The Silver Fern

scruffy-lookin

@Kruse I'm for a red card. It was an forearm to the head even if the head wasn't first contact. Coming son soon after the debateable penalty for the "late charge" that it is very hard to to not see it as Vunipola getting BB back for milking.

I'm not sure how if SBW gets a red for a shoulder to the head that does no damage a forearm to the head gets anything less.

scruffy-lookin

@Billy-Tell There is a citing process but why anyone would have faith in it is beyond me.

As for pre-anticipating a tackle. That's a new one. Surely all tackles almost are pre-anticipated. It was Sinckler's actions that caused a dangerous situation and sets a dangerous precendent if the tackler is now responsible for the getting the ball carrier out of the predicament he got himself into.

As for the communication barrier between the officials. I believe that we need to move to referee teams that work together regularly so they can build combinations and understanding because too often they don't appear to trust each other and we get muddled application of the laws.

scruffy-lookin

@Billy-Tell it wasn't necessarily foul play but it was a pin-point swinging arm to the temple. It's hard to judge intent but it certainly warranted further investigation.

scruffy-lookin

@kev Weird that they showed one replay and moved on but then I thought it was weird that Mako got a yellow when he led with the forearm to even up the score on BB.

scruffy-lookin

@hydro11 I wouldn't expect SBW to be booed in Black but I expect there to be immense pressure if he is ever selected again. It's true he offers something that no other player does but if he can't control himself he can't be selected in big games and if he can't be selected in big games he can't play at all as the ABs are better off developing someone else.

It's not great because I would prefer that the ABs were able to utilise his skills but I don't see any way around it.

scruffy-lookin

@hydro11 Are you a scapegoat when it's your fault? Isn't that just being held responsible? SBW farked up royally and has form of doing exactly the same thing in big games. I'm all for letting players learn from their mistakes and come back better but I would be OK with him being dropped.

scruffy-lookin

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Don Frye" data-cid="573672" data-time="1461140645">
<div>
I've been a supporter of his generally but I think the Reebok deal was probably the turning point for me.
</div>
</blockquote>
 
I'm not anti-Dana - I think what he and the Fretitta's have done taking the sport from the far fringe to where it is today is amazing - but Dana is UFC-first and there are clearly some issues about how fighter pay and matchmaking work. It's crazy that there are guys fighting for the UFC earning 10K and 10K and while I can only guess at what the UFC grosses and have no real idea what its running costs are it does seem that the fighters are getting less as a percentage than athletes in other major sports. 
 
For the most part the way the UFC is run works out great for me as a fan but I see why a lot of fighters are dissatisfied with a systems that seems weighted against them. The UFC is experiencing a boom at the moment and it's because it has two stars who have been able to cross over with the mainstream audience this is the first time we've seen one of the new stars break from the company line and it was interesting to see how quickly Dana smacked Conor down. The UFC seems to be of the opinion that either Conor will fall into line or the loss of revenue at UFC 200 is worth the affect that giving into fighter demands would have on the future. 
 
Changing gears, looking forward to seeing Jon Jones fight OSP tomorrow. For those who don't like elbows on the ground, this may be one to skip. Solid main card. Pettis v Barboza has the potential to be a classic stand up war between two of the best kickers in the UFC. I always enjoy watching Demetrious Johnson fight and it will be interesting to see him against a bigger guy and to see whether Cejudo tries to use his wrestling offesively or whether he tries to out box Johnson.

scruffy-lookin

<div>Fight Night 51 was exactly the kind of card that certain fans and media mean when they talk about over-saturation. A main event with two fighters with name recognition but little divisional relevancy and an undercard stacked with local fighters. I'm not sure if it was better matchmaking or a coincidence but it was good to see Brazillians only go 5-4. I agree with Mike that it was a fun card even though it wouldn't have been considered "UFC Quality" a few years ago. </div>
<div> </div>
<div>Hunt v Nelson this weekend which has a similar look to the card but where it's a fair bit harder to find favourable matchups for the local fighter without obviously trying to get a result. Hopefully Hunt can finish Nelson and go on one last run towards the title. Nelson has had trouble with strikers who are willing to circle away from his overhand right and don't get backed up on the cage with his jab-feint-jab routine. </div>
<div> </div>
<div>Daniel Hooker, the kiwi who won his UFC debut at the Auckland event this year is the first fight on the card. Not sure if Sky will be showing that or whether it will be Fight Pass only.</div>

scruffy-lookin

I agree that it's (probably) not going to turn off people for this fight that were potential buyers but might have an effect on the long-term prospects of the sport with things like getting the MMA licenced in New York and fighters being able to attract top-flight sponsors.
 
MMA always walks a line between sport and spectacle, martial art competition and brawling violence which is what makes it so compelling to some of us but also why it gets a fair bit of negative press (or no press at all).

scruffy-lookin

Pretty over the top from Jones and Cormier. The fight at the media day was a bit of a black eye for the sport and these comments just further inflame things, even if the mics weren't supposed to be live. While it wouldn't surprise me if Jones (or any other elite athlete or high achiever) was a sociopath IMO, he's just trying to get under Cormier's skin. Two alphas who don't like each other and won't back down.
 
I think Jones will win in the Octagon but it remains to be seen who'll win the publicity war and whether it will result in more buys or end up turning people off.

scruffy-lookin

While it's not ideal that Cormier is taking the title shot on shaky knees it's an issue he's apparently had for a while and hasn't stopped him dominating all his opponents. At 35 I don't know whether there's time for Cormier to take 6-12 months off for surgery and then hope that the title picture works in his favour. Regardless, it's a fight I'm excited to see.
 
Hard to complain about oversaturation with the quality of the last three cards and the UFC taking a mini-break until mid-August.

scruffy-lookin

With UFC 177 on 30 August a fourth Bantamweight title in 2014 would be a fairly quick turnaround for either Dillashaw or Barao. Especially when you consider that the opponent that makes the most sense regardless of who wins at UFC 177 is Dominic Cruz who would have to win his fight against Takeya Mizugaki at UFC 178 on September 27 and be in condition to fight again quickly which seems overly-optimistic given his recent history.
 
Youâ€re right that the lack of available champions may encourage the UFC to try and schedule a fourth Bantamweight title bout in 2014 with the champ versus Assuncao or any available top ten fighter just to fill out one of the December cards. Assuncao is an interesting fight for Dillashaw and a decent fight Barao (in Brazil at least) but not one that is going to get casuals super-interested.
 
Which brings me back to the oversaturation, while casual fans (by definition) arenâ€t going to watch every card I was under the impression that ratings for the Fox Sports Fight Night main events were higher than most PPVs or the PPV prelims. Iâ€d have thought that fighting in the five-round main event on a smaller card would be a better way to get casual fans interested in contenders than having the same fight as a three-rounder on the main card of a PPV.
 
 
Gustaffson out and Cormier in to face Jon Jones at UFC 178 and they've also added McGregor v Poirier. The card is looking pretty stacked.
 
Edit: Formatting

scruffy-lookin

Totally right on the Bantamweight title being put up three times this year. I'll believe four when I see it. 
Matt Brown v Eric Silva was on Fox Sports rather than Fight Pass. I don't think they've had any US Fight Pass cards yet. Granted, Fox Sports doesn't have the reach of Fox or Spike but it's not behind an internet paywall.

scruffy-lookin

Iâ€d take any article from Deadspin with a grain of salt but then Iâ€m a bit of a UFC fanboy so anything I say is under suspicion. There are some significant problems for the UFC at the moment as its established stars either retire or have extended absences and the promotion moves from being PPV focussed to spreading itself over multiple distribution platforms. The UFC will have run six events in just over 30 days once this July 4th weekendâ€s double-header is done. Thatâ€s more than they ran in the whole of 2004. The expanded schedule is a topic of much debate and, unfortunately for the UFC, has coincided with the retirement of GSP and Anderson Silva (who have been the most bankable PPV stars of the past few years), long term injuries to Cain Velasquez, Anthony Pettis and Dominic Cruz (which has taken three titles out of circulation) and injuries to almost every other title holder causing fight delays and postponements in 2014. At this stage it doesnâ€t look like any title will be defended three or more times during 2014 which is what youâ€d like to see from a champion. 
 
On the topic of developing stars, it seems strange to me to criticise the UFC for not developing stars while simultaneously criticising it for holding too many events. It seems to me that the best way to develop stars is to bring guys in and give them a chance to develop within the UFC rather than trying to sign/buy guys who have managed to build significant records in other organisations which brings its own set of problems. Creating stars, it isnâ€t an exact science - especially if youâ€re talking about fighters that are able to make an impression with the wider public as well as general sports fans or MMA fans. The right combination of skill, record, personality and timing rarely come together and the UFC, and any other promotion, can only do so much to try and identify and promote fighters who they think can become stars. The flip side of this is when fans feel like the UFC is pushing a certain fighter, giving them additional coverage and even preferential matchmaking they flip out. 
 
As an aside, a group of us went to the Te Huna v Marquardt card last weekend and it was awesome. There was an interesting moment when, on trying to enter Vector, we were re-directed from the gate to the ticket office but instead finding that Iâ€d stuffed the booking it was to upgrade us from the cheapest of the nosebleeds to the front row right where the fighters walked in 20 metres from the cage. Good fights - Soa v Rosholt aside - which showed that star power isnâ€t necessary for an entertaining card. Without the expanded schedule thereâ€s no way that NZ would be getting a UFC card. As things stand, we might be getting a UFC card every couple of years and while weâ€re unlikely to get title fights or the biggest names, I think that this is preferable to no live NZ UFC events.
 
Yes the expanded schedule has diluted PPVs, but on the flip side it means more fights. For those of us who like watching fights, this is mostly a good thing. There are only a few â€œspecialâ€ events are year but thatâ€s mostly been true in previous years. 
As Mike said, the last two Fight Nights have been really entertaining cards despite the lack of top-tier talent. Iâ€m not sure if that has been good matchmaking, luck or, more likely a combination of the two.

scruffy-lookin

I bought a pair of the New Balance Minimus about three weeks ago so I'm just easing into them. I've been running with varying seriousness for the last three years or so - one marathon (3:39) and just under 20 half marathons (PB 1:37). I pronate and have worn mid-range Mizunos for road and an assortment of off-road shoes. Generally I've been pretty happy with my shoes and, while I haven't picked up any serious injuries directly related to running, I have the usual niggles particularly right hip and knee "issues". 
 
Like a lot of people the barefoot running movement has intrigued me and the idea of running with less pain is very attractive. 
 
I got the off road Minimus and have had two trail runs, two beach runs and a few short park sessions. Overall I've been pretty happy with them. They have a nice feel with the variety of conditions I've used them in (grass, sand, trail and mud). I got a little ahead of myself and did about 40 mins on the beach for my second run in them and paid for it over the next two days - especially when standing up or walking down stairs. After that initial over-reach, I eased back for a while and have slowly worked my way up to an 1:10 minute trail run today. 
 
I'm planning on using the Minimus in the first race of the xterra trail running series in late May look to be on course at this stage. 
 
At this stage I have no set plans to ditch my road runners in favour of barefoot running or for one of the road Minimus options but I'm open to the future possibility.

The Silver Fern

scruffy-lookin

Posts