media-mitrione grievance andrew 2

7/24/2019 Media-Mitrione Grievance Andrew 2

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/media-mitrione-grievance-andrew-2 1/12

February 29, 2016

Massachusetts State Athletic Commission

50 Maple Street, Suite 1

Milford, MA 01757

Re: Matt Mitrione vs. Travis Browne, UFC UFN 81

Please allow this complaint to serve as Matt Mitrione’s protest and appeal of the decision awarding

Travis Browne a TKO victory on the main card heavyweight bout at UFC UFN 81. The event took place

on January 17th, 2016 at the TD Garden in Boston, Massachusetts. Below is a link to the full fight video

and audio.

[VIDEO LINK INCLUDED HERE]

Round 1 and First Foul

523 CMR 16.05: Acts Constituting Fouls

The following acts constitute fouls in a contest or exhibition of mixed martial arts:

(2) Eye gouging of any kind.

Unified Rule 15 A: The following acts constitute fouls…

(2) Eye gouging of any kind

At 4:49 of Round 1, Travis Browne (”Browne”) fouled Matt Mitrione (“Mitrione”) with an eye gouge to

the right eye. Immediately following the eye gouge inflicted on Mitrione, Referee Gary Forman (the

“Referee”) called a timeout as he is mandated to do per 15E(i) of the Unified Rules “If a foul is

committed the referee shall call timeout.”

Unified Rules 15E(ii) mandates that after a foul occurs and timeout is called that “The referee shall order

the offending contestant to a neutral corner.”

The Referee committed an error subsequent to calling timeout when he failed to address Browne anddirect him into a neutral corner. Thirty five seconds into the foul timeout, the Referee addressed the

injured Mitrione (who was attempting to recover from the inflicted eye gouge foul) and instructs him,

“You have to get out of your corner”. The Referee never addresses Browne during the timeout and

failed to direct him into a neutral corner. Browne, the offending contestant, thus gained an unfair

advantage from his illegal blow by having the improper opportunity to receive coaching in his corner

during the time out.



523CMR 15E(iv) states “the referee shall then assess the foul to the offending contestant……and notify

the commission, the corners, the official scorekeeper of his decision on whether the foul was accidental

or intentional.”

Unified Rule 15H(i) States “Immediately after separating the unarmed combatants the referee shall

inform the commission’s representative of his determination that the foul was accidental”

The Referee committed an error by failing to assess the foul, by failing to assert whether the foul was

accidental or intentional as required under the Unified Rules and by failing to notify the corners. There

is a fine line between accidental and intentional. Intentional conduct can be instinctive or a function of

tactics employed, and need not be obviously malicious to be intentional. At the time Mitrione was

fouled by Browne’s first illegal blow, Browne was attempting to defend himself from a combination of

fair blows by Mitrione. Mitrione was about to strike Browne with an undefended right hook to the head

following a straight left lead. As a result of Browne’s position in reaction to Mitrione’s fair combination

of strikes, Browne was able to defend being struck by Mitrione’s legal attack only by employing the

illegal blow. Accordingly, the foul should have been judged intentional and Browne should have been

disqualified.

Round 2 and 2nd

FOUL

At 4:28 of Round 2, Browne again fouled Mitrione with a second eye gouge to right eye (the same eye

that was injured via the first foul). At that point, Browne should have been disqualified under 15(B) of

the Unified Rules. Unified Rule 15 (B): Disqualification may occur after any combination of fouls or after

a flagrant foul . Merriam‐Webster defines “ flagrant ” as conspicuously offensive <flagrant errors> ;

especially: so obviously inconsistent with what is right or proper as to appear to be a flouting of law or

morality. The illegal eye gouge from Browne’s left hand to Mitrione’s right eye was the same foul thatoccurred in Round 1 (which by rule should have been assessed to Browne). The second illegal blow from

Browne, which occurred within the Referee’s direct line of sight , injured Mitrione and compounded the

injury Mitrione incurred as a result of the Browne’s first illegal blow. In addition, just as was the case

with the first illegal blow, Browne again effectively used the eye gouge to blunt a fair attack from

Mitrione. The illegal blow resulted specifically from Browne’s willful defensive tactics, which he used

repetitively as a last line of defense against the left‐handed Mitrione. Browne’s second eye gouge foul

to Mitrione’s right eye was flagrant and blatant. This time Browne again defended himself from the

exact same straight left‐right hook combination by employing essentially the same manner of illegal

blow to defend, foul and incapacitate Mitrione. It was obvious to all in the arena and all watching the

Fox national broadcast that Mitrione had been fouled, and that he was injured and incapacitated by the

foul. It is an objective fact that Browne’s eye gouge compromised Mitrione’s vision, his ability to defend

himself and seriously jeopardized Mitrione’s chance of winning (see 523CMR 16.07(1) & Unified Rule

15H(i)). The Referee committed an inexplicable error by failing to call time out, by failing to assess the

foul from the second illegal blow at the earliest opportunity, and by failing to disqualify Browne.

Browne then sought to exploit his illegal blow (and the Referee’s compounding errors) by pressing the

fight harder and by attempting to finish the fight while Mitrione was injured from the foul and

attempting to recover.



523 CMR 15 E(i) states “If a foul is committed the referee shall call time out.” 523 CMR 16.06 (iii) states

The Referee shall, as soon as is practical after the foul, notify the judges and both unarmed combatants

At 3:58 of Round 2 (as Mitrione struggled to recover from the second foul) the Referee instructed

Browne “Travis, you have to watch your fingers bud.” The Referee, by his “warning” to Browne, thereby

acknowledged that he had witnessed the second illegal eye gouge foul to Mitrione’s right eye, which

had occurred more than half a minute prior to time being called. It is fundamental that a referee is

required to stop a fight or call time out after witnessing a foul. A referee does not have discretion to

choose which fouls to assess or when to assess them. Similarly, a referee does not have discretion to

make up new rules that are not embodied in either the Unified Rules or 523 CMR. Accordingly, the

Referee either willfully disregarded the rules or was ignorant as to his basic duties.

Please note well that at 10:58 of the Video, and immediately before improperly restarting the fight in

the second round, Referee Forman admonished Mitrione “You’ve got to be careful about jumping into

his fingers.”

Section 14 C of the Unified Rules directs judges to evaluate the contest based, in part, on “effective

aggressiveness …” Unified Rules 14 H defines effective aggressiveness as “moving forward and landing alegal strike.”

Mitrione was fouled, injured and incapacitated twice by eye gouges Browne employed to defend similar

fair attacks by Mitrione. It is an affront to the rules that the Referee would instruct a fouled combatant

not to move forward in an attempt to land legal strikes. This outrageous instruction by the Referee once

again demonstrated either a complete lack of knowledge or, alternatively, a willful disregard for the

rules. On information and belief, after the fight Referee Forman went so far as to post on his social

media that Mitrione “asked for it” by jumping in aggressively towards Browne. Forman subsequently

removed that social media post specifically and erased much of his other social media, as well.

Referee Forman knowingly endangered Mitrione, a fouled combatant, by improperly forcing him to fight

for an additional 33 seconds while obviously injured and compromised. At 3:55 of the second round

Mitrione unambiguously told the Referee that Browne’s second eye gouge foul had inflicted injury and

that he could not continue the contest without seriously jeopardizing both his safety and his chance to

win. Mitrione told the Referee, “I can’t fucking see, I’m seeing double, bud.”

The Referee stopped the contest. There is no authority in the rules that allows a referee to call time out

under such circumstances.

523 CMR 16.07: Fouls: Accidental

(1) “If a contest or exhibition of mixed martial arts is stopped because of an accidental foul, the referee

shall determine whether the unarmed combatant who has been fouled can continue or not. If theunarmed combatant’s chance of winning has not been seriously jeopardized as a result of the foul…”



(2) If the referee determines that a contest or exhibition of mixed martial arts may not continue because

of an injury suffered as the result of an accidental foul, the contest or exhibition must be declared a no

decision if the foul occurs during:

(a) The first two rounds of a contest or exhibition that is scheduled for three rounds or less;

Unified Rule section 16

16B If an injury sustained during competition as a result of an intentional foul, as determined by the

referee, is severe enough to terminate a bout, the contestant causing the injury loses by

disqualification.

16C If an injury is sustained during competition as a result of an intentional foul, as determined by the

referee, and the bout is allowed to continue, the referee shall notify the scorekeeper to automatically

deduct two points from the contestant who committed the foul.

16D If an injury sustained during competition as a result of an intentional foul, as determined by thereferee, causes the injured contestant to be unable to continue at a subsequent point in the contest, the

injured contestant shall win by technical decision, if he or she is ahead on the scorecards. If the injured

contestant is even or behind on the score cards at the time of stoppage, the outcome of the bout shall be

declared a technical draw

Accordingly, whether Browne injured Mitrione by accidental or intentional foul, when the referee

stopped the fight at 3:55 of Round 2 the contest should have been over by rule . The Referee’s only

options were immediately calling no‐contest, disqualifying Browne for the two (intentional) fouls, or

declaring a TKO, submission or tap.

The Referee again acted outside the rules when he ordered the contest re‐started. The fight was

already over by rule and the Referee had no authority to re‐start the fight after the second round

stoppage. Accordingly, Round 3 did not occur during properly sanctioned competition. Round 3 thus

became an exhibition (of incompetence) and not a competition as provided by the rules.

Notwithstanding that the fight should have been ended at 3:55 of Round 2, the Referee improperly

called time outside of his authority and did not end the contest. There is no rule that empowers the

referee to stop a fight absent a foul, TKO or submission. This was not a time out related to a fighter

safety issue such as replacement of a mouthpiece or mending a hand wrap or other intervening

circumstance that could potentially injure a combatant. See Unified Rules 7(C) which states “If the

mouthpiece is involuntarily dislodged during competition, the referee shall call time, clean the

mouthpiece, and reinsert the mouthpiece at the first opportune moment without interfering with the

immediate action.”

Per Unified Rules 15E(ii) after a foul occurs and timeout is called “The referee shall order the offending

contestant to a neutral corner.”

Given that the Referee (improperly) called a timeout at 3:55 of Round 2, he was obligated to order the

offending opponent, Browne, to a neutral corner after he called time out. Once again, the referee failed

to direct Browne to a neutral corner, and once again Browne had access to his corner and coaches.



If Mitrione was not fouled, on what authority did the Referee call time and by what authority was the

ringside doctor consulted? If Mitrione was fouled then why did Referee Forman not call time

contemporaneous with the foul and assess the foul “as soon as is practical ” as required by 523 CMR

16.06 (3). If there was no foul, the Referee had no authority to call time out in the manner in which he

did. If there was a foul, the Referee was required to call time and properly assess the foul at the time it

was committed. In the present case, Referee Forman did neither. Accordingly, the Referee’s actionswere outside of any possible interpretation of the rules.

Unified Rule 15H(ii) If a fighter is fouled by blow that the referee deems illegal, the referee should stop

the action and call for time. The referee may take the injured fighter to the ringside doctor and have the

ringside doctor examine the fighter as to their ability to continue on in the contest. The ringside doctor

has up to 5 minutes to make their determination. If the ringside doctor determines that the fighter can

continue in the contest, the referee shall as soon as practical restart the fight. Unlike the low blow foul

rule, the fighter does not have up to 5 minutes of time to use, at their discretion, and must continue the

fight when instructed to by the referee.

During the Round 2 (foul?) timeout at 9:09 of the video, Mitrione tells the ringside doctor, “I can’t

fucking see”. The ringside doctor audibly proclaims, “He can’t see now”.

523CMR 7.01 It is a paramount duty of the Commission and its licensees, the Ringside Doctors and

Referee, to acknowledge the “diverse health and safety issues surrounding unarmed combative sports …

[and to] enhance the safety of all participants…”

Once the Referee makes the decision to take the injured fighter to the Ringside Doctor, ONLY the

Ringside Doctor can determine if the fighter can continue. See 15H(ii), above.

If the Ringside Doctor determines the combatant “can’t see” then the combatant MUST NOT BE

ALLOWED TO CONTINUE as it is clearly impossible for a fouled combatant injured in this manner to

defend himself safely. Moreover, if an injured combatant cannot see then it is axiomatic that the

combatant’s “chance of winning” has been “seriously jeopardized” as a result of the foul. It is impossible

and therefore improper error for a licensee to reach any other conclusion. 15H(i) states If a contest of

mixed martial arts is stopped because of an accidental foul, the referee shall determine whether the

unarmed combatant who has been fouled can continue or not. If the unarmed combatant's chance of

winning has not been seriously jeopardized as a result of the foul and if the foul did not involve a

concussive impact to the head of the unarmed combatant who has been fouled, the referee may order

the contest or exhibition continued after a recuperative interval of not more than 5 minutes.

Immediately after separating the unarmed combatants, the referee shall inform the Commission's

representative of his determination that the foul was accidental.

Upon information and belief, the Referee did not properly assess the foul and did not properly apprise

the Commission representative, the combatants or the corners of his determination regarding the foul.



Round 3

We reassert that Round 3 was not a legal round and that the entire round was tainted and outside of

the sanctioned competition. Notwithstanding that assertion, Referee Forman committed further error

by not stopping the contest in Round 3 pursuant to 523CMR 16.07(4).

523CMR 16.07(4) If an injury inflicted by an accidental foul later becomes aggravated by fair blows andthe referee orders the contest or exhibition stopped because of the injury, the outcome must be

determined by scoring the completed rounds and the round during which the referee stops the contest or

exhibition.

It is clear that Browne’s fouls of Mitrione were aggravated in Round 3 and that the contest should have

been halted. It is hard to fathom how anyone, especially the Referee, could not see that Mitrione’s

twice‐fouled right eye was sustaining grotesque damage. In fact Referee Forman’s negligence and

dereliction of his duty resulted in Mitrione’s suffering serious injuries to his eye (and shoulder)

requiring surgery. Mitrione’s injuries included a “blowout fracture” of his right orbital bone. Below is a

photo of how Mitrione appeared during Round 3.



Licensing and Conflict of Interest

We respectfully assert that the Massachusetts State Commission committed error by granting Forman a

license as a Referee, by renewing Forman’s license that he had only recently relinquished to become a

Licensed Matchmaker or Promoter, and by assigning Forman, a referee with limited experience (and ahistory of controversy) to referee a contest at the sport’s highest level in the state’s largest indoor

arena. Forman’s assignment to the main card UFC heavyweight contest between world ranked

combatants is tantamount to assigning a little league umpire to home plate for a Red Sox playoff game

at Fenway Park or assigning a high school referee to protect Tom Brady in an NFL game at Gillette

Stadium. Simply put, Forman had not demonstrated the competence, experience or temperament

necessary to be given such a crucial responsibility. In no other professional sport is an inexperienced

and non‐vetted official (with a dubious track record) elevated to oversee a contest at the highest

professional level. It was foreseeable that Forman would commit errors and potentially risk the safety

of the combatants. In fact, this is what occurred. 523 CMR 6.10 states that to qualify for a license as a

referee the applicant must demonstrate they possess the background and experience necessary to

perform the functions of their position and that they have demonstrated a track record of competent

work..

523 CMR 6.10 To qualify for a license as a referee, judge, timekeeper, or ringside physician, a

person must submit an application on a form provided by the Commission demonstrating the

following:

(1) They possess the background and experience necessary to perform the functions of the respective position; and

(2) (for judges and referees only) They are either certified to perform their respective duty by either

the Commission or other organization approved by the Commission, or that they hold the samelicense in good standing in another jurisdiction and have a demonstrated track record of competent

work;

Prior to UFC Fight Night 81, Forman had served as a referee in 3 shows and 9 contests over the

previous 6 years:

BFC ‐ Bellator Fighting Championships 17May 6, 2010 ‐ Gary Forman 3 fights, 2, 6 & 8

Titan FC 32 ‐ Titan Fighting Championship 32

Dec 19, 2014 ‐ Gary Forman 4 fights 2, 4, 6 &7

UFC Fight Night 59 ‐ McGregor vs. SiverJan 18, 2015 ‐ Gary Forman 2 fights 2 & 5



At UFC UFN 81 Referee Forman conclusively demonstrated that he did not possess the background and

experience required to be licensed as a referee under 523CMR 6.1. We respectfully note that the

Commission was put on written notice and made aware of Forman’s appearance of conflict.

In addition, the Commission was put on written notice of alleged deficiencies and errors in Forman’s

previous work as a referee in Massachusetts. The Commission acknowledged receipt of and responded

to a letter that set forth several concerns regarding Forman’s competence. Unfortunately, the

Commission erred in overlooking those concerns as Forman emphatically demonstrated his utter and

complete lack of competence at UFC UFN 81.

http://www.mass‐mma.com/2015/01/14/an‐open‐letter‐to‐the‐mass‐state‐athletic‐commission/

Many were surprised that Referee Forman was assigned the professional MMA bout between Mitrione

and Browne, and few were surprised when he lost control of the fight via a series of improper rulings

inconsistent with or outside of the rules. Tragically, Mitrione was badly injured as a direct result of

licensee Forman’s negligence and incompetence.



The above chart is the Conflict of Interest Grid published by the MSAC on its website.



The following is an excerpt from Paragraph 6 “Approve Applications” of the published Minutes of the

February 11, 2014 meeting of the Massachusetts State Athletic Commission:

6. Approve Applications:

Motion to approve Linda Shields-Forman, April 12, 2014 event application for a pro/amMMA event was made by Commissioner Krowski Jr, seconded by CommissionerLitchfield.Motion passed by unanimous vote.

Motion to approve Linda Shields-Forman, April 18, 2014 event application for a pro/amboxing event was made by Commissioner Krowski Jr, seconded by CommissionerLitchfield. Motion passed by unanimous vote.

Motion to approve Linda Shields-Forman Boxing/MMA Matchmaker application wasmade by Commissioner Krowski Jr, seconded by Commissioner Licciardi. Motionpassed by unanimous vote.

Motion to approve Gary Forman MMA Referee application was made by CommissionerKrowski Jr, seconded by Commissioner Litchfield. Motion passed by unanimous vote.Commissioner Licciardi stated that Gary Forman will no longer be a match maker.

We assert that the Commission erred in interpreting and implementing its own rules by granting Shields‐

Forman a license to promote and a license to be a Matchmaker, while simultaneously approving

Forman’s reinstatement as a Referee. We believe that Forman’s claim that he would no longer be a

Matchmaker was false and that he continued all his previous activities utilizing his wife as a proxy.

Alternatively, this coordinated arrangement between Forman with Shields‐Forman at a minimum

violates the spirit (and letter) of the MSAC Conflict of Interest guidelines, gives a clear appearance of

conflict and impropriety, and thus should have been disallowed by the Commission.

In FACT, Referee Forman used his platform as a state licensed referee at the nationally broadcast UFC

event to promote the fight promotion owned by Forman and Shields‐Forman. Please note that Referee

Forman used his Twitter account at 7:02 PM on January 17th, well after the start of the UFC Fight Night

81, to promote and advertise “CageFX” which is the fight promotion he and his wife (Linda Shields‐

Forman) produce together. This advertisement, which was delivered to more than 17,000 people,

sought to capitalize on Forman’s participation as a referee in the UFC event by directing people to a

website promoting the shows produced by Forman and his wife.

https://twitter.com/cagefx/status/688919455229964288



We also find it unusual that Referee Forman began following both Browne and Mitrione’s social media

on January 17, 2016. Would it be proper for a circuit court judge to send a “friend request” to a lawyer

that was to appear before him later that day? Is this similar action by Forman consistent with being an

unbiased referee? These questionable actions by Forman only serve to reinforce why the CMR conflict

rules are in place and why it was an error that they were disregarded in this case.

Accordingly, in light of multiple and compounding errors committed by the Referee and other licensees

and officials, it is impossible to conclude that the MMA contest between Mitrione and Browne at UFC

UFN 81 was conducted fairly. We hereby appeal the decision of this contest and request that the

Commission overturn the decision and declare Mitrione the winner by disqualifying Browne.

Alternatively, the bout must be declared a “no contest.”

We also urge the Commission to protect the integrity of future MMA events and use its best efforts to

ensure fighter safety by disciplining Referee Forman pursuant to CMR 20.03

CMR 20.03 The Commission may suspend or revoke the license of, otherwise discipline or take any

combination of such actions against a licensee who has, in the judgment of the Commission:

(5) Conducted themselves at any time or place in a manner which is deemed by the Commission to

reflect discredit to unarmed combat;

(7) Failed to execute the duties of their position in a skillful, professional manner generally expected

of an individual holding that position.

Respectfully submitted,

Matthew Mitrione, Licensed Combatant

media-mitrione grievance andrew 2

Documents