You think Shogun won? “Go to hell,” says judge Cecil Peoples
If you don’t like light heavyweight champ Lyoto Machida’s unanimous-decision win over challenger Mauricio “Shogun” Rua at last Saturday’s UFC 104 then “you can go to hell,” says Cecil Peoples, one of three California State Athletic Commission-assigned officials who misjudged the fight.
Peoples made the remark – along with many others that call into question his ability to judge anything more complex than a pie-eating contest – in an interview with MMA Weekly. He also confirmed that he hasn’t seen the fight on video nor looked at any of the statistics that give Rua an overwhelming advantage. It’s the second time this week that Peoples has spoken up about the fight to the media. Obviously Peoples isn’t smart enough to stay quiet on the subject, instead choosing to open his mouth, insert his size tens and further fuel the controversy.
Cory Brady over at Five Ounces of Pain does a great job of breaking down Peoples’ comments, so instead of me rehashing them, I’ll excerpt the highlights here:
“My thing is, Rua did hit him more,” explained Peoples. “But Machida hit him harder, especially in the early rounds.”
So according to Mr. Peoples, the man admits that Shogun landed the bulk of the strikes, but Machida “apparently” landing the harder shots canceled out Mauricio’s strikes because they were somehow perceived as softer.
What sense does this make?
With this logic, the gameplan for all fighters in the UFC going forward should be to absorb as much punishment as humanly possible while landing an occasional haymaker. Are you kidding me?
And since when did Peoples become an on-site human measuring stick for the velocity and impact of strikes. Being convinced that Machida’s blows were somehow more devastating reeks of favoritism.
“I’m really perplexed about how you give (Rua) this round, because Shogun was kicking (Machida) a lot in the legs, but every time he kicked him in the legs, he got hit in the face,” continued the repeatedly controversial judge. “Shogun would put his hand up, and Machida would go right through, sweat’s flying off (Rua’s) face. Shogun kicked (Machida) in the belly – that’s how he got the red mark.”
Perplexed as to how anyone could give Rua a round where he clearly landed more strikes?
I think the world of mixed martial arts is a lot more perplexed as to how one of its most frequent outcome deciders could so easily toss out all of the powerful kicks landed by Rua just because he didn’t knuckle Machida up to his liking.
I could understand giving a few shots to the face more leverage than a few dozen hard kicks back during UFC 1-10, but the year is 2009 and this was UFC 104. If the fossils in place to rule on MMA bouts currently are frozen in time, its time for them to be replaced. Simple as that.
“But you gotta remember, Machida is stepping back, so when he gets kicked, he’s getting brushed,” said Peoples. “But he counters Shogun with a hard kick to the belly. Which one counts more for the exchange? I give it to the (second one), because it was harder. It wasn’t brushed.”
So the same hard kick to the “belly” of Machida that caused the red mark that Cecil so easily explained away as meaningless is no longer meaningless when Lyoto lands it?
Again, somehow Machida must have been landing the harder kicks. Disregard the fact that “The Dragon” was taking steady, visible damage to the legs and body, Lyoto’s kicks were…… well, they were just harder according to the impact expert.
“Machida was controlling that round because he was dominant in not getting beat up in that round,” Cecil attempted to rationalize. “He was the general in that first round.”
I don’t know, but if Machida was dominant in not getting beat up in that round, wasn’t Shogun even that much more dominant being that not only was he “not getting beat up,” he was also pushing the action?
5 comments
Machida landed a higher percentage of punches, stuffed all the take-down attempts, and did land the harder strikes that were more likely to finish the fight. Although there was discoloring in Machida’s legs and body, he didn’t actually begin to show it in performance until late 4th round.
I know Peoples makes a lot of questionable calls, but he is not alone in his fighting metrics. Rua was the best answer to the question of Machida, but Machida is still the champion.
This was not a robbery, and I am beginning to question how much you are favoring Rua. I like both fighters, and I cannot wait for the rematch. This is Ali/Frasier. Possibly the best technical rivalry MMA has ever had. Much better than any Hughes/Trigg, St. Pierre/Penn, or Hughes/St. Pierre.
I would have been happy with the decision going either way, and I hope to see more fights like it.
That may have been the first 5 round 5 minute fight to never go to the ground. That is something to talk about.
Sure, Machida landed a higher percentage of punches. But Rua landed more punches. And more kicks. And I take exception to anyone who says his punches did more damage or were more likely to end the fight. There’s no way for you to know that or measure that. And you can’t give a fighter the decision because of what his punches were more likely to do but obviously didn’t. That’s just plain dumb. As for the actual damage caused, Machida was changing his stance by the second round because his lead leg was taking damage, so don’t tell me Machida wasn’t showing it until the fourth. Machida made no takedown attempts, and was on the defensive for a majority of the fight. So let me re-quote the last two graphs of Cory Brady’s story I excerpted above in regards to Peoples’ opinion of round one and subsequent rounds:
“Machida was controlling that round because he was dominant in not getting beat up in that round,” Cecil attempted to rationalize. “He was the general in that first round.”
I don’t know, but if Machida was dominant in not getting beat up in that round, wasn’t Shogun even that much more dominant being that not only was he “not getting beat up,” he was also pushing the action?
Am I favouring Rua? Based on his performance against Machida, absolutely. I just have to question anyone who continues to defend Machida’s win (and the judges’ decision) when there’s so much evidence to the contrary.
I still believe Machida did enough to justify his decision. I think it would have been more agreeable if it had been a split decision.
Would you have been more accepting of a split?
Machida’s style has always been to switch stances, and switching stance to check kicks so there isn’t a constant assault on one leg is a viable strategy.
I think Rua did enough to win, and I was surprised by Machida’s win. However, I can still understand his win.
I still stand by this was not a robbery.
Standing there and absorbing a leg kick is not the same thing as checking the kick. Machida stopped checking the kicks after about the fifth one. How can you say Machida did enough to win when he clearly did less than Rua? He landed fewer strikes, did less damage, attempted no takedowns and spent most of the fight backing up. As for whether a split decision would have been more acceptable, no. It would still mean that two other judges completely missed the right call. A split decision in Machida’s favour would be like a consolation prize, a lovely parting gift for finishing second.
Cecil needs to be stopped from judging future bouts…he is horrible. Marcos Rosales and Nelson Hamilton also…but at least they kept their pie-holes shut.
Octagon Control- Rua
Aggression-Rua
Quantity of strikes- Rua
Attempts to take down…Rua
At what point was Shogun LOSING??
Leave a Comment