In recent years, it’s become pretty clear that the quality of judging in the UFC has been on a downhill slide. More and more often, we’re seeing fighters who clearly won their bouts being, ‘robbed’ (though the word is often overused by MMA fans). Last night at UFC 310, the final pay-per-view event of 2024, we another example of questionable judging
One of the first controversies happened during the prelims. Brian Battle was up against another top 15 welterweight contender, Randy Brown. After a brilliant opening round from Randy Brown (which he clearly won), Brian Battle came back strong in the second round, making it one-to-one. The third round went back to Randy Brown, who re-found his range, peppering Battle with his snapping jab, finding his teeps and avoiding the takedown. It was obvious to the pundits, commentators, and fans alike that Randy Brown should have come away with the decision. However, Brian Battle was awarded the win, leading to boos from the crowd. Battle responded with the famous question, “Who are you booing?” – reminiscent of his victory over Kevin Jousset in France. He was so distracted that Rogan had to tell him “Never mind them.”
Later in the night, we witnessed what might have been the biggest robbery of the card. Ciryl Gane was awarded the decision over Alexander Volkov. Even the commentators at cage side believed Volkov should have gotten the win. It was telling that Ciryl Gane’s corner wasn’t even celebrating at first, almost as if they expected Volkov to be awarded the win. Gane himself walked out of the cage and had to be called back in, and when asked why he answered, “he wasn’t happy with his performance”, hinting that he too thought he lost the fight and was surprised by the decision.
There was also some discontent online regarding the Evloev/Sterling fight, and though it was close, I do believe that decision was correct, despite what many online are saying. Henry Cejudo was one notable critic of the decision, saying “Aljo controlled more of the time. He gets the nod for me”.
Either way, wrong decisions can have a huge impact on a fighter’s career. If Volkov had won, he would’ve been in line to fight the winner of Jon Jones versus Tom Aspinall (if and when that eventually happens). Now, with a loss, he’s back into contention, likely having to fight someone else to work his way back to a potential title shot.
These kinds of decisions need to be corrected or at least investigated. Whatever is going on with UFC judging is causing a lot of debates. For example, some believe Ciryl Gane vs. Tom Aspinall is more marketable, and that’s why certain fighters might get the edge in decisions. Other times it may be because the organisation wants to protect a fighter’s undefeated record. Whilst these kinds of comments are running rampant online, what we don’t want is the UFC turning into boxing, where questionable decisions are more common. Dana White was quick to dismiss the investigation of the questionable h=judging in the post-fight press conference. Though he disagreed with both the Battle and Gane decisions, he said “It doesn’t matter what he thinks or what you or I think, the only thing that matters is what the commission thinks.”
It will certainly matter to Alexander Volkov and Randy Brown, but they won’t be the last to be affected by this. Let’s hope we’ll have better judging in 2025, but I won’t get my hopes up…
Subscribe
