Семми Шилт может потерять свое место среди главных восьми претендентов на звание чемпиона гран-при K-1 2010. Чемпион It’s Showtime Хесди Гергес, который проиграл решением Шилту квалификационный бой на турнире К-1 в Сеуле, подал как устный, так и письменный протест, направленный на пересмотр исхода схватки

In a move that has the potential to greatly impact the 2010 K-1 Grand Prix, Hesdy Gerges’s team has filed a formal complaint against Semmy Schilt stemming from their Final 16 match last weekend. Filed by Black Label Fighting and It’s Showtime, the complaint argues that Schilt received illegal medical attention between rounds of the October 2 fight and calls for Schilt to be disqualified from the December 11 Grand Prix finals. Here is the official statement from It’s Showtime and Black Label Fighting:

Причиной этом послужила открытая рана Шилта, случившаяся в начале встречи. Менеджер Шилта Бас Бун в перерыве между первым и вторым раундами решил пойти на прямое нарушение правил и скрытно обмотать открытое рассечение лентой.

Симон Рутц, глава It’s Showtime: “Если следовать правилам, то К-1 может сделать лишь одну вещь: дисквалифицировать Сема Шилта. Во время боя угловые бойца не имеют никакого права обрабатывать бойца без контроля рефери или врача, это касается и ран/травм. Но это произошло и было задокументировано. Увидь рефери рассечение в первом раунде, встреча была бы однозначно и незамедлительно остановлена. А теперь место Хесди Гергеса в финале ушло у него из-под носа.”

Если правота Гергеса будет подтверждена, Шилт может забыть о планах завоевать рекордный пятый титул чемпиона. Однако действующий король К-1 не беспокоится.

“Это их право подавать протест, но я не боюсь за исход. Хесди однозначно хочет побеждать в ринге, но не нужно махать кулаками после драки о небольшой ошибочке. Я продолжаю тренировки и подготовку к декабрю, чтобы устроить переполох в финале.”

Удовлетворит ли FEG просьбу лагеря Гергеса – пока неизвестно, учитывая то, что боец Голден Глори Алистар Оверим в прошлом нарушал правило ударов в клинче, однако никакого штрафа за это не последовало.

Источник: Mixfight.ru автор: Михаил Мазур
Source: the Dutch newspaper “De Telegraaf”

In the K-1 regulations is written that in case a fighter gets injured during the fight, the wound may not be treated by one of the cornermen without interference of the official physician and referee. However, this did happen right after the first round by [Schilt’s manager] Bas Boon. Schilt, who received numerous lowkicks right from the beginning of the fight, didn’t check one of those lowkicks very well so his right shinbone got torn open. If the referee had seen this right away, the doctor had to take a look at the wound and continuing the fight wouldn’t have been medically responsible. The referee never discovered this wound, because Schilt’s corner ‘secretly’ applied a lot of tape on the wound.

The exact wording of the rule in question can be found in the official K-1 rules, Article 22.5 (emphasis mine):

Article 22: Protector
The use of protectors made of rubber, plastic, or other material is not allowed for any reason including the protection of an injury. However, when the official physician or the referee and judges allow the usage of protectors depending on the injuries, the following applies;
…
5. Only the official physician is authorized to tape the injured area, once the mach starts.

That is the point Gerges’s team is arguing – that Schilt’s corner applied tape between rounds 1 & 2, and that doing so is in violation of this rule.

Watching the video, you can not see the tape being applied, but Schilt does clearly come out for the 2nd round with tape on his leg that was not present when the match started. Assuming Gerges’s team is correct and this tape was indeed applied by Schilt’s corner without the official physician, it seems there is little question here – Schilt is in violation of the rule and the complaint is valid.

The trouble though is deciding what to do about that complaint. Again, from Article 22 of the K-1 rules:

Caution, warning or point reduction may be given if a fighter does not follow the instruction of the judges.

Nowhere does it mention the possibility of a disqualification, however there are two key points to consider. First, did the taping allow Schilt to continue despite an injury that should have stopped the fight? Second, should Schilt have been deducted a point? As it stands right now, Schilt won via split decision – a point deduction would change that to a draw, forcing an extension round.

Here is It’s Showtime president Simon Rutz on the situation:

Because Hesdy Gerges is our reigning IT’S SHOWTIME world champion, K-1 really wanted to match him with their own world champion. K-1 created a huge buzz in the Japanese media and hyped the question: ‘Who is the stronger one, the IT’S SHOWTIME world champion or the K-1 world champion?’ After 2 rounds the judges scored the fight 20-20 (draw), 19-20 (for Sem) and 18-20 (for Sem). However, like everyone could see, the third round was clearly for Hesdy Gerges so that round should have been scored 10-9, 10-9, 10-9 for Hesdy Gerges. If you add that score to the scores after round 2 you will get the following end result: 30-29 (for Hesdy), 29-29 (draw) and 28-29 (for Sem). A more clear example for an extra round can’t be found! If there would have been an extra round, Sem would never have been able to finish this round, because he already had difficulties finishing the third round. This decision was already unjustified, but on top of that it’s clear to see that Sem Schilt’s corner has violated the rules by applying a thick layer of tape on Sem’s deep wound.

And here is where the trouble comes in, as now this all becomes an elaborate game of “what if?”. If Schilt had been deducted a point, there would have been an extension round. Rutz argues that Schilt would clearly have lost that round, but that’s obviously speculation, not fact. You also have to ask how a point deduction would have impacted Semmy’s performance. A highly cerebral fighter, Schilt likely would have fought a different 3rd round if he did not know he was ahead.

Finally, this is all complicated by the fact that this was a tournament fight, not a stand alone super fight. As a result, you can’t call it a No Contest and walk away – someone has to move on to the finals, and this complaint argues that someone should be Hesdy Gerges.

Schilt had this to say (translated):

It’s their right to protest, but I’m not afraid of the outcome. Hesdy would undoubtedly prefer to win in the ring, then afterwards you should not get bogged down in a form error. I then continue to train so I can pop in the final.

Personally, I think what we’re seeing here is undeniably a violation of the rules, and even though the officials did not catch it at the time, there should be some form of penalty. But I’m not sure I can get behind removing Schilt from the GP as that penalty. I also don’t think Rutz’s comments will help here, as he makes a very legitimate complaint sound a lot like sour grapes by bringing up the scoring. If the protest is in regards to the taping, then why say “This decision was already unjustified”? It starts to come across as complaining about the entire fight, which undermines the valid taping complaint.

Regardless of your take on it, by filing a formal complaint, Gerges’s team has made this an issue K-1 must address, and soon. We’ll keep you posted on any updates.

Source: Head Kick Legend by Fraser Coffeen. Thanks to Rick Willemsma at MMAZone