` FanPosts: MMA fans react to NSAC decision on Nick Diaz - Fighters Only Magazine

FanPosts: MMA fans react to NSAC decision on Nick Diaz


Yesterday Nick Diaz was handed a twelve month suspension from the Nevada State Athletic Commission after failing a drug test following his February fight with Carlos Condit.

But while the suspension was expected the size of the fine wasn’t - he was ordered to surrender thirty per cent of the $200,000 he was paid for the bout.

In the latest round of Fighters Only FanPosts, readers around the world react to the news:


allen firth

I think the fine of Diaz was absolutely warranted, especially given his responses to questioning. A smarter fighter would have answered more diplomatically, if you're going to be that brash with the people holding sway over your penalty, then you shouldn't expect anything less than what Diaz got dished out.

Diaz comes across as a brawler, someone with true fighting skill but little else. These days to succeed at the highest level you have to have intellect and diplomacy not just good cardio and heavy hands. All the talent in the world is not going to keep you at the top, unfortunately that is the way top flight sports is these days.


Conor McManus
The Diaz suspension and fine, in my opinion, is warranted. Diaz failed to acknowledge his ADHD on his pre-fight medical questionnaire and it’s his second time failing a drugs test for marijuana. He should have learned from the first time he failed that he needed to disclose his condition and that he was prescribed a medical marijuana card.

Diaz knew what he doing the second time and should have realised he needed to disclose his ADHD in any fight post 2007 and his prescription. It’s a real shame to see the suspension given but Diaz was definitely in the wrong.



As a professional athlete, Diaz knew that he wasn't allowed to have any type of drug in his system, its basic rules, that a child could understand. Marijuana is such a schoolboy drug, he isn't above the law, this is his second time being caught, he has to have a penalty.

Also, the fact he screwed up the GSP fight, tested positive for drugs twice and then didn't show up for his BJJ super fight, just shows how much he doesn't care about his fans, he doesn't even give explanations, he isn't a good ambassador for the already criticised sport.

He puts on a good fight, but he shouldn't be above the law because he is a Diaz, he took an illegal drug, he is not a child, he is a grown man and knew what he was doing was wrong. In my eyes he punishment is just.


Lee Andersen

Why do athletes risk this? In a modern day society you are aware of drugs and the impacts it has on day to day living. You are aware that it is still part of sports full stop from athletics to mixed martial arts. Whether it be marijuana or anabolic steroids the cons outweigh the pros.

So you might get a buzz or you might be getting stronger does that matter to what you can loose being suspended for a year means you can't fight = no payday, you can't compete in the sport you love. You let down your family, friends and fans. You could potentially loose sponsorships as no one wants to be associated with a junkie. Is it really worth it for a few minutes of being high risking everything you worked so hard to get?


Matt Walby

Don't understand how NSAC can justify effectively giving Chael Sonnen permission to take roids yet giving Nick a 12 month ban for marijuana metabolites?! It's not even entirely clear if they are a banned substance. How that can warrant a 12 month ban and 30% fine is beyond me. The UFC needs Nick more than he needs them. Couldn't possibly jeopardise money spinning Silva-Sonnen II PPV though! Unwarranted ban!


Tom Bell

Personally, I struggle to understand why such a harsh punishment has been handed to Nick Diaz. First and foremost, he is employed to fight. Marijuana is a substance that holds a detrimental effect on Diaz' fighting ability, which if anything, compromises his employment performance as a fighter.

I feel that my criticism of the punishment does not lie with the NSAC committee members itself, but the legislation they have put in place in the first place.

I can't help feel that this legislation previously set by the NSAC does not reflect the surrounding geographical marijuana culture. California, where Diaz hails from, is arguably the MMA hub of the US and a state where Marijuana is most easily accessed.

I feel the legislation set by the NSAC originally is in need of review, as it currently stands very middle-minded, middle-aged and middle-class and Diaz was victim because of this.



Let's have it right, weed does NOT enhance your performance in any way, shape or form. Steroids DO enhance performance. Testerone replacement therapy DOES enhance performance.

The NSAC have banned him for a year because he attempted to sue them, and, he took the piss.

Nick Diaz needs a personal man manager, Cesar Gracie is a excellent coach, but, a man manager? He sucks. If I was Cesar and I went to pick Nick up for a press conference to fight with GSP, would I take no for a answer? No. Would I hunt his ass down like lion hunting its prey? Yes.

All in all, a year suspension is pathetic, 3 months would of been sufficient. And, Nick Diaz needs someone to help him out. Pick me!

Matt Edwards

While it’s difficult to object to Diaz being punished for breaking rules he was aware of, in this instance the punishment is at odds with the crime. Such a harsh penalty for marijuana usage, which would have had a negligible influence over the fight, would imply that Charles Bennett was on the NSAC panel, because that guy is as crazy as a goddamned horse.

Clearly, the punishment imposed on Nick Diaz represents not only the consequence of his failed drug test but also of his actions in response to it. Diaz fought back against the Nevada State Athletic Commission and has been made an example of. 

It’s commendable that recent NSAC decisions, such as the reduced suspension for Alastair Overeem and the testosterone exemption issued to Chael Sonnen, encourage fighters to co-operate with them. However, fighters should be able to defend themselves against rulings they consider to be unfair. NSAC’s actions suggest that they do not respond well to being questioned, which is a dangerous attitude for a governing body to have.