Yesterday the ABC’s MMA Rules Committee met and voted to address two controversial aspects of the Unified Rules of MMA.
The 12-6 elbow foul and the definition of grounded fighter.
The straight up to down elbow is a longstanding foul since the initial creation of the unified rules in New Jersey over 20 years ago. Recently data has been published demonstrating the 12-6 elbow is no more forceful than other legal elbows, whether from a standing or grounded position such as mount or side control.
The committee also voted for a new definition of ‘grounded’ fighter. The definition is important because when fighters are grounded they cannot be kicked or kneed to the head. The current definition has lead to controversy over the years. The following simpler and clearer language was proposed:
A fighter shall be considered grounded and unable to be legally kneed or
kicked to the head when any part of their body besides their hands or feet
comes in contact with the canvas (ground).
Both proposals were approved by the MMA Rules Committee (full disclosure I am a member of the Committee and was present during the votes).
What does this mean?
In short the committee will approach member commissions and let them know their position. These proposals will then go to full vote at the next ABC Annual Conference scheduled for July 19-July 24, 2024 in Louisville, KY. There the proposed changes will be put to vote of the full ABC. If a majority of voting member commissions approve then the unified rules will be updated with these new changes effective immediately.
From there every jurisdiction that uses the Unified Rules will, by default, have the new rules in place. Other jurisdictions will need to update their rules. Some will need to update their regulations which takes more time. Some will need to have full blown legislative changes which takes even more time.
One short observation – any jurisdiction that needs legislative ore regulation change to adopt rule changes should consider legislation which gives their commission the flexibility to adopt rule changes on an as-needed basis. This would be a good step in the right direction in helping the unified rules to actually be unified.
Combat Sports Law 