After reading the article on MMAfighting about MMA rules, and how they are bad today, I felt the need to respond. I think that this is one of the main reasons why this sport isn’t as accepted as it probably should be. Now, considering that I’m not an American, I come from a position where rules in sports are highly specific and precise. Take football (or soccer as you Amercians say 
). In Europe, soccer rules are pretty much very well defined.
Now, I do have issues with MMA (UFC, to be more precise) rules. First of all, they are very subjective to the person of a judge, and I don’t think that it’s good in any way. Let’s talk about the fresh example from UFC 142. Judge Mario Yamasaki disqualified a young MMA fighter Erick Silva for hitting Carlo Prater in the back of the head. Nothing seems unusual here, does it? Well, except for the fact that we don’t really know what the “back of the head” really is. Is it the area represented by a mohawk haircut (the “mohawk” theory), or the area right behind your earmuffs (the “earmuff” theory)?
You see, UFC is just filled with events that simply require an arbitrary decision, because there are no strong, codified rules.
The other thing that’s bothering me is the fact that take downs are regarded as something worthy of points. I do agree that controlling is important, and that it should weigh some points, but if you take someone down, and then keep him there in a neutral position for 10 minutes and then win, that’s simply bad for this sport. A referee should at least bring the fight back to the feet, if nothing else. In fact, I would give negative points for passivity of the fighter who is “in control” on the floor.
These are just some of my thoughts on this issue. What do you think, are the rules in MMA so bad that they need changing and codifying, or, are they good as they are currently?
Everyone loves what you guys tend to be up too. This type of clever work and coverage! Keep up the fantastic works guys I’ve incorporated you guys to blogroll.