The Roar
The Roar

Advertisement

UFC wins audiences despite lack of rules

Roar Rookie
17th March, 2010
3

The Ultimate Fighting Championship was in town last month and managed to polarize Australia’s sports fans. I am on the negative side. But the mixed marshal arts competition can hardly be doubted as a sport.

It fits the requirement, as per this Google definition: “an active diversion requiring physical exertion and competition.”

The Google definition, albeit brief, seems to be close to what most people think of when they think of sport. However, the thing that is missing in both the definition and the UFC is rules.

UFC has made me realize that my favorite thing about sport is the thing that I often get most upset about: the rules.

The rules of a game are what define it; and also what define its athletes. Athletes like Andrew Johns, Adam Gilchrist, Wayne Rooney Tiger Woods and Rodger Federer all play sports in which rules determine their body movements and dictate their thoughts.

Their ability beyond the handicaps enforced on them is what gives their athleticism context.

Take the rules away from Test cricket and you’ve got a five-day long sticks and stones fight; take the rules away from Aussie Rules and you’ve got 80 minutes of ‘kill the dill with the pill’; and take away the rules from rugby and all you’ve got is a late night SBS time-slot.

For all I know, the lack of rules in UFC may be what appeals to its audience.

Advertisement

These days we can judge the success of a sport the same way we judge our grocery stores: by the bottom line. Google the words ‘UFC’ and you’ll quickly be convinced about how popular and marketable this sport is.

It is here to stay.

close