In response to my post on the disqualification of a fighter during last week's Ultimate Fighter episode, a colleague came to ask me what, if any, options there are to have a fight result overturned. Briefly, by way of background, on last week's episode of the Ultimate Fighter a fighter named Uscola was disqualified for kneeing a grounded opponent to the head.
As detailed in my previous post, this was a correct application of the Nevada State Athletic Commission Regulations by the referee. Due to the doctor's subsequent determination that Attonito (the recipient of the knee) was unable to continue, the referee disqualified Uscola. Although some may disagree about whether the knees actually made contact with Antonito's head (in my view the replay was inconclusive at best and warranted the referee's call), as set forth below there is no basis for the Commission (under its Regulations) to change the decision in this situation.
In determining whether there is a basis for the athletic commission to change a decision, you must first determine the appropriate regulating body. Here, the Ultimate Fighter takes place in Las Vegas, Nevada and so the Nevada State Athletic Commission Regulations apply -- specifically, NAC 467.
Under Section, 467.770, "Change of decision after contest or exhibition: Factors considered by Commission," except in instances where the Commission changes a result based on drug use etc.:
"the Commission will not change a decision rendered at the end of any contest or exhibition unless:
1. The Commission determines that there was collusion affecting the result of the contest or exhibition;
2. The compilation of the scorecards of the judges discloses an error which shows that the decision was given to the wrong unarmed combatant; or
3. As the result of an error in interpreting a provision of this chapter, the referee has rendered an incorrect decision."
Under this provision, unless there is collusion affecting the result, an error in the tabulation of the judges' scorecards which shows that the wrong fighter won, or an error in the result because the referee interpreted a provision of Regulation 467 incorrectly leading to the wrong decision, the Commission will not change a decision.
Here, as set forth in my initial post, the Regulations provide that kneeing a downed opponent is a foul and can result in disqualification. There was, therefore, no misinterpretation of the Regulations by the referee and no basis for the Commission to overturn the decision.
In fact, the only part of the decision that Uscola could theoretically take issue with is whether the referee correctly exercised his discretion in calling the foul and then (after listening to the doctor) disqualifying Uscola. However, because the Regulations do not provide that a decision will be changed as a result of an error in exercising discretion (under the appropriate regulations), there is no basis in my opinion for the Commission to overturn the referee's decision.
