"UFC 75" Judge Jeff Mullen explains Bisping vs. Hamill decision
by: Average Joe 10 months, 1 week, 6 days, 17 hours, 16 minutes ago 3
Email Article Print ArticleOne of the judges from this past Saturday’s UFC 75: CHAMPION vs. CHAMPION explains his decision in awarding Michael Bisping a very controversial win over Matt Hamill.
UFC Junkie has an article up that features UFC 75 judge Jeff Mullen explaining what went into his decision to give Michael Bisping the win over Matt Hamill.
Mullen, who says he first started judging UFC contests in 1996 (and has been doing it twice as long as any other current judge), recently posted a message on The Underground Forum, where he’s been a member since 2001.
Mullen argues that he had a clear view of Bisping early in the second round — a view that the television camera and the UFC broadcasters didn’t have — and that the local fighter “was landing the jab again and again and not getting hit.” Additionally, he argues that Bipsing was “using an active guard trying to turn for armbars and sweeps” in the second round while Hamill was “doing very little on top.“
Both Jeff Mullen and Cecil Peoples scored the fight 29-28 (awarding Bisping the second and third rounds) while British judge Chris Watts gave all three rounds to Hamill.
In the end, it was a controversial split-decision for Bisping.
“By the way, Mario Yamasaki thought Bisping won rounds two and three,” Mullen wrote. “Mario was the ref and had a better view than any of us.
Because England has no athletic commission, the UFC was responsible for regulating the event. UFC Vice President of Regulatory Affairs Marc Ratner was charged with the tasks of drug testing the fighters and choosing officials — including Mullen — to judge Saturday’s fights.
This was the biggest BS decision I think I’ve ever seen. Hamill destroyed Bisping during the first round, didn’t do much in the second, but clearly out worked him in the third and they still awarded Bisping with the decision??
I’ve also lost all respect for Bisping who acts like he won the fight via KO or TKO and gave Hamill no respect in his post fight interview. Hamill showed true class by giving props to Bisping and saying it was a good fight. Then the UK fans boo the poor guy just because he dished out an ass beating to their hometown boy USA style.
Hamill won that fight period.
I tend to agree with you. The second round was closer than ppl think but at the most it should have been a draw....
“Born in the USA”, was a nice touch to come out to and made me a believer in Matt Hammill for life.
Here is the UG post found on this thread:
Hello to everyone on the Underground. I have been reading the underground for years. I used to post quite a bit. Then I decided it would be better for me to stay out of all the arguments. I want to thank all of you guys for being so nice to me through the years. I have seen almost no negative posts about me here until now.
I first started judging the UFC in 1996. I have been judging UFC almost twice as long as any other active judge. I am a former kick boxer and have been training grappling for 13 years. I am not here to argue with any of you or tell you that your opinion is wrong. I am only going to tell you why I judged the fight the way I did. Watch the fight again and turn off the sound. Commentary can color what you see.
No doubt Bisping dominated the 1st. He hurt Bisping with a right hand right off the bat and again near the end of the round. He out scored Bisping and busted him up. It was a very impressive round for Hamill but still a 10-9 round. Not dominate enough for a 10-8.
Watch the beginning of the second round closely. When Hamill throws the jab, Bisping slips the punch and hits him with his own counter jab. It is hard to see on camera because Hamill’s back is to the camera. His back was also to Goldie who was talking like the beginning of this round was like a continuation of the 1st. If you look you will see that Hamill is facing me giving me a clear view of what is landing.
Bisping was landing the jab again and again and not getting hit. Hamill got 2 takedowns in rounds 2 and 3 but did very little with them. Bisping is using an active guard trying to turn for armbars and sweeps, Hamill is doing very little on top. Bisping is keeping him from scoring or improving his position. In the 3rd round Bisping actually lands more punchesd from the bottom than Hamill does from the top.
In both the 2nd and 3rd rounds Bisping does more scoring. Striking. Under pride style scoring Hamill would have won. He did more damage, but it was all in the 1st round. By 10 point must system Bisping won the fight 2 rounds to 1 . 29-28 Bisping. Sometime the angle you see the fight effects your decision. That is why they put the judges on 3 different sides.
BY THE WAY MARIO YAMASAKI THOUGHT BISPING WON ROUNDS 2 AND 3 ALSO. MARIO WAS THE REF AND HAD A BETTER VIEW THAN ANY OF US. I have never taken a payoff as some of you have suggested and never will.
You may not agree with my decision but please don’t question my honesty.
Thank you Jeff Mullen