NSAC Executive Director Keith Kizer says instant replay possible by end of year
While much of the post-UFC 99 fallout has focused squarely on Mirko "Cro Cop" Filipovic's apparent snub of the UFC, the Croatian striker's path to victory over Mostapha Al Turk has been relatively ignored.
While difficult to pick up live, replays of the action from Saturday's main-card bout in Cologne, Germany clearly show a single poke to both of Al Turk's eyes led directly to the ensuing TKO win for Filipovic.
While Al Turk was left without recourse based on current MMA regulations, Nevada State Athletic Commission Executive Director Keith Kizer on Tuesday told MMAjunkie.com (
www.mmajunkie.com) that change could be quickly coming in the form of instant replay.
"We're trying to find out if there's a way to do limited instant replay," Kizer told MMAjunkie.com's George Garcia and John Morgan on Tuesday's edition of "GoodSports," co-hosted by Garcia. "We're hoping to find a way to do that."
When the UFC ventures abroad to countries lacking an athletic commission, the organization and its Vice President of Regulatory Affairs (and former NSAC Executive Director), Marc Ratner, turn to the NSAC's regulations for guidance.
Had instant replay been available for Saturday's contest, referee Dan Miragliotta could have noted the illegal strike, a move that would have resulted in a no-contest based on the apparent accidental nature of the strike.
Kizer said the same potential regulation change could have also assisted UFC welterweight Anthony Johnson avoid an unnecessary loss in his July 2008 bout with Kevin Burns, a bout held under the NSAC's jurisdiction in Las Vegas. Johnson also fell prey to an eye poke that was not immediately detected by the match's referee, Steve Mazzagatti.
Burns was then awarded a TKO-win following the illegal blow.
Had instant replay been able to point out the unintentional foul, the bout would have gone immediately to the judges for an official result. Having clearly secured the bout's opening two rounds, Johnson would have walked away a technical-decision winner.
"Actually [instant replay] was Marc's idea years ago, and it just never went anywhere – mainly because of technology – but now I think we're finally there," Kizer said. "It has to be a foul or a stoppage that immediately ends the fight. You would never change the strategy.
"Let's say the doctor looked at Mr. Al Turk, or the situation we had with Anthony Johnson, and says, 'He can not continue.' So the fight's over, so it's not going to change the strategy whether the referee changes his mind on the call. In those situations, then the ref can look at it and say, 'You know what, it was an accidental foul. Let's go to the scorecards.' Or in the other situation, 'I thought it was an accidental foul to go to the scorecards, but on instant replay it was actually a legal punch.' Either way, the fighter could not continue, so it wouldn't have mattered, and we can take our time and look at it."
Kizer explained that a potentially illegal blow that immediately leads to the end of the bout would be the only situation in which he envisions instant replay making its way into mixed martial arts.
"The problem with instant replay is, of course, even in football once the next play starts you can't go back and review something," Kizer said. "It's the same with boxing or MMA. You can't go back at the end of the round and look at whether something happened, say, one minute into the round. Had the ref called it differently, the rest of the round might have happened differently.
"I've had pretty intelligent boxing people say, 'You could review between rounds whether a knockdown happened.' No, you couldn't, because if Fighter A knocks down Fighter B, but the ref calls it a slip, then at the end of the round you say, 'That was a knockdown,' Fighter B would say, rightly so, 'Wait a second. Had I known that was a knockdown, I would have tried for my own knockdown to try and even out the round. But it was called a slip, so I treated it like a slip.'"
Kizer compared the use of instant replay in any situation other than a fight-ending blow to the NFL allowing instant replay to adjust a score following the conclusion of a game.
"It's like after the game saying, 'You know, that field goal by the Falcons was wide, so instead of winning by two, they lose by one,'" Kizer said. "The Falcons would say, 'Wait, we took a knee at the end because we were up by two. We would have done a Hail Mary.'
"You just can't do it."
Therefore, an illegal blow that goes unnoticed by the bout's referee and does not immediately lead to the end of the contest would be unaffected by a potential regulation change involving instant replay.
Also important to note is that Kizer envisions a system in which the referee would be solely responsible for the ultimate decision.
"Once there's some action in that contest, you can't go back," Kizer said. "Let's say the referee doesn't stop it and the knee was down and the guy got kneed in the head but the fight continued and the referee didn't stop it, there's nothing you can do about that now because the continuation.
"It would only be those situations where there's an immediate stoppage of the fight and the ref wants to know was it an illegal blow, an intentional foul or an accidental foul that immediately stopped the fight. Then it would still be [the referee's] discretion. It wouldn't be up to the commission. It wouldn't be the corner. It wouldn't be the promoter. It would be the referee's decision, just like in football. If he looks at it and he can't tell, you've got to go with the original call."
As with any potential change to the sport's regulations, instant replay will undoubtedly receive its share of criticism. But for Al Turk on Saturday – or Johnson nearly one year ago – it's a revelation that could have assisted match officials in coming to the most logical decision in their unfortunate situations.
And while thinks don't always move quickly when government agencies are involved, Kizer said the NSAC could potentially institute the change before the end of the year.
"I would think you could see it as early as the end of the year if the commission agrees to make that regulatory change," Kizer said. "The proposal will be in front of them this summer. Whether they pass it or not – then it takes time to cautify it – it could be near the end of the year."
