Tweet
MMAWeekly was first with the scoop that the Nevada State Athletic Commission -- site of the occasional boxing/MMA bout -- has officially instituted instant replay. An official will have the opportunity to review footage of a fight-ending blow and determine whether it was a foul. The expectation is that injuries to athletes caused by eye pokes, groin strikes, back-of-head shots, or shotgun wounds won’t count against their record.
Officials cannot evaluate footage until the fight’s conclusion, and can only arbitrate suspected fouls that forced an end to the action. It will not be used to re-watch really, really cool karate and sanshou techniques, though undoubtedly that will be the temptation.
There is some quicksand: even after review, a strike might still be ambiguous enough that a decision can’t be rendered. And the stretch where an official deliberates could pad some broadcasts that are already tightly scheduled, meaning some pre-taped preliminary fights might get bumped from the air.
New Jersey instituted instant replay in 2007, but promoters are expected to provide their own equipment, and there has yet to be an instance of use in a high-profile bout there; in Nevada, the addition is expected to go into effect within 30 days, meaning that the next major show that could conceivably be affected would be UFC 106 on Nov. 21.
The NSAC also approved five-round bouts for fights deemed championship caliber. Who makes that decision is a mystery, but it would presumably be limited to contender bouts. I find that to be the weakest of the revisions coming out of their midweek meeting: title fights are the pinnacle, and should be of the greater duration than an arbitrary bout that’s subjectively dubbed intriguing or title-shot-worthy.
Half the time, the promotion doesn’t even know what a contenders match is and what isn’t. And if an influential fight happens to not be booked in Nevada, are the fighters just out of luck?
Officials cannot evaluate footage until the fight’s conclusion, and can only arbitrate suspected fouls that forced an end to the action. It will not be used to re-watch really, really cool karate and sanshou techniques, though undoubtedly that will be the temptation.
There is some quicksand: even after review, a strike might still be ambiguous enough that a decision can’t be rendered. And the stretch where an official deliberates could pad some broadcasts that are already tightly scheduled, meaning some pre-taped preliminary fights might get bumped from the air.
New Jersey instituted instant replay in 2007, but promoters are expected to provide their own equipment, and there has yet to be an instance of use in a high-profile bout there; in Nevada, the addition is expected to go into effect within 30 days, meaning that the next major show that could conceivably be affected would be UFC 106 on Nov. 21.
The NSAC also approved five-round bouts for fights deemed championship caliber. Who makes that decision is a mystery, but it would presumably be limited to contender bouts. I find that to be the weakest of the revisions coming out of their midweek meeting: title fights are the pinnacle, and should be of the greater duration than an arbitrary bout that’s subjectively dubbed intriguing or title-shot-worthy.
Half the time, the promotion doesn’t even know what a contenders match is and what isn’t. And if an influential fight happens to not be booked in Nevada, are the fighters just out of luck?
Comment