|
The point is not that Zuffa can't do more to prevent steroid abuse. The point is Josh was pointing a finger at Dana for something he knows full well Dana cannot change.
- Let's say Dana would implement a policy of weekly testing of all fighters contracted to the UFC. All fighters that are caught would be banned permanently. Okay great, less steroid abuse. Now what happens to the fighters that are caught, or refuse to compete in the UFC because of this (since they rely on steroids to stay on top)? They leave and join another org. Their fans leave with them. The UFC loses money, and another org gains.
Now obviously this was an extreme example I put up, but the point is the same. Why should the UFC do any more to test their fighters? The UFC are currently doing more than most other MMA orgs by simply hosting many of their events, including title fights, in areas where they ARE tested. An obvious example of that is UFC fighters ARE getting caught. Why is Josh not pointing fingers at orgs where fighters are NEVER getting caught?
Josh was making a completely unreasonable request and throwing sarcastic jibes at the UFC and Dana in his post. Dana's reply was to be expected (well, I had hoped it would contain less profanities but that's beside the point). (I am of course assuming the reply actually came from Dana, as I have still not seen any confirmation that the message was authenticate).
And Josh also pointed a finger at Renato Sobral and claimed he shouldn't be fighting because of an altercation he had, which may be because he was verbally abused or something like that. And I guess BJ Penn shouldn't be fighting either since he assaulted some guy in hawaii once. And Mike Tyson never should have gotten a chance to box after he was convicted of rape. I'm sorry but that's not how the fighting world works. If a promoter refuses to promote fighters who have commited a crime, especially when the crime is something like Renato was accused of, some other organization/promoter is simply going to grab the fighter and it will end up being lost revenue for the UFC, for what? The sport is no less tarnished if the fighter is still fighting, and the majority of MMA fans are not going to care about a minor altercation or some such offense.
To put it simply, Josh was just trying to stir shit up. He was telling the UFC how to run their company, not only that but in a way that would make them lose money and do little for the 'sport' as the UFC hardly have the same sort of authority over it as the heads of the NFL or NBA do in their respective sports. He was quite simply deserving of an angry rebuttal by Dana/Zuffa for that article.
Last edited by Tauron : 07-21-2007 at 10:11 PM.
|