MMA opinion: Why is Tom Aspinall being vilified after getting fouled?

The controversy coming out of the UFC 321 main event has been shrouded in volatile discussion ever since Ciryl Gane’s infamous eye-poke foul on Tom Aspinall saw the referee call the fight.

But why should the incumbent champion face criticism? 

Sports News Blitz writer Freddie Thomas-Neher shared his thoughts on the debate. 

Watching UFC 321, a card that was actually at an appropriate time for UK fans, I found myself overwhelmingly nervous for Tom Aspinall’s appearance in the main event. 

Aspinall’s journey to the Abu Dhabi main event

Ever the consummate professional, Aspinall had fought twice for interim UFC belts in the undeniably outrageous absence of champion Jon Jones. 

Aspinall had beaten the surging, terrifying Russian heavyweight Sergei Pavlovich in Madison Square Garden and knocked out Curtis Blaydes in London the following June in a grand total of 129 seconds, yet still found himself bereft of an undisputed challenge. 

When Jon Jones vacated his belt, finally elevating Aspinall to the undisputed status he had long lineally occupied anyway, the next challenge would show whether Aspinall was indeed the Jon Jones-killer that had long been assumed, taking shape in French kickboxer Ciryl Gane (who Jones had mauled to win the belt originally).

READ MORE: MMA news: Tatsuro Taira gets title shot against Joshua Van over Manel Kape

UFC 321 and subsequent criticism

The first round between ‘Bon Gamin’ and Aspinall has since been blown out of proportion; yes, the Englishman was probably losing it (although it was tighter than people remember!).

Yes, he had a bloody nose. Yes, Jon Jones won the fight quicker. 

But none of these make any difference to the core fact that, at the death of the fight Tom Aspinall was fouled in such a manner that has required several eye surgeries since. 

Dana White, UFC President, said after the fight that “only Tom knows what happened” and that the Wigan-born heavyweight “didn’t want to continue”; quite the unexpected statement from the UFC brass when a sitting champion is injured via a foul. 

Aspinall has since faced consistent accusations of having milked the injury, with endless speculation surrounding the idea that he knew he was losing the fight and effectively ‘cut his losses’. 

Public debate 

An odd, rather hypocritical source of criticism has come from former UFC Bantamweight Champion Aljamain Sterling, who famously won his championship via an illegal knee leading to a disqualification while Sterling was being fairly comprehensively outclassed.

Sterling said: “The reason why I think this does not look good, Tommy Aspinall was losing that fight. Right away, the guy is saying, ‘I can’t see.’ You can’t say, ‘I can’t see.’ We know that is the nail in the coffin.

“Was he milking it? Was he using his best Aljamain Sterling acting attributes to take home the gold? I know you think I’ll be on the same side as Tommy, but I am not,” 

Eddie Hearn, promoter of Matchroom Boxing has stated this week that he believes UFC President Dana White’s treatment of Aspinall to be unfair, alongside the public response. He said: 

"Look at what they did to Tom Aspinall. He literally had his eye gouged out in a fight and Dana White basically called him a cry baby and cast him aside, humiliated him in front of everybody, while the guy is having operations to save his eyesight."

Incumbent light heavyweight champion and potential future opponent Alex Pereira also defended Aspinall, saying: 

“I don't mess around with health, man. I see it like this: this guy’s a fighter, he’s not going to fake something like that.” 

“It even scared me a bit,” ‘Poatan’ added. 

The contradicting viewpoints show sum up the public's split: some think Aspinall knew he was behind, and some believe that he acted appropriately to conserve his health.

YOU MAY ALSO LIKE: Boxing analysis: What’s next for Ryan Garcia after win over Mario Barrios?

Missing the point

However, the public’s split and subsequent debate surrounding Tom Aspinall is getting away from the core point of the matter. 

Aspinall was, inarguably, fouled by Gane to a serious extent. 

There is no denial of the foul itself; it is widely accepted that Gane was in the wrong and that he was down to the knuckle in Aspinall’s eyes. 

Gane also has a history of eye pokes and fouls, notably eye poking Jon Jones immediately in their fight, and being accused of striking Junior dos Santos at the back of his head as their fight was stopped.

Why is Tom Aspinall facing scrutiny?

Veteran lightweight Jim Miller fought against this narrative as well, saying: 

“The person who was poked in the eye is always the p***y, is always the bad guy, is always the loser for not choosing to continue. It’s never the person that commits the foul that gets looked at in a negative light, no. They’re never punished.”

“The eye poke stuff is all on the person who throws the eye poke. All of it. That’s easy! It’s f**king easy!”

Miller, who holds the record for most appearances in UFC history at 46, makes a convincing point.

Aspinall, who waited in the rafters and allowed the UFC brass to indulge in Jon Jones’ foregone conclusion faux-retirement against an aged Stipe Miocic, deserves a much better representation from the organisation he has fought under for the past six years. 

At the core of the issue, Aspinall was the victim of a foul and has since faced endless grief for protecting himself and his reputation, within the parameters of the MMA handbook. 

With his future in fighting even in doubt amidst debate with the UFC, the Aspinall-Gane rematch will, if it ever happens, be shrouded in accusation of Aspinall having ‘cut his losses’.

But the narrative really should be whether the heavyweights can meet in the ring and fight fair.

READ NEXT: Six Nations third round winners and losers: Ireland and Scotland joy, woe for Wales