Official Conor McGregor thread (part 2). **Read warning in 1st post**

EagererBeaver

Do you disagree that that takedown could have been huge depending on how the fight had been scored or something?

When someone is commentating live, they're commentating on the immediacy of the action unfolding in front of them. They're not thinking "I wonder if I should say this in case little johnny back home in Dublin thinks I'm doing McGregor a disservice because now that I think about it, he landed a really good combination three minutes ago that may have had a big impact with the judges that I need to take into consideration when I comment on the takedown right in front of my eyes. Oh ****, fight's over"

wonderfullife

EagererBeaver wrote: »

Do you disagree that that takedown could have been huge depending on how the fight had been scored or something?

When someone is commentating live, they're commentating on the immediacy of the action unfolding in front of them. They're not thinking "I wonder if I should say this in case little johnny back home in Dublin thinks I'm doing McGregor a disservice because now that I think about it, he landed a really good combination three minutes ago that may have had a big impact with the judges that I need to take into consideration when I comment on the takedown right in front of my eyes. Oh ****, fight's over"

Biased commentary in all sports doesn't do particular fans a dis-service. It does the sport a dis-service.

The reason commentators try to remain impartial is because they owe a duty to their sport to try give all new and casual fans the chance to enjoy the sport. The last thing Sky Sports want is a new fan to tune in for Manchester United v Liverpool with Martin Tyler talking in a monotone when Liverpool attack but shrieking with excitement anytime Man Utd go forward.

Sport can be overwhelming. I know a lot of people, men and women, who won't give NFL or Snooker a go because they haven't a notion what the rules are and feel lost watching it.

I'm not derailing this thread after the Mousasi incident lol. If you have time re-watch the fight and notice the difference in Rogans excitement levels when Nate threw flurries, which mostly missed, and when Conor was dropping him at will.

Easy Rod

EagererBeaver wrote: »

Do you disagree that that takedown could have been huge depending on how the fight had been scored or something?

When someone is commentating live, they're commentating on the immediacy of the action unfolding in front of them. They're not thinking "I wonder if I should say this in case little johnny back home in Dublin thinks I'm doing McGregor a disservice because now that I think about it, he landed a really good combination three minutes ago that may have had a big impact with the judges that I need to take into consideration when I comment on the takedown right in front of my eyes. Oh ****, fight's over"

There is very little argument to be made that Rogan wasn't biased in the fight. He absolutely was. It's not a massive deal but it's worth pointing out. I doubt he explicitly set out to do it either it's just something that happened naturally.

wonderfullife

Back on topic, anybody else think the UFC are playing a strange game re: promotion lately?

McGregor said that UFC 202 did 1.65m buys with very little promotional push and a weak undercard and that he expects 205 to do 2m+ with full promotional push.

We're 18 days from fight night and i'm not really seeing the huge push. Yet.

There's still time but they were pushing UFC 200 way harder around this time.

Is this a deliberate strategy under the new WME/IMG regime? To cut back on promotional expense as part of an overall cost-cutting program?

Or, as others noted, are they relying on McGregor and Alvarez to do more promoting?

Diaz and McGregor effectively promoted 202 themselves with the Mac Life video series and Diaz with his Road 2 War video series.

Fighters don't get paid, explicitly, for their own promotional efforts. The top stars reap the rewards on the back-end through PPV points but they are not actually paid to do it.

I really thought by now we'd have seen huge plugs for the event on Conan O' Brien, Jimmy Kimmel, ramping up the use of TMZ, releasing McGregor and Alvarez documentaries etc.

Other than the Live Like Legends promo, the UFC haven't done much.

EagererBeaver

Please, as if Sky Sports or BT Sport could give a ****e about impartiality. United played Hull earlier in the season and the three pundits in the studio were Rio Ferdinand, Paul Scholes and Alex Bruce, son of recently departed Hull manager Steve. Rio insisted on using "we" all the time. Jamie Redknapp has done all but fellate his dad live on TV any number of times. It's not just pundits either - Niall Quinn as an example.

Of course impartial commentary is crucial. So is impartial "journalism" for that matter. So maybe you should stop deciding how people feel about judging decisions off the back of a two second clip of a facial expression or selectively choosing individual comments from a 25 minute fight.

darced

This post has been deleted.

wonderfullife

EagererBeaver wrote: »

So maybe you should stop deciding how people feel about judging decisions off the back of a two second clip of a facial expression or selectively choosing individual comments from a 25 minute fight.

Ok. This is my final reply to you on this. If you read my article (which you said you've no intention of) you'd see i'm not "deciding how people feel on the back of facial expressions or selected comments".

Here's my thoughts from my article:

Fans have to contend with 3 things when judging this Round and often they are 3 irreconcilable things.

1. Their inherent bias. If they are a Nate Diaz fan they will view this round through a different prism.

2. Commentary bias. Rogan barely raised his voice when Conor dropped Nate twice, but the tone of his voice raised when Nate landed anything of note.

3. Recency bias. Even if you’re a neutral, you’re going to remember the last minute more clearly than the 4 minutes that preceded it. Nate grabbed the last minute of the round by the pussy. Hard to argue otherwise.

Let’s analyse this in a complete vacuum. No commentary. No bias.

There are some valid reasons an impartial observer, watching the action with no commentary, could award the 2nd Round to Nate Diaz. One is that they were swayed by the hardwiring of their brain into placing too much of an emphasis on the last thing they’ve seen in the Round.

The other is called the ‘availability heuristic ‘.

This is defined as “a mental shortcut that relies on immediate examples that come to mind. When you are trying to make a decision, a number of related events or situations might immediately spring to the forefront of your thoughts.”

Like Joe Rogan, the first thing most people thought towards the end of the 2nd round was “here we go again!”.

In the first fight, Conor dominated Round 1 before fading in the face of a Diaz onslaught in Round 2. History seemed to be repeating itself. Our brains automatically flashed back to that day in March where McGregor wilted from the moment the 1-2 from Diaz landed flush. Subliminally, and subconsciously, we saw the same pattern repeating and our immediate thoughts at the end of the Round were “wow, the same thing almost happened”. So we allowed this to skew our decision-making and award Diaz a round that no qualified, competent Judge could ever award to him.

.....

The truth is our availability heuristic and recency bias makes all Judging systems vulnerable to the hardwiring of the human brain. A fighter could dominate the first 16 minutes of a 5-round fight yet our brain could allow us to award the fight to the opposing fighter who (equally) dominated the last 9 minutes. This makes no sense given it’s the totality of the fight is what counts – otherwise why bother with Rounds or Time Limits – yet is a very real function of the human brain to place additional emphasis on the last thing we see and remember.

Hope that clears it up for you.

EagererBeaver

So the volume of his voice is now an important factor? How about the tone? If he'd been screaming at the top of his lungs when he was raving about McGregor kicking his leg to bits in the first round and taking about how Diaz had an issue with it inside the first couple of minutes would that have changed things for you? Daft.

McGregor is the Featherweight champion and does what he wants with the UFC. He has more power than any MMA fighter we've seen and is adored by millions the world over. A few Irish lads are, I believe the expression is "butthurt", over the fact that Joe Rogan didn't cheer loudly enough for their boy. Jesus ****ing wept.

Swashbuckler

Rogan as a long history of bias long before Conor arrived on the scene. He's known for it.

wonderfullife

EagererBeaver wrote: »

A few Irish lads are, I believe the expression is "butthurt", over the fact that Joe Rogan didn't cheer loudly enough for their boy. Jesus ****ing wept.

Can i ask you a question in good faith and all honesty? And for any MODS i'm asking directly as a result of the above post

Why do you only turn up to the MMA forum and Conor McGregor thread to curse at and insult what you perceive to be "McGregor fanboys" and to take a pop at Conor?

Do you have opinions on McGregor that could help stimulate debate and chat as opposed to just arriving to slate people for their views?

Do you have any opinions on MMA that might help drive some debate in other threads? This thread is busy enough for the most part but the other threads get quiet.

I'm guilty at times of McGregor "fanboy" posts. 100%. I also like to think people have noticed i can be very critical of McGregor and Kavanagh if it's warranted.

The articles i've been writing are a hobby and have got great feedback on my writing ability in here and i'm super grateful for the feedback and criticism, so i can try to improve my standards.

The overwhelming majority of your posts in this thread (and forum) are sporadic moments where you show up to rip McGregor and his fans to pieces, then disappear off again for months.

You go to great pains to say you're a) not a hater b) not a begrudger and c) not a troll ...

EagererBeaver wrote:

100% there are those on this forum will tell you that a team of Conor McGregors would win the All Ireland hurling, football, and camogie championships, as well as the Six Nations and probably the Ashes too. It's all any the mental preparation and precision.

(on McGregor fans/"implied scumbags") :

EagererBeaver wrote:

That was mortifying. Half of those boys looked ripe for roles as extras in Love/Hate movies.

EagererBeaver wrote:

In not sure about how realistic a Hollywood career is for McGregor. The tattoos won't do him any favours and his inability to string sentences together without tripping over his words and mixing metaphors all the time will cause him problems.

EagererBeaver wrote:

..It's really remarkable how many people continue to get offended on Conor McGregor's behalf when someone makes a comment on him that doesn't originate from inside his arsehole and that contrary to popular belief, it's actually incredibly sunny in there. I am not a "hater",.....

EagererBeaver wrote: »

Now, despite not having said a word about the man himself, I'll probably get accused of being a McGregor "hater", or maybe the slightly more intellectual (not difficult on this forum) might come up with something about "Irish begrudgery".

EagererBeaver wrote: »

Of course he can - it's McGregor under discussion, not Mendes.

Lesnar got pushed towards his title shot, without doubt before he deserved it. That has zero impact whatsoever on whether McGregor did or not. Just like Mendes. The only thing different about the analogy is the weight class.

EagererBeaver wrote: »

"anti McGregor article" my hole.

EagererBeaver wrote: »

What obnoxious, condescending wankery.

EagererBeaver wrote: »

Wonderful, McGregor's casual racism is now making it's away onto Boards.

EagererBeaver wrote: »

People really do go out of their way to get offended on McGregor's behalf.....

EagererBeaver wrote:

You can't tolerate even the tiniest piece of criticism of McGregor and instead of bothering to debate anything, simply dismiss it as "trolling". Like your mate up there who thinks everyone is a "hater". You're so concerned about what other people think of McGregor that you bother to go checking out posting stats, dates etc. Jesus wept.

EagererBeaver wrote:

Well you know, other than the move to the higher weight class, fact Do Anjos similary won last fight by first round KO, RDA is a bit of a monster etc. But yeah, other than that there's no reason to doubt it at all.

RDA mid-round KO....

EagererBeaver wrote:

Fighting for interim belt a bit of a joke....

EagererBeaver wrote:

Are there any appalling McGregor soundbites you don't re-hash on this thread?

EagererBeaver wrote:

If I was to really look for a conspiracy though, I'd say the idea was to give McGregor a "safe" fight at LW (a suspicion I'll hold even more if it ends up being for interim belt) to let them build it even more for 200.

EagererBeaver wrote: »

The fact it's an Irish forum doesn't matter a ****. Nobody is obliged to like or cheer for McGregor simply because he was born on the same patch of earth.

EagererBeaver wrote: »

This thread is absolutely bonkers. Like an online Hello magazine exclusively for McGregor fanboys.

EagererBeaver wrote: »

For ****'s sake.

EagererBeaver wrote: »

Please. The slobbering masses here will be eagerly discussing the significance of whatever they name the child or brand of nappies they buy.

EagererBeaver wrote: »

The sycophancy is worse.

The fawning over McGregor is utterly pathetic at times. Like a tweenage girl and her favourite pop star. Or worse. Except most people on here are, by and large, grown men.

EagererBeaver wrote: »

DeVore running around on twitter demanding answers from Dizz, wanting to know about his journalistic standards...despite him not being a journalist

Fanboys gonna fanboy

dashoonage

I wish people would turn up and insult everyone equally.

DrPhilG

dashoonage wrote: »

I wish people would turn up and insult everyone equally.

Up yours.

ASOT

DrPhilG wrote: »

Up yours.

Prick

dashoonage

Thats the spirit lads!

EagererBeaver

Let's get this straight, you quote 21 of my posts, of which maybe one (talking about tripping over his words and talking ****e and getting hailed as a genius), maybe two (reference to racism) could be interpreted as being in any way "anti-McGregor", then ask why I'm always having a pop at him?!

Do I have opinions on MMA? Yes, plenty. Why would I post about them in this thread though? You realise that this is the McGregor thread, yes? What else should I discuss in here!? Just land in here and have a yarn about bisping or Cruz or Jones? This is a genuine question - please explain to me what else should be under discussion.

I wholeheartedly disagree with your assertion that Rogan was biased against McGregor in the Diaz fight. By some bizarre decision making process, you decide that pulling up 21 of my posts (some of them going back 18 months or more) is a response to that? And after all of that, I'm supposed to think of you as anything other than a fanboy?!

"You don't think Joe Rogan was biased against McGregor in that fight therefore you're anti-McGregor". Madness.

DrPhilG

ASOT wrote: »

Prick

Mind your own business ya hoore.

I was talking to that ballbag dashoonage.

dashoonage

DrPhilG wrote: »

Mind your own business ya hoore.

I was talking to that ballbag dashoonage.

Go way you...youre a fanboy.

wonderfullife

EagererBeaver wrote: »

...then ask why I'm always having a pop at him?!

Do I have opinions on MMA? Yes, plenty.

I wholeheartedly disagree with your assertion that Rogan was biased against McGregor in the Diaz fight..... And after all of that, I'm supposed to think of you as anything other than a fanboy?!

"You don't think Joe Rogan was biased against McGregor in that fight therefore you're anti-McGregor". Madness.

Almost all of your posts in this thread are to have a dig at McGregor "fanboys".

Your opinions on MMA have yet to make a splash outside this thread. In fact, outside of McGregor and Fight Threads you've made roughly 9 posts on this forum and 5 of them were relating to USADA.

I don't think you're Anti-McGregor based on your differing opinion of Joe Rogans fight call.

I think you haven't the faintest interest in stimulating constructive debate based on the fact your main MMA interest is slagging off any McGregor fans.

For the record, most of your vitriol was directed at Gamebred who is the P4P McGoat fan

EagererBeaver

wonderfullife wrote: »

(on McGregor fans/"implied scumbags") :

As for this one (I'm on mobile so quite functionality limited), that comment was not about "McGregor fans", as you well know, it was about the trainwreck of a press conference in the Convention Centre with Aldo before 189.

If you want to associate yourself with and get offended on behalf of lads who ask the likes of Jose Also how his pussy smells and other highly intelligent questions, be my guest. I'll gladly continue to call them out.

wonderfullife

EagererBeaver wrote: »

As for this one (I'm on mobile so quite functionality limited), that comment was not about "McGregor fans", as you well know, it was about the trainwreck of a press conference in the Convention Centre with Aldo before 189.

If you want to associate yourself with and get offended on behalf of lads who ask the likes of Jose Also how his pussy smells and other highly intelligent questions, be my guest. I'll gladly continue to call them out.

Ok we are definitely not derailing this thread!

So this is the last reply, PM me if you want to discuss this further!

You said half of the lads who turned up were like extras from Love/Hate. Implying half were scumbags. There was some embarrassing moments and questions in that Presser (April 2015) for sure! No need to imply half his fans that turned up are skangers.

EagererBeaver

wonderfullife wrote: »

Almost all of your posts in this thread are to have a dig at McGregor "fanboys".

Your opinions on MMA have yet to make a splash outside this thread. In fact, outside of McGregor and Fight Threads you've made roughly 9 posts on this forum and 5 of them were relating to USADA.

I don't think you're Anti-McGregor based on your differing opinion of Joe Rogans fight call.

I think you haven't the faintest interest in stimulating constructive debate based on the fact your main MMA interest is slagging off any McGregor fans.

For the record, most of your vitriol was directed at Gamebred who is the P4P McGoat fan

Irishman and casual MMA fan in "most of his posts on Irish MMA discussion board related to Conor McGregor" shocker.

My main interest is in watching the sport. I just think a lot of ****e gets talked on this board about McGregor (since you've trawled though all my posts you might have picked up I always call him McGregor rather than "Conor" as I'm not personally on a first name basis with him) and thoroughly enjoy the discussions and debate that surround him. There are lots who disagree with me. There are plenty who agree too.

Effects

EagererBeaver wrote: »

I always call him McGregor rather than "Conor" as I'm not personally on a first name basis with him)

Surely it's Mr. McGregor in that case.

EagererBeaver

wonderfullife wrote: »

Ok we are definitely not derailing this thread!

OK, despite the fact that you're the one who dragged up my post history for discussion, I'm done too.

wonderfullife

EagererBeaver wrote: »

Irishman and casual MMA fan in "most of his posts on Irish MMA discussion board related to Conor McGregor ridiculing his fanboys" shocker.

My main interest is in watching the sport. I just think a lot of ****e gets talked on this board about McGregor (since you've trawled though all my posts you might have picked up I always call him McGregor rather than "Conor" as I'm not personally on a first name basis with him) and thoroughly enjoy the discussions and debate that surround him. There are lots who disagree with me. There are plenty who agree too.

I don't know Vitor Belfort too well nor Ronda Rousey nor Anderson Silva for that matter but i refer to them all by their first names too. I think most people do out of habit. Personally i just type 'Conor' out of laziness most of the time - it's shorter than McGregor and anybody on this thread knows i'm not talking about the late Conor Cruise O' Brien

Do you honestly not see a trend in the quoted posts i showed you? They weren't discussing McGregor (for the most part) or analysing his skills, they were all just taking a pop at other lads for their posts!!

Gamebred

https://www.instagram.com/p/BL9t4M6Dw9O/?taken-by=mark_henry7


I see Alvarez has brought in the Brazilian Jonas Bilharinho to mimic McGregor


That worked out well for Aldo

wonderfullife

The best bit was Bilahrino was brought in by Aldo not just to mimic McGregor southpaw/karate base but also to mimic his trash talk. So he'd actively talk sh1t during sparring.

Funny because Aldo wouldn't have had a notion what McGregor was saying to him, might as well be talking Double Dutch for a Brazilian to understand him when he reverts back to his normal Crumlin accent :pac:

martyos121

Any man that needs a sparring partner for trash talk is well and truly mentally destroyed. In hindsight, I'm not sure Aldo stood much of a chance in that fight given his mental state.

Gamebred

martyos121 wrote: »

Any man that needs a sparring partner for trash talk is well and truly mentally destroyed. In hindsight, I'm not sure Aldo stood much of a chance in that fight given his mental state.

Conor done it for Diaz 2,paid sparring partners to come over get ready in a different locker room come out talk **** and spar and that was it.

wonderfullife

Gamebred wrote: »

Conor done it for Diaz 2,paid sparring partners to come over get ready in a different locker room come out talk **** and spar and that was it.

Ah. That's not quite correct.

He didn't pay sparring partners as far as i'm aware. He paid for all of them (of course) to fly out, to stay in a luxury gaf and not put their hand in their pocket for the entire camp.

I don't think he actually paid them to train with them. Open to correction.

As for the trash-talk - that's not quite accurate either.

John Michael Sheil did mimic the Nate trash-talk but according to Kavanagh, that's just his nature anyway.

It's not as if they got Connor Wallace to start winding Conor up before sparring. It was simply that John Michael is fond of talking sh1t so it all worked out well in that respect.

Gamebred

wonderfullife wrote: »

Ah. That's not quite correct.

He didn't pay sparring partners as far as i'm aware. He paid for all of them (of course) to fly out, to stay in a luxury gaf and not put their hand in their pocket for the entire camp.

I don't think he actually paid them to train with them. Open to correction.

As for the trash-talk - that's not quite accurate either.

John Michael Sheil did mimic the Nate trash-talk but according to Kavanagh, that's just his nature anyway.

It's not as if they got Connor Wallace to start winding Conor up before sparring. It was simply that John Michael is fond of talking sh1t so it all worked out well in that respect.

They weren't his only sparring partners he paid sparring partners based in Vegas.