The EASY Solution to the "Grounded Fighter" Rule (How to Properly Regulate Knees to a Grounded Fighter)

[TheMMAnalyst]

Arnold Allen vs Movsar Evloev continues to bring to light an on-going issue with the knees to a grounded fighter rule...one hand down, two hands down, weight-bearing hand down, knee down, two knees down...different rules for different regions when none of them make any fucking sense.

The solution is so logical and obvious that of course the UFC and the Athletic Commission have never considered it, but it is an easy one-shot fix: change the "Grounded Fighter" Rule so that the only way to be "Grounded" is to have your butt and/or back on the mat.

That's actually the true definition of being "Grounded", since you can't decide to "get up" in a millisecond. The spirit of the rule is to not allow someone that is defenseless to get their skull/spine caved in (i.e. Mark Kerr going North-South for inverted knees to the skull), but you aren't defenseless when you are caught in a headlock or have your knee on the ground. You have plenty of choices to make, but currently the best choice is to wait and do nothing and/or bait your opponent to foul you.

When you have a hand or knee on the ground you are actually the one choosing to be in that position; you can choose to stand up or fall to your back if you don't wish to get knee'd in the face. Instead we have a ridiculously obscene interpretation where the onus is on the attacking fighter to not do the most logical attack possible (knee a kneeling opponent) when the opponent is the one putting or keeping themself in that position.

Instead of asking a referee to gauge how much weight is on their hand or if their knee lifted up an inch before a knee hits lets make it blatant and obvious as to what it means to be "Grounded" so there is no confusion and fighters can use the most instinctively logical attack for a position that constantly takes place in a fight. This means defending fighters can't "play the game" to bait fouls or think there is a safe zone, on top of punishing wrestlers for getting their shots stuffed (now it's riskier to shoot since there is a more meaningful counter, since you can't just claim to be "Grounded" once you get sprawled on).

It would make the fights more dynamic and natural without really putting fighters in any grave danger that they aren't choosing to be in (if it's a choice, they aren't defenseless).

 

[DarthChen731]

Neck, back, pussy, & crack

 

[Dorkman]

Or...we could just change it to knees are legal in any position?

 

[Joshuaace]

If they must continue to use no kicks/knees to head of grounded opponent...any body part other than feet and hands

 

[Sasha]

Or...we could just change it to knees are legal in any position?

Yeah, small adjustments to this kind of rules often just move the problem instead of fixing it. Legalize knees, and get good refs, it should be a good start.

 

[OldBoy91]

Or...we could just change it to knees are legal in any position?

Thats the best solution, but unfortunately a lot of athletic commissions wouldn't sanction MMA if they did and it would limit where the UFC could hold events.

So it's unlikely that they will ever just say fuck it and allow knees to grounded opponents even though it's obviously what should happen.

 

[Snake Fist]

When you can prevent youself from getting hit in the head by placing a hand on the ground, it isn't fighting.

I'm all for the UFC to change it's name to something like USC Ultimate Sport Championship, for fighting it is not.

 

[gentel]

imo it should be elbows or above on the arms, knees or above on the legs, or any of the torso/neck/head on the ground to be considered grounded

So basically anything but hands, feet, shins, and forearms touching the ground = grounded

 

[TheMMAnalyst]

Thats the best solution, but unfortunately a lot of athletic commissions wouldn't sanction MMA if they did and it would limit where the UFC could hold events.

So it's unlikely that they will ever just say fuck it and allow knees to grounded opponents even though it's obviously what should happen.

It does make sense to make it illegal if an opponent is flat on his butt/flat on his back if you are more inclined to look towards fighter safety (since guys stuck in side control or north south have no defense and can get serious brain/skull/spine damage from being stuck in that position for an extended period). I'm totally fine with knees legal in any position, but I think for the perception of safety this is the fair compromise ultimately.

It makes it easy for the referee to determine if the knees are legal or not (since the fighter would have to actually get up off the mat, not just put a knee down or touch a hand).

I just don't get how they don't understand that when you are on your knees/knee or touching the ground with your hand/hands you ultimately put yourself in that position and are choosing to be there and/or are there because of your fighting choices (i.e. shooting and getting sprawled on).

 

[OldBoy91]

It does make sense to make it illegal if an opponent is flat on his butt/flat on his back if you are more inclined to look towards fighter safety (since guys stuck in side control or north south have no defense and can get serious brain/skull/spine damage from being stuck in that position for an extended period). I'm totally fine with knees legal in any position, but I think for the perception of safety this is the fair compromise ultimately.

It makes it easy for the referee to determine if the knees are legal or not (since the fighter would have to actually get up off the mat, not just put a knee down or touch a hand).

I just don't get how they don't understand that when you are on your knees/knee or touching the ground with your hand/hands you ultimately put yourself in that position and are choosing to be there and/or are there because of your fighting choices (i.e. shooting and getting sprawled on).

Yup. Which is why I agree that your proposal is the best one and far more likely to actually happen going forward.

Somebody being on their back or even on their knees is grounded. Besides the safety issue there is also the visual of kicking or kneeing them is probably too much for new fans and you have to keep it out of the sport in order to grow the overall fanbase.

Somebody who is standing on their feet and the soles of their feet are actually touching the ground, and they reach down with their hand to touch the canvas, should never be considered grounded. They are literally standing up and exploiting a rule to avoid taking damage.

 

[PrideNverDies]

Just legalize knees in ground like One Championship does. They even have them legal in some US states when one did a show in Colorado it was legal.

 

[TempleoftheDog]

This is not the UFC’s call. Why can’t people understand that? The commission regulates this. They hire the refs, and judges. And they make the rules in their jurisdictions.

To keep mentioning the UFC in regards to this is a huge red flag as to the basic intelligence of any given poster.

 

[TheMMAnalyst]

Yup. Which is why I agree that your proposal is the best one and far more likely to actually happen going forward.

Somebody being on their back or even on their knees is grounded. Besides the safety issue there is also the visual of kicking or kneeing them is probably too much for new fans and you have to keep it out of the sport in order to grow the overall fanbase.

Somebody who is standing on their feet and the soles of their feet are actually touching the ground, and they reach down with their hand to touch the canvas, should never be considered grounded. They are literally standing up and exploiting a rule to avoid taking damage.

To me being on your knees isn't being grounded - you can stand-up in a split-second or you can choose to fall to your back. But because it's "safe from knees" fighters will gladly stay on their knees to prevent truly damaging strikes.

That's what I mean about "choosing to be grounded" - you either can stand-up or if you got sprawled on (i.e. you chose to shoot) you can go to your back. Ultimately the goal is to prevent stalling and fighters from "gaming the system" to induce fouls or create falsified "safe zones" during fights.

We don't want to see guys get crippled, this doesn't seemingly add more inherent risk to a fight, it just adds a new layer of nuance to the game so fighters can actually use their natural fighting instincts i.e. kneeing someone in the face that is kneeling in front of them.

 

[laleggenda27]

Knees and kicks to a grounded opponent should be legal. Problem solved.

The only time being "grounded" should be a consideration is to outlaw stomps. Outside of that, knees and kicks should be fair game. Not only would it solve this problem, but it would make the sport more exciting by forcing fighters to actually scramble out of bad positions.

 

[TheMMAnalyst]

This is not the UFC’s call. Why can’t people understand that? The commission regulates this. They hire the refs, and judges. And they make the rules in their jurisdictions.

To keep mentioning the UFC in regards to this is a huge red flag as to the basic intelligence of any given poster.

Sherbro the UFC pays off and regulates the commissions, let's be real - how do you think they just got "Slap Fight" legalized in CA on the basis of it being "safe"?



This is a one-hand washes the other situation.

 

[TheMMAnalyst]

Knees and kicks to a grounded opponent should be legal. Problem solved.

The only time being "grounded" should be a consideration is to outlaw stomps. Outside of that, knees and kicks should be fair game. Not only would it solve this problem, but it would make the sport more exciting by forcing fighters to actually scramble out of bad positions.

I don't think kicks should be legal simply because they are most useful after you've already badly hurt someone i.e. dropped them.

So then you run in and punt an injured/badly hurt fighter in the head that can't defend themselves it's going to lead to some horrifying injuries - there is probably no more brutal way to injure someone with a strike then punting their head when they are on the ground and have no idea what is happening.

I mean from a "fight realism perspective" it's cool, but after thinking it over for some time it adds an incredible level of risk for what seems to be a relatively minor gain to fighters method of attack/victory.

I think the compromise is you make the fighter put themselves in a worse position i.e. going to guard to avoid the knees if they are so worried about it, but draw the line at soccer kicks just for the sheer brutality of it.

 

[Spath]

This is not the UFC’s call. Why can’t people understand that? The commission regulates this. They hire the refs, and judges. And they make the rules in their jurisdictions.

To keep mentioning the UFC in regards to this is a huge red flag as to the basic intelligence of any given poster.

The OP literally says ”athletic comissions”. Why are you in such a pissy mood?