UFC 75 Judge Jeff Mullen Explains Bisping-Hamill Score

Drexal · 09-10-2007, 04:10 PM

Quote:

UFC 75 Judge Jeff Mullen Explains Bisping-Hamill Score

Longtime MMA judge Jeff Mullen, one of the two officials who scored Saturday’s UFC 75 fight between Michael Bisping and Matt Hamill as a victory for the U.K fighter, says that the angle in which he was watched the fight played a major role in his final decision.

The Bisping-Hamill fight took place Saturday at the 02 Arena in London, England. The final verdict was a controversial split-decision victory for Bisping, “The Ultimate Fighter 3” light-heavyweight winner.

Mullen, who says he first started judging UFC contests in 1996 (and has been doing it twice as long as any other current judge), recently posted a message on The Underground Forum, where he’s been a member since 2001.

Mullen argues that he had a clear view of Bisping early in the second round — a view that the television camera and the UFC broadcasters didn’t have — and that the local fighter “was landing the jab again and again and not getting hit.” Additionally, he argues that Bipsing was “using an active guard trying to turn for armbars and sweeps” in the second round while Hamill was “doing very little on top.“

Both Jeff Mullen and Cecil Peoples scored the fight 29-28 (awarding Bisping the second and third rounds) while British judge Chris Watts gave all three rounds to Hamill.

In the end, it was a controversial split-decision for Bisping.

“By the way, Mario Yamasaki thought Bisping won rounds two and three,” Mullen wrote. “Mario was the ref and had a better view than any of us.

Because England has no athletic commission, the UFC was responsible for regulating the event. UFC Vice President of Regulatory Affairs Marc Ratner was charged with the tasks of drug testing the fighters and choosing officials — including Mullen — to judge Saturday’s fights.

source:
UFC 75 Judge Jeff Mullen Explains Bisping-Hamill Score -- UFC news at MMAjunkie.com

Nice article about why Bisping won in the Judges eyes. I agree with them on this one.

fullonshred · 09-10-2007, 04:11 PM

I think the "Cage" got in their way. That and a lot of green.

Drexal · 09-10-2007, 04:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fullonshred

I think the "Cage" got in their way. That and a lot of green.

And I think you are too into wild conspiracy theories.

LocoSouthernBoy · 09-10-2007, 04:19 PM

I think part of this article explains the decision better, in my opinion anyway.

I may be wrong, but I feel they just want a UK poster boy at the moment.

For the whole article. Telegraph Blogs : Sport : Gareth A. Davies : September 2007

Ultimate fighters use a mixture of martial arts

That chance came in 2005, when the first series of the UFC's reality TV series 'the Ultimate Fighter' hit the US airwaves. White said: "That show was our Trojan Horse. We got people watching mixed martial arts without even realising it. We got 16 of the best young fighters in the world to live and train together, film them in the house like Big Brother, film them training for their fights like Rocky, and people realised 'Hey, these guys aren't thugs, they are athletes and they train their asses off'. Then at the end of each episode two guys fight for the right to advance in the competition and the winner of the whole series gets a six-figure contract with the UFC."

The show, screened on Bravo in the UK, was an overnight success and it's winners became heroes to the games console playing generation. White said: "We're the fastest growing sport there is but we're not even close to where we want this thing to be. We want to be global, worldwide, just like soccer."

The first stage market White has targeted outside of the US is right here in Britain. He said: "We came to London in July of 2002 and had a sold out show at the Royal Albert Hall. But even though we sold out and put on a great show, we came to the UK a little early.

"We jumped the gun coming to the UK, but I knew you guys would love this. When my partners and I bought this company we knew the three countries which would be our biggest markets would be the US, Mexico and the UK because all three countries like to see a good fight."

Now, with a UK office in place and after an estimated £4 million spent on advertising, the UFC seems to be replicating its US success over here. In April, the UFC not only drew the third biggest box office ever the Manchester’s MEN Arena, but also shattered pop icon's Take That's merchandise record. Then Belfast took a £1 million pounding at the gate for a June event, and a similar number at the merchandise stalls.

This weekend, the show will be broadcast in 160 countries worldwide (Setanta Sports in UK and Ireland). White is convinced the UK is ready this time. "We knew the fans were dying for us to come back here," White said. "I love the UK fans, they really get behind their fighters like (TUF winner) Michael Bisping and have such knowledge of the sport. And the UK media is getting more education about the UFC, too. They are realising that if boxing is a sport, then this is too and that they'd sell more newspapers covering us in their sports pages than bashing us.

"This is the same education process we went through with the US media. We expected it and, actually, we want it this way. We want the opportunity to explain that in this sport, we've never had a death or serious injury. This is the most exciting sport in the world and as soon as anyone gives it half a chance, they are convinced. And the UK is a much smaller country than America so it will take a whole less convincing to get the UFC to be as much part of the UK sports calendar as the FA Cup or next Ricky Hatton fight."

Drexal · 09-10-2007, 04:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LocoSouthernBoy

I think part of this article explains the decision better, in my opinion anyway.

I may be wrong, but I feel they just want a UK poster boy at the moment.

For the whole article. Telegraph Blogs : Sport : Gareth A. Davies : September 2007

Ultimate fighters use a mixture of martial arts

That chance came in 2005, when the first series of the UFC's reality TV series 'the Ultimate Fighter' hit the US airwaves. White said: "That show was our Trojan Horse. We got people watching mixed martial arts without even realising it. We got 16 of the best young fighters in the world to live and train together, film them in the house like Big Brother, film them training for their fights like Rocky, and people realised 'Hey, these guys aren't thugs, they are athletes and they train their asses off'. Then at the end of each episode two guys fight for the right to advance in the competition and the winner of the whole series gets a six-figure contract with the UFC."

The show, screened on Bravo in the UK, was an overnight success and it's winners became heroes to the games console playing generation. White said: "We're the fastest growing sport there is but we're not even close to where we want this thing to be. We want to be global, worldwide, just like soccer."

The first stage market White has targeted outside of the US is right here in Britain. He said: "We came to London in July of 2002 and had a sold out show at the Royal Albert Hall. But even though we sold out and put on a great show, we came to the UK a little early.

"We jumped the gun coming to the UK, but I knew you guys would love this. When my partners and I bought this company we knew the three countries which would be our biggest markets would be the US, Mexico and the UK because all three countries like to see a good fight."

Now, with a UK office in place and after an estimated £4 million spent on advertising, the UFC seems to be replicating its US success over here. In April, the UFC not only drew the third biggest box office ever the Manchester’s MEN Arena, but also shattered pop icon's Take That's merchandise record. Then Belfast took a £1 million pounding at the gate for a June event, and a similar number at the merchandise stalls.

This weekend, the show will be broadcast in 160 countries worldwide (Setanta Sports in UK and Ireland). White is convinced the UK is ready this time. "We knew the fans were dying for us to come back here," White said. "I love the UK fans, they really get behind their fighters like (TUF winner) Michael Bisping and have such knowledge of the sport. And the UK media is getting more education about the UFC, too. They are realising that if boxing is a sport, then this is too and that they'd sell more newspapers covering us in their sports pages than bashing us.

"This is the same education process we went through with the US media. We expected it and, actually, we want it this way. We want the opportunity to explain that in this sport, we've never had a death or serious injury. This is the most exciting sport in the world and as soon as anyone gives it half a chance, they are convinced. And the UK is a much smaller country than America so it will take a whole less convincing to get the UFC to be as much part of the UK sports calendar as the FA Cup or next Ricky Hatton fight."

Excellent post, thanks for that!

GSPALLTHEWAY · 09-10-2007, 04:24 PM

great post, interesting at least...

but, i actually was watching on TV, and saw it 5 times now, and i have as good a view as anyone.... hamil clearly won the fight, bad decision, nothing can be done except to move on or do a rematch

rsylver · 09-10-2007, 04:26 PM

HAHA! Come on. So you are saying that Dana slid a bill under the judges scorecards before the fight saying no matter what happens Bisbing wins. Even if Matt knocks him out or TKO's him Bisbing wins by decision. If you tell anyone about this I will kill your family pet or make sure the NSAC never lets you judge again because I am Dana White and I rule the world. MUHAHAHA! Come on it was a judgement call and Matt lost we will be seeing a re-match so he has a chance to finish the next one to win.

Drexal · 09-10-2007, 04:35 PM

I think the main thing that the conspiracry theorists are forgetting is that this was supposed to be a gimmie for Bisping. In that sense and that sense alone there was some 'conspiracy' to give Bisping an easy win. Dana nor the UFC honestly thought Hammil had any sort of chance in this fight or Bisping would have had it in front of his home crowd. Hammil surprised everyone, including me, I thought Bisping would walk this one, but Hammil was much stronger than I previously thought. There is no doubt in my mind that the 'fix' wasn't in on this fight as far as the judging goes. Look at it this way, a bad decision is in it's own way FAR more damaging to the UFC than a loss for Bisping. I think too many noobs don't understand a, the scoring* or b, the difference between MMA and WWE.

I think after a few days people will calm down a bit and look at it more objectively.

* to clarify scoring; as in it is a subjective thing, that's why they have 3 judges not just one, to try and eliminate this sort of thing.

BlingDogg · 09-10-2007, 04:38 PM

As I said earlier when I posted that here:
Bisping vs Hamill: Who really won?
Sure....
I still believe Hamill did more to win the fight. Mullen's just trying to cover his own ass.

I guess I should have started a new thread, But I thought there were enough Bisping/Hamill threads going around already.

fullonshred · 09-10-2007, 05:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drexal

And I think you are too into wild conspiracy theories.

You certainly have the right to disagree. Doesn't make you right.

twistafate2976 · 09-10-2007, 06:03 PM

would someone please just post the parameters a UFC fight are judged on,... watch the fight again,.... and realize that you would have to be and idiot to overlook Hamills aggressiveness and octagon control,.. as well as the many takedowns he successfully executed,.. ok Bisping stopped a few take downs and landed a couple stiff ones,... but neither took hamill down nor staggered him in the least. Based on this please get your stuff together and give the better man the win,.. HAMILL CONTROLLED THE PACE FOR 3 ROUNDS

twistafate2976 · 09-10-2007, 06:04 PM

i dont care about the propaganda bullsh8t that mullen or whoever else is saying,... they seen the same fight,. and have chosen to overlook what is so obvious to so many,.. give me a break,.

FightFan76 · 09-10-2007, 06:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by twistafate2976

i dont care about the propaganda bullsh8t that mullen or whoever else is saying,... they seen the same fight,. and have chosen to overlook what is so obvious to so many,.. give me a break,.

EXACTLY.....Just look at both of their faces after the fight (which can be misleading sometimes) and tell me who won; he beat Bisping up and watching Bisping after the fight he knew he had lost.....

subgenius · 09-10-2007, 06:17 PM

Matt Hamill lost. Simple. Mike Bisping won. Simple.

What? You don't like that? Too bad!

The record books say Hamill lost, Bisping won.

NEVER, NEVER, NEVERRRRRRR let a fight go to a decision.

NEVER!

The judges have always been suspect. Not because they have been paid off. But, rather, because they SUCK. I did not mean that they suck as individuals or as people. They SUCK at judging a match. I have NEVER liked any judging in the UFC, PRIDE, or any other sport relating to MMA or combat.

Hamill lost. That's the end of it. No amount of bitching and whining about it, here or anywhere else, not even the UG or Sherdog, will EVER change the outcome of this fight. It's done. It's over. Stick a fork in it.

Jenkins83 · 09-10-2007, 06:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by subgenius

Hamill lost. That's the end of it. No amount of bitching and whining about it, here or anywhere else, not even the UG or Sherdog, will EVER change the outcome of this fight. It's done. It's over. Stick a fork in it.

I don't think it's a good idea to just ignore what happened. People have every right to complain about it and they should. That's the only way changes are ever made. If enough people complain that is only thing that will motivate the UFC to get on the judges asses and make sure they know how to score fights properly. If everyone had the "oh well whats done is done" attitude nothing would ever change. So go ahead and keep on complaining guys.

subgenius · 09-10-2007, 06:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jenkins83

I don't think it's a good idea to just ignore what happened. People have every right to complain about it and they should. That's the only way changes are ever made. If enough people complain that is only thing that will motivate the UFC to get on the judges asses and make sure they know how to score fights properly. If everyone had the "oh well whats done is done" attitude nothing would ever change. So go ahead and keep on complaining guys.

We have seen bad judging for MANY, MANY years. Nothing has changed. This fight will NEVER get reversed. It's done. Pissing into the wind will not change the outcome. You guys complain here like Dana White will read it and things will change. Send the UFC an e-mail. That's what you guys need to do. But, the judging criteria and the judges themselves will always be suspect. There will always be controversy when the judges are allowed to decide a fight.

daveyxx · 09-10-2007, 07:14 PM

those who forget history are doomed to repeat it. i think its right to talk about the judging decisions. OBVIOUSLY they wont get reversed but talking about these things can be enough to have some change.

Heatwaves · 09-10-2007, 09:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drexal

I think after a few days people will calm down a bit and look at it more objectively.

This comment struck me as particularly amusing. If anything there were a huge number of FF Bisping fans before the fight, yet most of these people tend to agree that Hamill won outright. If fans of Bisping agree that Hamill won the fight, what's more objective than that?

I bet 10,000 points on Bisping and I still think that Hamill won all three rounds.

As for the judge's comments, I like how he explains what he saw from his unique angle. Of course, that argument doesn't hold water when compared with the angles (plural) they show on tv, instant replay and countless replays on the internet.

I hope that Dana takes this situation seriously, because if he blows it off and future controversies arise it could result in a drastic backlash against the sport.

Heatwaves · 09-10-2007, 09:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by subgenius

Matt Hamill lost. Simple. Mike Bisping won. Simple.

What? You don't like that? Too bad!

The record books say Hamill lost, Bisping won.

The record books once said that Diaz beat Gomi too.

Quote:

Originally Posted by subgenius

NEVER, NEVER, NEVERRRRRRR let a fight go to a decision.

NEVER!

Agreed. But if you've ever fought you know that it's not always as simple as that. The outcome of a fight, even knockouts and submissions, depend on the reactions of two fighters, not one. Every fighter should always do their best to finish fights, but they also need to be assured that a decision will be fair and equitable.

GSPALLTHEWAY · 09-10-2007, 09:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Heatwaves

The record books once said that Diaz beat Gomi too.

Agreed. But if you've ever fought you know that it's not always as simple as that. The outcome of a fight, even knockouts and submissions, depend on the reactions of two fighters, not one. Every fighter should always do their best to finish fights, but they also need to be assured that a decision will be fair and equitable.

diaz and gomi is a horrible example, but i get your point... its hard to finish fights obviously as well....
but in all reality 2 years from now itll go down as bisping over hamil and no one will remember really...
it does suck though, hamil obviously won, and hearing the judges try to justify it bugs me