Issue 073
March 2011
Each issue UFC referee Marc Goddard brings fight fans the ref’s side of the story
What defines a blow to ‘the back of the head’?
So what actually constitutes a foul when striking toward the back of the head? It’s a very common question. Arguably there’s more interpretation surrounding this issue than any other, with fighters often feeling left confused by subtle differences according to different referees. And in the case of the USA, the definition can differ from state to state.
In the past there has been talk of a ‘Mohawk line,’ two inches in width, that if struck directly inside would constitute a foul. This has triggered considerable debate and confused fighters. It’s incredibly difficult for both fighter and referee alike to make an assessment around a ‘two-inch marker’ rule. Would blows landing outside of it be perfectly legal?
Myself and many other referees employ a much simpler definition of ‘the back of the head,’ where it’s easier to apply the foul. This is often referred to as the ‘headphone’ rule. Imagine a set of classic stereo headphones on your head with the adjoining band running from ear to ear, up and across the crown of your head. Anything behind or underneath the metaphorical headphones would be defined as the back of the head. A deliberatly thrown punch, elbow or other strike from a fighter when they are in clear view of this area would be deemed a foul.
What can be a little more tricky to call, and demands a keen eye from the referee, is a situation where a fighter, more often than not in a grounded position, turns to avoid a punch thrown by his opponent and exposes the back of his own head to the strike. This is certainly not a foul by the attacking fighter who initially threw his punch at the intended, legal area. For a fighter to have fouled he would need to be clearly presented with the back of his opponent’s head when the punches were thrown. This is the trigger that a referee will use when defining the legalities of such strikes.
ASK THE REF Q&A
Don’t know your DQs from your decisions? Each issue, Marc will answer your questions on the ‘Unified Rules’ used in MMA.
Are fighters allowed to compete in rash guards?
Paul, via email
The Ref says: Under current Unified Rules no items of clothing other than approved shorts can be worn during a contest. This covers rash guards, tights, gis and anything else.
A recent bout contested between Gerrald Harris and Maiquel Falcao ended in some confusion with the horn sounding before the televised timer had run its course. Which one is correct?
Bob, via email
The Ref says: Hi, good question! A referee will only ever go by the official time keeper sat at ringside. The official timekeeper alone will sound the ten-second clapper (with ten seconds to go, naturally) or the horn to announce the end of a round.
The televised clock that you see during broadcast can sometimes be out of sync with the official timekeeper’s clock. This is something for the production company to worry about and certainly not the referee or fighter who should only obey the referee’s command of “Stop!” once the horn has sounded. Fighters and referees have no view of TV clocks or countdowns and nor do they need to.
