In a Bantamweight (135 lbs.) fight that saw Kyung Ho Kang come out and start to dominate from very early on against Shunichi Shimizu, I saw one of the stranger bits of refereeing that I can recall. At 3:34 in the First Round, after having mounted his opponent, Kang went for a Triangle choke and rolled over to his back, his opponent fully sunk into the choke. Shimizu gamely defended the choke, causing Kang to start chaining together submission attempts, moving between Triangle chokes and Armbars, sometimes even going for both at the same time. At the 2:02 mark, Kang landed two of what appeared to be illegal “12-6” elbows initially, but upon further review, I would say that “2-8” would be more applicable as far as the downward angle is concerned. Referee Steve Perceval separated the fighters, with Shimizu still seeming to be in decent shape, even motioning to Kang that his 12-6 elbows were illegal. After making sure that the ringside physician was checking on Shimizu, Perceval then announced that he was taking two points from Kang, as opposed to the usual one-point deduction.  This precipitated a lot of boos from the crowd, boos to which I’d be inclined to agree with.

Seeking further information on the subject, I was grateful to have the chance to speak with Mike King; who since beginning his refereeing career in 2006 has refereed hundreds of Pro MMA bouts, much less the countless more Amateur MMA bouts he has overseen. He informed me that while he agreed with the separation of the fighters and calling the ringside physician into the cage to check on Shimizu, that he disagreed with the two-point deduction from Kang, going on to say that a one-point deduction would be much more appropriate. He went on to elaborate on the subject and his experience with it, citing the need for staying on top of the fighters with preemptive verbal commands to watch where their blows are landing, not just separating the fighters upon the instance of a foul itself. King also stated that a two-point deduction for anything less than an obviously intentional foul seemed a bit unprecedented and excessive, confirming my suspicion that UFC referee (and I say UFC referee due to the fact that since the bout took place in Singapore, where there is no recognized sanctioning body or athletic commission, which in those instances, the UFC imports their own referees) Steve Perceval was a bit heavy-handed in the way he dealt with the situation.

Shimizu was clearly in good shape to continue, so the fight thankfully went on. Commentator Jon Anik brought up a very good point once the fight resumed, stating that what was looking like a 10-8 round for Kang turned into, at best, a 8-8 round for him, or most likely, a 9-8 round for Shimizu. To extrapolate Kang’s predicament, that would mean that barring him getting a clean sweep for every round going forward, he was at great risk for having the fight scored as a Draw, or even worse, a Loss for him. Luckily, the dominance that Kang began to showcase early on into the fight continued, with Kang nailing Shimizu with audibly hard elbows and thunderous punches from the top position in guard. After more than two minutes of eating numerous hard blows, blows that contributed to one of his eyes being almost swollen shut, Shimizu began to wilt under the barrage of Kang. After a brief scramble, Kang ended up on top in mount and locked in an Arm Triangle choke that almost immediately forced Shimizu to tap. This was very fortunate for Kang, for as explained before, the unprecedented two-point deduction could have very well caused him to achieve a Draw, or even lose the fight via decision if the fight had gone the distance. I know that there is no referee alive who has always made the right calls, but it would have been a shame to see such a dominant performance marred by a questionable call by the referee.

Luckily, Kyung Ho Kang finished the fight before he could’ve run afoul of the scorecards!