I can’t recall much (any?) discussion about “cage fighting” on this site.
Though perhaps not targeting the same demographic as the Almanac, readers will be aware of this massive Entertainment/Sporting juggernaut and the decision to promote tournaments in Melbourne.
Some argue the “barbaric” line – challenged often by others citing it as safer than boxing.
Is it really good enough to say that licensing avoids its flourishing underground (the safe shoot-up clause)? By that logic we could approve anything.
Has Labor made a sports or an economic call?
It is a vexing issue, certainly one that I know little about but probably should learn enough to hold an informed position.
Enlighten me please?!
Crio – I love a top shelf boxing encounter. Two superbly fit, strong, balanced, fast athletes executing immense skill under enormous pressure. Unfortunately a lot of boxing matches are just money churning slug-fests.
I’m in the barbaric camp with cage fighting. Proponents go down the “its safer in a cage” route when the defending the sport. Yeah, well, I suppose it is if you’re kicking your opponent in the head. To me the issue is not so much the connotations around fighting in a cage (like trained, killer dogs or spiked up cocks), but more the fact that the fighters are almost bare knuckle. The gloves they wear carry less padding than a cricket glove.
Having said that I’m not in favour of things being banned, unless their intention is to deliberately harm the community. Cage fighting is not setting out to do that. Too many people want things banned because they insult their own sensibilities. Its not a good enough reason. Regulate it, keep it free of corruption, and ensure those engaging in it are properly trained. People like me just won’t go and watch.
A moral quandary for me, Crio, in that it’s brilliant to watch but ideologically insupportable. I don’t see it as any more or less objectionable than boxing and surely it’s a matter of time before litigation shuts down any industry that relies on people getting repeatedly hit in the head as a key feature. In the meantime they’ll make haymakers while the sun shines.
As for padding on gloves – remove them altogether. Jawbones are stronger than unpadded knuckles.
I don’t know much about cage fighting; how many rounds, how long are the rounds, what rules ??? Can some one please advise me .
One of the big changes in ‘the noble art’ is the days of 15 round bouts is long gone. I can’t recall a 15 rounder since the 1980’s. They certianly were punishing encounters but some blokes thrived on them. Frankie Ropis was certainly a pug who could go the dstance.
Glen!
I’m with you Dips. Can’t just ban things because they are against some (most?) people’s sensibilities.Plenty of sports have levels of danger to the participants so as long as they are aware of that, it’s up to them. There are probably stats “proving” that it is safer than some other sports. Is the argument to ban this to protect the participants or the audience?
I try and stay out of the loop as much as I can thesedays where pop culture is concerned, crio, but what is this ‘cage fighting’ you talk of? Is it the MMA type of fighting with the grapplers/Ju Jitsu to the fore, or just some some losers in a cage poking each others eyes out?
If it be the former, then to stinking hell with whatever po faced wowsers are against it. Those blokes are genuine athletes, and you can be George Foreman or Mike Tyson, but if your killer punch doesn’t connect fairly quickly after the bell, you’re going down.
Skip, I haven’t the foggiest, but I wondered if “no idea/opinion” was a gutless default to an issue which seems to get some riled.
‘No idea/opinion’ is not a gutless default. Neutral is a good place to be. Often.
Just guessing, but more young blokes probably hurt themselves trying to emulate the Crusty Demons than from ‘Cage Fighting’.
Maybe some promise of ‘Cage Fighting Equality’ will appease these opponents.