be useless, it wouldnt happen. Put a guy in the ocean and tell him he has to swim for 20 minutes and he will do it, put him in the ocean without telling him how long he has to last and he will drown in 10.
Thats why Pride always had the yellow cards, if stand up was doing nothing they get 10% purse loss. Thats effective for the stand up.
