The "Open Attack Rule" in MMA

[Nastycrow]

Originally posted by: Fight Magnet
Date: August 31, 2012 at 02:05 PM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/the-open-attack-rule-in-mma.48322/

The Open Attack Rule is a rule meant to protect the fighter. The ref in a split second has to determine whether the fighter can legitimately defend himself. When he reaches this conclusion, he calls "Open Attack" to the attacking fighter. The said fighter can then legally deliver Head strikes to a downed opponent, either knee or kicks.
What are the benefits, and draw backs to the "Open Attack rule" in mma. In these 2 gifs it looks fairly clear that the Refs are incapable of determining when the "Open Attack Rule" should be effectively employed. Heurta appears to be out of it completely as the result of a solid knee strike landed while standing with his back to the cage just prior, and the Ref subsequently calls Open Attack to his detriment. Where as Tim at least has the presence of mind, (for whatever reason) to crawl to the cage. The Ref chooses not to call Open Attack, and Arlovski pays the price for it by having a legit win taken away.
I guess it comes down to training the Refs, and we already know that they can sometimes display incompetence with the rule set as is. Does this give them one more area to f--- up in regards to the rule?
Should the Unified Rules of MMA adopt this rule?
I'm Pro "Open Attack Rule" for one reason and feel it could be of benefit in one area in particular in the UFC. While watching Edgar vs Benson 2, Ben employed the three point stance (more than once), to avoid the attack of Edgar who had him clinched and crumpled on the bottom but still in a standing position. We've heard Herb Dean use the term "you're playing the game" in another similar instance (forget the fighters) who was also employing this three point stance. I think Couture has used it as well (3 point stance)in addition to others. It also lead to some controversy in the Nate Diaz vs Stun Gunn fight, when it was determined Stunn Gunn was a downed opponent while Diaz landed head strikes.
If this rule was in place while fighters were "playing the game" the Ref could call "Open Attack" allowing the fight to progress, while at the same time not disadvantaging the dominant fighter.
As it stands the "Downed Opponent Rule" is meant to protect the fighters from being crowded against the cage as opposed to ropes (Pride) and having viscous head strikes landed. Defending fighters have twisted the rule and started "Playing the Game" with it.
Thoughts?

 

[Nastycrow]

Originally posted by: Spud
Date: August 31, 2012 at 02:10 PM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/the-open-attack-rule-in-mma.48322/

FIGHTMAGNET said:
Should the UFC adopt this rule?
Click to expand...
The UFC can't just introduce soccer kicks, with an "open attack" rule or not. They don't decide the rules, the Athletic Commissions do.
Just not allowing soccer kicks is better than having an "open attack" rule.

 

[Nastycrow]

Originally posted by: wolf
Date: August 31, 2012 at 02:15 PM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/the-open-attack-rule-in-mma.48322/

Spud said:
FIGHTMAGNET said:
Should the UFC adopt this rule?
Click to expand...
The UFC can't just introduce soccer kicks, with an "open attack" rule or not. They don't decide the rules, the Athletic Commissions do.
Just not allowing soccer kicks is better than having an "open attack" rule.
Click to expand...
I don't like the Open Attack rule. And this poster is right. It's not up to the UFC, it's up to the athletic commissions. The IMMAF should figure this one out. Anyways, I don't like it and don't think it's necessary in the UFC.

 

[Nastycrow]

Originally posted by: Fight Magnet
Date: August 31, 2012 at 02:20 PM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/the-open-attack-rule-in-mma.48322/

Spud said:
FIGHTMAGNET said:
Should the Unified Rules of MMA adopt this rule?
Click to expand...
The UFC can't just introduce soccer kicks, with an "open attack" rule or not. They don't decide the rules, the Athletic Commissions do.
Just not allowing soccer kicks is better than having an "open attack" rule.
Click to expand...
My bad, fixed. Taking that to literally.
That's a simple way of doing nothing to address problems in the rules, and not one I'm opposed to, but I've pointed out something that's taking place in mma, that "should" be addressed and the "Open Attack Rule" would deal with the issue.
The saying if it's not broke don't fix it like you're suggesting, doesn't apply entirely from my pov, because there's still the issue of fighters "Playing the Game"

 

[Nastycrow]

Originally posted by: Fight Magnet
Date: August 31, 2012 at 02:28 PM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/the-open-attack-rule-in-mma.48322/

wolf said:
Spud said:
FIGHTMAGNET said:
Should the Unified Rules of MMA adopt this rule?
Click to expand...
The UFC can't just introduce soccer kicks, with an "open attack" rule or not. They don't decide the rules, the Athletic Commissions do.
Just not allowing soccer kicks is better than having an "open attack" rule.
Click to expand...
I don't like the Open Attack rule. And this poster is right. It's not up to the UFC, it's up to the athletic commissions. The IMMAF should figure this one out. Anyways, I don't like it and don't think it's necessary in the UFC.
Click to expand...
Try thinking outside the box for a bit, you two are addressing a point that's being taken to literal. My bad, for incorrectly narrowing it down to the largest MMA promotion in the world. Your point is one both of you could safely assume I already know.

 

[Nastycrow]

Originally posted by: Fight Magnet
Date: August 31, 2012 at 02:49 PM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/the-open-attack-rule-in-mma.48322/

The Open Attack rule would counter situations like this, a tactic that amounts to stalling a fight. This would be a benefit to MMA imo.

 

[Nastycrow]

Originally posted by: Ian2D
Date: August 31, 2012 at 02:51 PM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/the-open-attack-rule-in-mma.48322/

Where was "open attack" when Huerta got his head kicked off?

 

[Nastycrow]

Originally posted by: Fight Magnet
Date: August 31, 2012 at 02:57 PM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/the-open-attack-rule-in-mma.48322/

Ian2D said:
Where was "open attack" when Huerta got his head kicked off?
Click to expand...
That was addressed in the OP, from my pov the Ref called Open Attack incorrectly in that instance. That's not to say the rule couldn't benefit MMA. There's no argument that in the two instances that Open Attack have been allowed in ONE Fc, that they were used incorrectly imo at least. It's not the first, won't be the last time a ref makes the wrong call.
"Don't throw the baby out with the bath water", so the saying goes.

 

[Nastycrow]

Originally posted by: abc0331
Date: August 31, 2012 at 03:05 PM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/the-open-attack-rule-in-mma.48322/

FIGHTMAGNET said:
Ian2D said:
Where was "open attack" when Huerta got his head kicked off?
Click to expand...
That was addressed in the OP, from my pov the Ref called Open Attack incorrectly in that instance. That's not to say the rule couldn't benefit MMA. There's no argument that in the two instances that Open Attack have been allowed in ONE Fc, that they were used incorrectly imo at least. It's not the first, won't be the last time a ref makes the wrong call.
Click to expand...
The rulings needs a more of a clear signal.
I know I'm not there, but it is hard to see in all the fights they have used it.
Not sure what I think about the rule itself; but I think it needs to be changed a bit before it would be as intended. --That being said, it is kind of deluded and unclear about what makes what circumstance, and when there are a slight bit of grey area in the rules, fights will retain a bit of controversies.

 

[Nastycrow]

Originally posted by: Fight Magnet
Date: August 31, 2012 at 03:23 PM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/the-open-attack-rule-in-mma.48322/

abc0331 said:
The rulings needs a more of a clear signal.
I know I'm not there, but it is hard to see in all the fights they have used it.
Not sure what I think about the rule itself; but I think it needs to be changed a bit before it would be as intended. --That being said, it is kind of deluded and unclear about what makes what circumstance, and when there are a slight bit of grey area in the rules, fights will retain a bit of controversies.
Click to expand...
The Open Attack ruling is a
Verbal command
given by the Ref. Which would tie in with "Obey my commands at all times".

 

[Nastycrow]

Originally posted by: condrab
Date: August 31, 2012 at 03:55 PM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/the-open-attack-rule-in-mma.48322/

I'm against soccer kicks, but I would be ok with knees to a downed opponent. That being said It shouldn't be up to the ref to determine when a fighter can or can't use a legal technique. Either a fighter can't defend themselves and the fight is over, or a fighter can defend themselves and whatever is legal can be used.

 

[Nastycrow]

Originally posted by: mabrown45
Date: August 31, 2012 at 04:17 PM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/the-open-attack-rule-in-mma.48322/

so the idea is to give yet another thing the refs can screw up?.......i think they have enough on their plates
there should be no verbal command...........they should just get rid of the 1 hand down rule completely.

 

[Nastycrow]

Originally posted by: PsychoIcon
Date: August 31, 2012 at 04:56 PM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/the-open-attack-rule-in-mma.48322/

The Rule is Made to protect the defenseless fighter...
Not for one fighter to protect himself with the rules...

 

[Nastycrow]

Originally posted by: Puxin
Date: August 31, 2012 at 05:47 PM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/the-open-attack-rule-in-mma.48322/

Judges should be instructed to credit the opponent with a takedown every time a fighter is "downed". Putting your hand on the ground may prevent a knee to the head, but it could also cost you the round, particularly if you do it 3-4 times in quick succession.

 

[Nastycrow]

Originally posted by: Fight Magnet
Date: August 31, 2012 at 06:21 PM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/the-open-attack-rule-in-mma.48322/

condrab said:
I'm against soccer kicks, but I would be ok with knees to a downed opponent. That being said It shouldn't be up to the ref to determine when a fighter can or can't use a legal technique. Either a fighter can't defend themselves and the fight is over, or a fighter can defend themselves and whatever is legal can be used.
Click to expand...
There you go, same here, I'm not advocating for soccer kicks in the UFC, but more so options to keep the fight moving (in one particular scenario specifically). In addition to, potentially, realizing there's benefits to thinking outside the box when it comes to the rules, as Matt Hume has tried to do here in ONE FC.
I'm ok with knees to a "downed opponent" as well, but the whole reason this rule was implemented was with the introduction of the cage. The powers that be deemed it more dangerous to have a combatant crowded against the cage and be susceptible to head strikes, combined with having that head with no where to go but into the cage compounding the damage. The cage also limits options for escape. So in that scenario I think the downed opponent rule has it's benefits, which also means scrapping the rule completely doesn't sit well with me. In the center of the cage is something different, this is where I'm for the use of head strikes on downed opponents.
So now you have a somewhat beneficial rule in certain circumstances, but fighters have adapted and like Psycho says are using the rule to protect themselves, not the reason they were implemented. By adopting/adapting an Open Attack rule as well you're possibly getting the best of both worlds, protecting the fighters and at the same time negating any playing the game by fighters.

 

[Nastycrow]

Originally posted by: Fight Magnet
Date: August 31, 2012 at 06:31 PM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/the-open-attack-rule-in-mma.48322/

Puxin said:
Judges should be instructed to credit the opponent with a takedown every time a fighter is "downed". Putting your hand on the ground may prevent a knee to the head, but it could also cost you the round, particularly if you do it 3-4 times in quick succession.
Click to expand...
Sounds good, what happens when a fighter is legitimately trying to get to his feet? Can a judge recognize this from his position? The third man in has the best vantage point, so allowing Judges to make this determination could be overly harsh, where as, giving the Ref the option keeps the fight active in real time. Although after the fact consequences could very well solve the issue.

 

[Nastycrow]

Originally posted by: Fight Magnet
Date: August 31, 2012 at 06:52 PM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/the-open-attack-rule-in-mma.48322/

Matt Hume Sheds Light on ONE FC's Blended Rule-set.
Chief official and head referee Matt Hume talks about ONE FC's blended ruleset, a combination of "the best of" Unified and PRIDE rules. He also clarifies the promotion's stance on soccer kicks to grounded opponents, and the "Open Attack" rule.
Click to expand...
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/v/pQx-JzxQ6R8?rel=0[/youtube]

 

[Nastycrow]

Originally posted by: wolf
Date: August 31, 2012 at 06:57 PM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/the-open-attack-rule-in-mma.48322/

giving incompetent refs more power over a fighters safety is not the way to go....not now anyways. Have it one way or the other. You can or you can't use soccer kicks / kick downed opponents.

 

[Nastycrow]

Originally posted by: PsychoIcon
Date: August 31, 2012 at 07:01 PM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/the-open-attack-rule-in-mma.48322/

This is where a union would help some.

 

[Nastycrow]

Originally posted by: wolf
Date: August 31, 2012 at 07:04 PM
Source: https://forum.mmajunkie.com/threads/the-open-attack-rule-in-mma.48322/

PsychoIcon said:
This is where a union would help some.
Click to expand...
IMMAF should step in and unify all the rules across the board everywhere so we don't have to deal with this s---.