Nate Diaz Claims Joe Rogan Caused Him To Lose To Maynard

**snakerattle79** · Posted On: 1/14/2010 2:08pm

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/3...ose-to-maynard

Joe Rogan's blatantly obvious and incredibly biased nature toward his preferred clientele may have once again placed the UFC commentator firmly on the hot seat.

"They were leading fans to believe I lost the fight," was the statement made in a recent video posted by UFC lightweight rising contender Nate Diaz, who came out on the losing end of a close split decision this past Monday night at UFC Ultimate Fight Night 20.

The cagefighting event—a sport which is growing rapidly in popularity—was aired live on Spike TV, with Diaz losing a rematch to fellow Ultimate Fighter reality show alumni and UFC top contender Gray Maynard.

Diaz has posted a video today on the popular Web site YouTube.com in which he lays the partial blame for his misfortune on well-known UFC commentators Joe Rogan and Mike Goldberg.

Diaz doesn't stop there, either; he also "calls out" his opponent from Monday night's controversial match, challenging him to come out and show his battle scars.

“If anybody sees Gray Maynard, tell him to show his face today and see how it looks,” an upset Diaz stated. “I got more landed strikes in that fight, and I threw more [strikes].”

“He (Rogan) must’ve been judging it on the person who he liked better, because obviously, as far as the commentary was concerned, everybody liked Gray.

“If the fans want to go back and judge the fight for themselves, put the TV on mute, if you can.”

Diaz is now the second fighter to complain regarding Rogan's obvious biased nature toward fighters he likes.

At UFC 104—when UFC light heavyweight champion Lyoto "The Dragon" Machida successfully defended his title against Mauricio “Shogun” Rua—Rogan continuously credited Shogun for his offense, without once mentioning that Rua's kicks were being countered by Machida's straight left counter-punching.

And as a result, the UFC 205-pound champion Machida urged his fans to also re-watch the unanimous decision, only this time on mute as well.

"The American commentators were pretty much biased," Machida told Sherdog.com.

"If you see the fight without audio, you will probably see a different fight. Shogun was a great opponent and had a nice strategy. He deserves all my respect as a fighter, but I was superior.”

Authors note: I see that Nate has taken his video down—my apologies. I hope from the above text you can get the "crux of the matter."

**Wolf** · Posted On: 1/14/2010 2:20pm

no he didn't. he claimed that joe rogan influenced fans watching the televised broadcast to think he lost. This thread title implies he is saying joe rogan influenced the judges in some way. That's not what he's saying at all.

**Diesel_tke** · Posted On: 1/14/2010 2:30pm

Diaz has posted a video today on the popular Web site YouTube.com in which he lays the partial blame for his misfortune on well-known UFC commentators Joe Rogan and Mike Goldberg.

I don't see how he could blame Joe for the judges decision or for how the fans at the fight viewed the fight. The only onese who could have been biased were the ones watching at home. I personally watch them all muted any way.

If you don't want to rely on the judges then you can't let the fight go to a decision.

**cyrijl** · Posted On: 1/14/2010 3:09pm

i thought shogun won....i don't know about maynard or diaz...none of diaz's shots looked all that hard. He also looked a little more desperate. I know those are not judging criteria, but you can't ignore them either.

I can imagine Cecil "Well Joe thinks maynard is doing better..." Wouldn't the Shogun fight prove that Joe wasn't a factor? He seemed to be rooting for Rua.

(yes i know Cecil wasn't there but i can't remember who was)

***Omega Supreme*** · Posted On: 1/14/2010 3:20pm

I'm going to disagree with you cyriji. Not only do I think Machida won that fight but I do believe Rogan influenced fans because I challenged people the same way. Look at the fight on mute. Where you can argue for Rua to win it wasn't such a one sided miss judged match that many had claimed.

**Cuchulain** · Posted On: 1/14/2010 3:24pm

I've never been to a UFC. Can the live audience hear the commentry?

**Cougar Spirit** · Posted On: 1/14/2010 3:39pm

Since Rogan does not have an official scorecard, it is just commentary. If you do not like the commentary, turn the sound down. As far as the fighters go, it takes a lot of guts, training and spirit to compete in the cage. It also takes a little ego. I can see where they may want to differ with the commentator or complain about them missing something, but the commentator has no bearing on the outcome. Like diesel_tke said, if you don't like what they are saying, don't leave it up to a decision. Knock them the hell out!

**fourTwenty** · Posted On: 1/14/2010 3:46pm

Originally Posted by Wolf

no he didn't. he claimed that joe rogan influenced fans watching the televised broadcast to think he lost. This thread title implies he is saying joe rogan influenced the judges in some way. That's not what he's saying at all.

Like Wolf said. Nate said Joe influenced THE FANS. The reading comprehension around here scares me sometimes.

**Lindz** · Posted On: 1/14/2010 3:50pm

Summary or headline contradicts article, is the bleacherreport poaching editors from slashdot?

**ADM** · Posted On: 1/14/2010 5:48pm

Originally Posted by Omega the Merciless

I'm going to disagree with you cyriji. Not only do I think Machida won that fight but I do believe Rogan influenced fans because I challenged people the same way. Look at the fight on mute. Where you can argue for Rua to win it wasn't such a one sided miss judged match that many had claimed.

You know we had this conversation at BJJ a few weeks ago now ... almost the exact same conclusion was made. Watch it on mute.

During the entire fight I was talking to my buddy about how biased it seemed, i.e. "Oh Machida just got hit with a BIG leg kick" compeltely ignoring Machidas counter in the exact same movement.

That said, Nate is fairly spot on, I've been noticing it a lot more lately, call it poor commentary if you like (and quite frankly that's what it is). I would prefer to see less of it, it's almost as if the commentators have an agenda of sorts.