No Strickland Split! Sonnen Had It 5-0 Du Plessis

Chael Sonnen felt like he was watching a different fight after judges scored Strickland vs. Du Plessis a split, with Du Plessis winning by one point on one scorecard.

There’s been a lot of controversy surrounding the Sean Strickland vs. Dricus Du Plessis split decision at UFC 297. Fans are out there complaining about Du Plessis winning on various fronts. There’s the ‘gotta take it decisively from the champ’ crowd. The ‘look at the stats’ crowd. The ‘headbutt’ posse is pumping that up. And then Strickland’s own coach saying they lost the optics battle.

As for Chael P. Sonnen, he’s going crazy wondering what everyone is talking about. As far as he’s concerned, he watched a one-sided win from Dricus Du Plessis. And he’s a self-proclaimed Strickland-stan!

“What did I see here between Du Plessis and Strickland?” Sonnen said in a new video on his YouTube channel. “I cheer for Sean, right? … We lost every round. We lost every round of the fight. … In my heart, I think it was 5-0. With a real bias to Strickland, with upset stomach and sweaty palms, it was 5-0 and at absolute best-case, 4-1.”

“I think that the crowd, for the most part, agreed with me,” he continued. “The live audience is a tremendous focus group for how the rest of the world is feeling. They’re educated and they’re hardcore and even if they’re drunk and it’s the end of the night, it’s the one they came for and they’re invested. And it seemed like they had no problem with the scores. I was stunned when it was a split decision.”

“So when one [judge] came in for Strickland, I was really surprised. Now, my bigger surprise was when all was said and done, Joe Rogan — who definitely qualifies as an expert in this space — and Dana White — who definitely qualifies as an expert in this space — both had Strickland. Did we watch the same thing?”

Sonnen tried to figure out what may have happened and came to a conclusion.

“I heard the commentary and they didn’t,” he said. “And I’m just wondering if I got influenced?”

For what it’s worth, I watched the fight with the volume down low on account of it happening at 2 in the morning. I could hear the buzz of the crowd and just the slightest muffled hint of Cormier and Cruz in the background. And I saw the fight 1, 2, and 5 for Strickland. 2, 3, and 5 were all close rounds, so not a robbery by any means. But Strickland’s jab was low-key busting Du Plessis up. In his own words, the South African looked like ‘a cauliflower’ after the bout.

This may be where optics come into play. Du Plessis certainly looked more active. He was moving forward, swinging big, and landing takedowns. Strickland had little other than a mean backfoot jab and the ability to get right back up after being taken down. Once the blood started flowing down his face it was practically game over. No one seemed to care about the colony of mice around Dricus’ eyes.

Just bleed!

With Strickland’s new popularity, we doubt the flow of outrage over his loss will lessen as time goes on. Will it earn him an immediate rematch? UFC CEO Dana White implied it would not, but with UFC 300 still sitting there needing more juice, anything is possible.

A lot of new fans seemed to think Strickland vs. Du Plessis was an all-time great. Maybe we should run it back, especially if Adesanya is injured and Chimaev still unable to travel to America.