Elsalvajeloco Posted June 7, 2016 Share Posted June 7, 2016 24 minutes ago, TheVileOne said: But yeah, you can't cash a paycheck from your boss and expect them to not be upset if you aren't towing the company line. Not saying it's fair, but that's business. I love Stitch, but the UFC had no reason not to fire him when he was denouncing the Reebok deal. The president doesn't owe him a phone call either in that case. The top brass delegate such work. As I said, it's basically the job Josh Gross turned down 11 years ago and that's why. Also, you can see why Gross is pissed at all this coverage (based on his tweets). He has been on a rollercoaster of employment and didn't even get a single mention of support unless you count Jordan Breen's bitching (especially on the Beatdown After the Bell on Saturday when the Helwani story broke) as support. No one came to his aide and he was the one that didn't take a single dime from Zuffa. Helwani can still have a career because he still has the connects. Gross crossing the UFC pretty much cost him his. No access to the UFC means that a lot of websites don't want to hire him. Helwani did try to play and is playing the sympathy card. You can say what Zuffa did, but you have to wait until people want to talk to you to say what you did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
odessasteps Posted June 7, 2016 Share Posted June 7, 2016 I wonder if being on zuffa payroll and covering ufc makes it any different than reporters who work for yes or nesn or sportsnet or masn and cover the teams owned by their respective networks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elsalvajeloco Posted June 7, 2016 Share Posted June 7, 2016 Pugmire has tweeted the ban has been lifted on Helwani. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elsalvajeloco Posted June 7, 2016 Share Posted June 7, 2016 8 minutes ago, odessasteps said: I wonder if being on zuffa payroll and covering ufc makes it any different than reporters who work for yes or nesn or sportsnet or masn and cover the teams owned by their respective networks. Not that I can see, but how many of those guys are willing to jeopardize their access? I mean Helwani's been around for awhile and most seasoned MMA journalists know what pisses the UFC off. You're telling me that breaking news on big UFC fights 20 minutes before the UFC wants to do it doesn't piss them off? Also, you don't expect any retaliation? Come on, bruh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
odessasteps Posted June 7, 2016 Share Posted June 7, 2016 In this instance, i think both parties had faults. And now, they apparently unbanned him. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elsalvajeloco Posted June 7, 2016 Share Posted June 7, 2016 1 minute ago, odessasteps said: In this instance, i think both parties had faults. Well, of course. However, we're talking about someone who wants to be the innocent little kid and playing it up knowing damn well what sets them off. This dude ain't no beat reporter for boxing in the 1940s. He was getting the inside track and now we know how he got it. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
odessasteps Posted June 7, 2016 Share Posted June 7, 2016 I love the ufc press release that doesn't even mention him by name. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DreamBroken Posted June 7, 2016 Share Posted June 7, 2016 I love the thread title. Banned for life but then maybe not 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Wilson Posted June 7, 2016 Share Posted June 7, 2016 Shortest Lifetime Ban Ever. Although not sure what threats/concessions SBNation had to give to have such a quick turnaround. Highly doubt their opinion of Helwani has changed a bit and they'll take the first excuse to not give him credentials to any event. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Natural Posted June 7, 2016 Share Posted June 7, 2016 I can see both sides to UFC vs. Ariel Helwani. UFC’s pissed because they wanted to break the huge news Brock Lesnar’s fighting at UFC 200. Ariel’s a reporter and it’s a big story to get the drop on. There’s no need for a life ban or rather…Shortest. Life. Ban. Ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muhammedboehm Posted June 7, 2016 Share Posted June 7, 2016 That's the part that I don't get Ariel reported it like 20 mins before UFC showed the video. Even thou Dana flat out lied to reporters earlier in the weekend when asked if Brock would be fighting. If the Dana/UFC doesn't go nuts no one would have remembered who reported this first, really most people won't anyone. Just to me seams like Dana/UFC wanting to have full control of everything in a day and age when that's not possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shawn411 Posted June 7, 2016 Share Posted June 7, 2016 Crying always work especially from a grown man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mistah Na1m4rk Posted June 7, 2016 Share Posted June 7, 2016 11 hours ago, TheVileOne said: But yeah, you can't cash a paycheck from your boss and expect them to not be upset if you aren't towing the company line. Not saying it's fair, but that's business. I love Stitch, but the UFC had no reason not to fire him when he was denouncing the Reebok deal. The president doesn't owe him a phone call either in that case. The top brass delegate such work. Uppity. So very uppity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now