Let's get it on! 'Big' John McCarthy and refereeing in MMA

View full size photo »

One of the most difficult jobs in all of combat sports involves participants that aren't even partaking in the actual competitive event. They are the regulators, so to speak. The enforcers that keep the combatants honest and maintain discipline inside the cage.
It is also, perhaps, the most thankless job in the entire sports universe -- that of being a referee in mixed martial arts.
They are affixed with a task of maintaining the proper distance so as to not obscure the action while also remaining in close enough proximity to adequately officiate the contest.
A good day at the office means little to no recognition, or at least it should. A bad day, however, will likely result in a veritable black-listing. Ask Steve Mazzagatti, who, to this day, is verbally berated in the press by none other than the sport's most visible figure, UFC President Dana White.
Why? Because old "D.W." doesn't think "Mazz" has what it takes to determine the fate of men whose livelihoods sometimes depend upon a split second decision. Any mistake or mishap is magnified exponentially by whether or not there is a competent official inside the cage.
This is essentially the crux of the issue. The responsibility that comes with being the one to determine whether or not a fighter is well enough to continue is as daunting as it is imperative. These referees are asked to effectively make heat-of-the-moment decisions with far-reaching consequences.
How do they do it? Let's hear from perhaps the most famous referee of the lot, "Big" John McCarthy (via The Canadian Press):

"When I talk to them in the back, I'm going to talk to them about when I'm going to stop the fight and how I'm going to do it and what I expect of him. ... It's too much, even for someone that's very skilled, to deal with. He's got someone that's going after him, he's in a bad situation and to have to answer a question, 'Are you OK?' or anything like that is ridiculous."

Refereeing is more or less an art form, which means it's open to interpretation. As McCarthy, he of the most effective methods, at least in the eyes of the majority, explains, it's silly to ask a fighter whether or not he is okay while he's being blitzed by his opponent.
The obvious answer is, no, he is not okay. I doubt there is anyone on Earth that would describe themselves as being "okay" while they have a highly skilled, well-trained martial artist winging punches at their skull.
It also only adds to the difficulties facing the fighter in this theoretically bad position. Which is most certainly not the function of an effective referee. The official's job is to determine whether or not a competitor is able to perform, not have a chat with him about it.
This bleeds directly into the next question. How does one ascertain such a thing? Back to "Big" John:

"If, for the most part, they're landing on your arms and he's defending himself well, I'm going to let the fight go. He's not going to hear me say anything, because he's doing a good job of defending himself. Handle your business, do what you need to do to get out of your predicament. If your opponent comes after you and he's swinging shots and they're not bouncing off your arms and they're bouncing off your skull and they're causing you damage, if you can understand me at the time, I'm going to be calling out his name, I'm going to say 'Move, get out.' When I say that, what I'm telling him is I need him to either try to move his position, because I need him to move so his opponent has to change what's he doing. Or try to take away what his opponent is attacking him with. It's not that I care that he's successful, because he's not always going to be successful. What I care about is that he has tried. I care that at least he's trying to move his position, he's trying to reach out and trying to take something away. He's thinking. Because if he's thinking, it's telling me he's OK in the fight and I'm going to let the fight go on."

In the full article, which again, you can read by clicking here, McCarthy brings up the Brock Lesnar vs. Shane Carwin fight at UFC 116, which drew plenty a great deal of praise for its handling by referee Josh Rosenthal.
Lesnar, the heavyweight champion at the time, was overwhelmed in the opening round by Carwin, nearly succumbing to a barrage of punches that sent him reeling. His chosen method of defense, mostly consisting of using his arms to protect his face from the coming onslaught, was called into question.
Is that an intelligent defense?
Based on McCarthy's criteria, just covering up is not enough to avoid a stoppage. One must also show that they are actively participating in the fight, whether that be by simply attempting to move out of the way, or firing back with offense of their own.
This is what Lesnar did when Rosenthal called out to him for action, if only in the form of a short but ineffective punch. He let the official know that he was ready and willing to soldier on, which is exactly what he did.
After suffering through a complete drubbing in the first round, Brock came back in the second frame to defeat Carwin to retain his title, a feat made possible by a well-versed referee that didn't surrender to the enormity of the moment.
That fight acts as an example to officials and fans alike of what a great night at work can represent for a referee that knows his duties and is aware of exactly how to carry them out. Aside from a championship or a job, history may be at stake.