Issue 055
October 2009
The dust has settled after UFC 100. The bloodied Octagon canvas has been segmented into 100 slithers and framed for posterity. I am proud to say I was there and, in time, will be able to tell my grandchildren that I had a seat in Row A, and that it was a colossal event.
It was broadcast in 75 countries, reached 300 million homes and was the most widespread pay-per-view event in the history of the UFC. It was a week, indeed, in Las Vegas when MMA came of age on the sports media landscape. But there were aspects of the centennial event which may have done more damage than good. There was also one thing missing: Authority. There was a lack of clear and concise policing of two incidents which have brought the sport into disrepute.
You know what they are: Dan Henderson’s comments in the Octagon after a spectacular, pinpoint knockout of Michael Bisping, and Brock Lesnar’s wild ramblings and taunting of Frank Mir, also in the Octagon. In my book the two transgressions are in that order. Henderson’s was more serious. I’m not buying into the argument from hardcore fans that “We have seen this, if not worse, before.”
Established aficionados of the sport need to think about the hundreds of thousands of new fans this event created in Mexico and China, watching the event being broadcast in their native tongues for the first time. Henderson’s post-fight comment when still in the Octagon could do more to undermine the sport of MMA in the eyes of abolitionists against its continuance. Admitting his follow-up punch had been intentional was crass. A fine and suspension should have followed within days.
Instead, Henderson was given a $100,000 bonus for ‘knockout of the night’. Sure, Henderson’s second punch on Bisping was uncomfortable – a replica, I might add, of his KO of Wanderlei Silva at Pride 33 where he followed up a left hook KO with a right across the jaw of the Brazilian.
But if MMA wants to be fully accepted as a sport on the mainstream landscape it needs to deal with these issues fully, instead of a perfunctory, ‘Oh, I was only joking’ comment. It would have sent a message out to the fighters, the media, and the world watching: “We punish transgressions in a visceral, brutal sport.” More than anything, it was an opportunity missed.
The UFC, and the Athletic Commissions – in this case Nevada under Keith Kizer – should have acted and reacted. It led to reactionary journalism in some quarters. Some felt sickened, rightly perhaps, by Henderson’s follow-up punch on Bisping. It was sickening. But aspects of the sport are brutal and visceral.
The UFC, the world’s leading mixed martial arts organization, careers on like a juggernaut and is cast-iron in a global recession, expected to gross over $300 million this year, and now outstrips boxing in pay-per-view buys. Yet don’t mistake ‘recognition’ for ‘acceptance’. MMA needs to be careful how it polices itself, and has a way to go.
In the mainstream media, news creation is a raw, ready affair. Pick the strongest incident from an event and open with it, along with the result. It is a simple formula used by most writers / journalists on event-reporting deadlines.
Lesnar needs the Fedor test
Whither, too, Lesnar? Mocked and a UFC villain to fans, he is proving to be damn difficult to beat. Sure, throw Cain Velasquez at him, or Shane Carwin, but I believe he would defeat them. They will, of course, face off in early October at UFC 104. I’d give Carwin the better chance of those two.
Nor is Lesnar a superstar (yet). He is a formidable athlete and former wrestler who became a huge star in WWE, but who has yet to gel with MMA fans. What he needs to demonstrate is some charisma, which I understand he has plenty of when away from media and television.
Great sportsmen are judged on achievement. Superstars transcend their sport through the synergy of fame, success and media coverage. Lesnar is yet to become cult. He is also far from the finished product of the polished prize heavyweight.
What the UFC really needs now is the ‘F-Man’, Fedor Emelianenko. Could Fedor’s technical skills and game on the ground defeat Lesnar? Would he be effective, moreover, in the takedown? I have a strong suspicion that if Fedor cannot be bought, or if Lesnar dominates the heavyweight division for too long, we will see a division split.
Perhaps it is inevitable. Although Dana White consistently reiterates that five divisions gives the UFC a clear defining simplicity, I understand the UFC and those behind the scenes working on regulation may eventually create a split with a heavyweight (205lb to 230lb) and super-heavyweight division (231lb to 265lb).
But we want to see these two face off. Fedor has shown time and time again that he can prove wrong those who doubt him. Lesnar vs Emelianenko is a fight I know I’d travel anywhere to see. Make it happen, Mr White.
