twitter google

Erick Silva paid win bonus despite disqualification loss

As fantastic as the festivities were on Saturday night in Rio de Janeiro for UFC 142, one of the few incidents marring the evening’s excellence had to do with referee Mario Yamasaki’s uncharacteristically bad call relating to a bout between Erick Silva and Carlo Prater. Silva dropped Prater early in their main card clash, then pounded him out for what looked to be a clean stoppage until Yamasaki ruled he felt illegal blows to the back of the head had done the damage and disqualified Silva as a result.

“Everyone here knows that wasn’t intentional. I don’t know what else to say,” explained Silva after the call, while Prater’s take was fairly neutral, saying, “I’m not a judge. I didn’t stop the fight. All I know is that he hit me and it sent a shock of pain through my body unlike anything I’ve ever experienced. I don’t know if the shots were legal. I just know it was unlike anything I’ve ever felt.”

However, it turns out the story has a happy ending as Silva will be paid a win bonus as a means of making things relatively right. The young Brazilian also has an opportunity to appeal the result internally as the UFC regulated the event based on the region’s lack of athletic commission.

The loss snapped a nine-fight winning streak for Silva who impressed fans in August with an equally quick TKO of Luis Ramos at UFC 134. Currently he holds an overall record of 13-2 with ten total stoppages.


  • Dufresne says:

    Good. He absolutely won that fight and he may have landed one glancing blow off the back of the head, but it was the following shots to the temple that did the damage.

    Agree or Disagree: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  • FightFan313 says:

    Erick slammed the back of the head over and over.. way obvious

    Agree or Disagree: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  • Niv says:

    Sorry FightFan by I completely disagree with you here. Silva did not repeatedley slam Prater in the back of the head, one shot definitely connected straight to the back of the head, and Prater himself helped cause that.

    Silva was hammering Prater on the side of his head and the one shot was incidental as Prater turtled and turned his head. If your going to penalize a fighter for connecting with a shot like that, I think you need to make the recipient of the blow responsible for turning his head and exposing the back to blows. What I mean by that is a ref should recognize that one or two shots received were caused by the guy defending himself and shouldn’t penalize the other fighter for it.

    If he continued to hit the back of his head on purpose then it’s different. Yamasaki blew this call plain and simple, he had a night to forget to say the least as he also missed Aldo holding the fence when it looked like he might get taken down.

    Agree or Disagree: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  • MCM says:

    UFC haters always like to point out everything they see as bad with the UFC, but this is not the first time Dana and the boys have paid out when the refs or judges have gotten things wrong. Good on em.

    Agree with Niv on the side of the head punches, but not about Yamasaki blowing the fence holding. He totally called Aldo on it and even made sure he wasn’t holding 10sec latter when pushed back against the fence.

    Agree or Disagree: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  • climbarock says:

    Mario has a good case for a DQ. IMO, one shot was directly to the back of the head and that was the one that seemed to hurt Prater, and a bunch of other shots were questionable…they looked like “hammer-wrists” about 2-3 inches behind the ear. IMO, that’s technically “back of the head.” Mario also warned Silva at the beginning of the sequence, and you can clearly hear it in the broadcast. The problem is that the vast majority of the refs don’t make that call; Mario doesn’t even make that call most of the time.

    Agree or Disagree: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0


    the knee hurt Prater-even Prater admitted that he never felt pain like that, ever in his career-Erick Silva is one to watch for-future champ in my opinion

    Agree or Disagree: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  • Lord Faust says:

    There is no clear “back of the head” standard. Big John has said several times that he uses Chuck Liddell’s haircut as a guideline; other refs have other opinions.

    And no, I’m sorry, that stoppage has zero grounds to be considered a DQ. And, even if it is, Mario sure picked a Hell of a time to re-evaluate what he considers “the back of the head”. Akiyama would have appreciated that distinction when Belfort was tattooing the back of his head with his knuckles.

    It was a bad call; a horrible one in fact. There was nothing shown in the replay that looked out of line with any other valid stoppage of this nature.

    Agree or Disagree: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0


You must be logged in to post a comment.