How to fix a flawed scoring & judging system?

Re-watching The Ultimate Fighter from this week and what Dana White said about the elbow that resulted in Steve Mazzagatti deducting a point not being an illegal elbow is just wrong.

Not only was it a 12/6 which is not allowed by the rules, but it was an elbow to the back of the head, which is definitely illegal. 

Dana was getting all upset over how much he dislikes Mazzagatti's referring and he lost sight of what actually was going on. Sure, the referee was doing a poor job of of letting Roger Zapata know that he needed to stop with the 12/6 elbows (even though the episode clearly showed Mazzagatti explaining things to Zapata between rounds) but there was more to this than just that.

Dana was also upset with the way he felt Ian Stephens was performing. While I agree with Dana that it is frustrating to see someone with wrestling as their main (or only) skill not try to utilize the other aspects of MMA and just be a "wet blanket" and lay on their opponent for as much of the fight as possible, I feel that the fact that the referee let Zapata get away with several 12/6 elbows as well as strikes to the back of the head were the main reason White feels Zapata won the fight.

Another thing that bothers me about this episode is the way Zapata felt the fight should have been scored on how a fighter looks at the end. He was yelling into the camera when producers were interviewing him after his win "Look at my face, and look at his face!" saying that he didn't look like he had been in a three round fight while Stephens had blood on him from multiple cuts & showed damage from taking punches.

That isn't always the indicator of who won the fight. fighters like Sarah Kaufman are known for bruising easily & GSP always looks more beat up than his opponents even though he usually dominated them for most of the fight. Johny Hendricks looked way more beat up in his fight with Robbie Lawler, yet somehow the judges gave Hendrick the win.

Had the judges been paying attention to what really happened in this fight it might have ended differently.

I feel the way attempted takedowns and time where a fighter is on top but not doing any damage or activity is given too much credit in the scoring. In my opinion they should not give credit for just laying on your opponent and in a situation where a lengthy failed takedown attempt should be scored to the fighter to successfully blocked the takedown & not in favor of the fighter who failed to take their opponent down.

Then there is the aspect of Zapata getting away with 12/6 elbows and strikes to the back of the head. Maybe had Mazzagatti done his job better the fight would have either ended differently because he took away points for the many illegal strikes by Zapata, or the judges could have not recognized those strikes as significant when they scored the rounds.

While I don't like the way Stephens went about the fight, I don't think Zapata should have won the fight. Not because I think Stephens actually won, just that had the fight been scored the way it should be & had the referee done a better job Zapata would not have won.

The judging system is flawed and needs to be fixed. Maybe the judges and referees could be evaluated on their performance in a way that allows for feedback from the promotions and the state athletic commissions they work for so that mistakes can be addressed. They should be acknowledged when they are doing well, but also informed when they made the wrong call, especially if it effects the final result of the fight.

One aspect for improving the quality of the way referees work a fight might be to have them wear a "ref cam". I had asked referees on my friend list who have UFC experience (Blake Grice, Kim Winslow, Dan Miragliotta, & Gary Copeland) what their thoughts were on this topic. Kim pointed out that the ref cam that I favored (the one seen used by Big John McCarthy on "Bully Beatdown") was mostly designed to fit Big John, and that it wasn't very comfortable to wear. Blake pointed out that a GoPro style camera mounted on the chest (or the even more bulky camera used by the now defunct Pride promotion) would be a safety problem for the times that a referee might need to separate fighters for various reasons during a fight. Gary seemed to focus on the idea that most promotions (especially the UFC) have several cameras cageside as well as "boom cameras" above the cage that catch most of the action so that the action can be seen from all views. He missed my point that this "ear camera" would not only have the best viewpoint for what is going on because it should be the closest to the action, but it could be used as a tool to critique a ref's performance, especially by showing what the referee is looking at during a fight.

Regarding judges, I feel they should be away from the cage and in a room with several monitors so they have all the angles and the best view of the action. (separated from each other of course so they don't effect the thought process of the other judges) I say do this BUT don't give them access to the audio of the commentators so that biased commentators (like Joe Rogan) can effect the way they score round - as well as eliminate the potential for being influenced by the crowd, especially if one of the fighters is "local" to the city where the event is happening.

Maybe fights could utilize instant replay to address issues that might arise during rounds or after a result is announced to make sure that the correct action was taken or the proper result happened? Enough mistakes in judging & refereeing have happened that the system needs to be improved. Maybe the suggested changes I proposed to scoring, the use of a referee "ear cam" and the other suggestions I mentioned would help improve things... but even if everything I suggest is implemented it would take some time to adjust but I'm sure the end result would be a better situation than what is currently in place.

Making things better is what it should all be about, right?