FightHounds

Fight Hounds recently caught up with one of Ireland’s top MMA referees Dave Jones to get his thoughts on what it takes to be an MMA ref, controversial UFC decisions and more… 

FH: Hi Dave, first of all thanks for talking to us. Could you tell us a little bit about you got involved in MMA?:

DJ: I have been involved with Martial Arts since the age of 6 beginning with Wado Ryu Karate, moving through Kenpo Karate, Aikido, Wing Chun and freestyle Kung Fu with “the odd bit of Japanese Jiu Jitsu thrown in.” In late 1996, I saw the Rickson Gracie documentary ‘Choke’ and the first two UFCs around the same time and thought this is what I want to do and my involvement with MMA began. I met up with John Kavanagh in 1998 and he set up a small training group split between De La Salle Churchtown, St Andrew’s College where I work and a primary school in Rathfarnham. I got into MMA because number one I liked the idea of it, and number two I firmly believe no one should coach it without having done it, and having taken it up quite late, I knew coaching would be where I would spend most of my time. I fought eight amateur fights, with a record of four wins, two losses, one draw and one No Contest. Three were in the UK and five in the US while I was training over there. I fought seven professional fights, the first being on the first MMA show in the UK – Cage Wars in Portsmouth. I opened Next Generation in association with Chris Brennan in 2002 and taught BJJ and coached MMA for close to 10 years.

FH: What kind of training is involved in becoming a qualified MMA referee?

DJ:

Well first and foremost, there are no “qualifications” for MMA refereeing. There are many referees offering all sorts of courses that purport to prepare people for refereeing. Most of these courses are run by referees looking to supplement their income.  Below are a few of the things I believe you need to become a MMA referee and in my opinion you can’t pick these up on a weekend course. 1. Intelligence; I believe that you must be able to assess quickly the action as it unfolds and decide how it affects fighter safety and is it within the rules (safety and rules being the two primary focuses of a referee). You must also learn to anticipate what may happen next and be ready to stop a bout on the basis of either of the two focuses I mentioned. 2. Impartiality; You must remain impartial and view the fight not from a fans perspective or a coach’s one but from a neutral position solely focused on safety and the rules. You can’t relax and “watch” fights, you are constantly analysing and assessing. 3. Integrity; You must remain at all times a professional both in preparation, manners and attitude, before during and after fights. It is important to keep a distance between you and the “internet analysts” who aren’t always in possession of the full facts when they are questioning a decision or an outcome of a fight. You must learn to deal with that in a mature manner.

I guess I am lucky in that I was involved in the sport from its infancy in Ireland and my experiences as a fighter and coach have stood me in good stead as a MMA referee. I have a Degree and Postgrad in Physical Education, I was always involved in sports from a young age and I am a qualified Basketball and Rugby referee through my involvement in both those sports so I am well used to the decision making that is required for refereeing.

FH: Recently there have been a couple of ‘controversial’ decisions with Carlos Condit being awarded a unanimous decision over Nick Diaz and before that Chael Sonnen getting the nod over the Michael Bisping. What did you make of those two decisions?

DJ: Three Independent judges are going to or at least should view things independently, however I do sometimes wonder what fight judges were watching when I see some of the results. In my opinion I think judges should have had some experience in either coaching or fighting. Given the age profile of some of the judges that isn’t always possible, but I do think that unless you can view fights from the experience of striking, clinch and ground ranges then you are at a disadvantage as a judge. With regard to the Diaz fight, I think the right decision was made, I had it 3 rounds to Condit, 1 to Diaz and 1 round a draw. Sonnen v Bisping was probably closer, and Bisping was probably due such a decision since his own against Matt Hamill in the UK earlier in his career was just as “controversial”. I am not saying that the latter came into play at all and nor should it but if you let a fight go to the judges you run the risk of it not going your way. Not all judges are coming from a practical knowledge base and fighters need to remember that.

FH: The Condit/Diaz decision was especially contentious with a lot of people saying that Diaz deserved the win because he was ‘pushing the action.’ But how relevant is that considering Condit’s stick-and-move game-plan?

DJ: Diaz pressed forward but did very little to capitalise on that. Condit countered constantly and stuffed pretty much all takedown attempts. The fight was 90% on the feet which means the heavier weighting of the scoring was based on effective striking and on that alone Condit won the fight. If the fight is mainly on the ground, then submissions and GnP get heavier weighting. If the fight is 50% up and 50% on the ground then more equal weighting is given. Finally if those first two criteria are equal for both athletes you move to “octagon control” and purposeful aggression. In the case of Diaz v Condit, there was no need to move past the first criterion i.e. effective striking.

FH: Another somewhat controversial decision was made at UFC 142 when Erick Silva was disqualified for punches to the back of the head. Some people argue that the back of the head is the area a Mohawk hair style would cover, while others say it everything behind the ears. What did you think of that decision and what do you consider the ‘back of the head’?

DJ: Firstly the biggest mistake in that fight was Mario Yamasaki not walking out of the cage and avoiding a cringe-worthy trial by TV from Joe Rogan. According to Mario he warned Silva more than once regarding the back of the head, and the video shows at least 1 strike to the back of the head after his warning. Do I think the illegal strike (s) changed the outcome of the fight, absolutely not but rules are there to be enforced and if the fighter was warned (please don’t forget fighters attend a rules meeting so that counts as a warning for all infringement too) then Yamasaki made the call as he saw fit. Silva is experienced enough to target his strikes he just got carried away in my opinion rather like Belfort vs Akiyama. I go by the headphones but also if the glove of the striking fighter can hit the ear of the fighter being struck then its legal. If there is no contact with the ear then it is an illegal strike. Fighters are informed of this at every rules meeting given by me.

FH: Have you ever had to make a tough call like that in a fight?

DJ: Not that sort of situation no thankfully. Fighters and coaches need to remember that any decisions a good referee makes, are for the safety of the athletes involved. We aren’t out to spoil records or ruin anyone’s evening. My job is to protect fighters from themselves a lot of the time, not wanting to tap, wanting to continue after being KO’d or close to it etc. The other side is the enforcement of the rules and only late last year I had to disqualify someone for a soccer kick to the head of downed opponent. To be fair he knew immediately what he had done but had been watching “Pride” fights the week leading up to his fight! Not an excuse, and not the first time I have heard it!

FH: Can you remember the best fight you’ve been in involved in?

DJ: Wow that is a really tough one! I have been lucky to be in charge of so many great fights over the years. Picking just one would be near impossible. The standard in this country is just getting better and better as well.

FH: What do you make of the rapid expansion of Irish MMA? It must be exciting to be involved as a ref when the quality of the fights is improving constantly.

DJ: Like I said above, the standard is improving show to show and as long as the match making is done well then there is always the potential for a “fight of the night” from every fight on a card. The “C” class rule changes have improved the standard of the amateur fights, which were often stalemates due to rule restrictions. So yes it is a very exciting time to be involved.

FH: Where will you be plying your trade next?

DJ: I have just done Man of War 3 and the next show for me is Cage Contender on the 25th February in the NBA in Tallaght. It is always a great atmosphere and always has some great fights.

FH: Finally Dave, anyone you want to give a shout out to?

DJ: I guess a big shout out to all the promoters who continue have me adjudicate at their shows. To the fighters and coaches who continue to trust that I will always and without question put the safety of the athletes first. To Peter Lavery, Dec Larkin, Aidan Marron and Johnny Shiels who I have worked with over the years at various shows up and down the country. Thanks to you guys to for the interview. Cheers.

Dave was talking to Alan Keane.

Photo Credit: MMA Kaptured.

Advertise Your Company On Fight Hounds