Cat Zingano Appeals UFC 232 Result, Wants Loss to Megan Anderson Overturned

Cat Zingano UFC
Cat Zingano Credit: Dave Mandel/

Cat Zingano is petitioning the CSAC to overturn her TKO loss against Megan Anderson at UFC 232 to a No Contest.

As expected, ‘Alpha’ Cat Zingano has filed an appeal with the California State Athletic Commission in an attempt to overturn the result of her UFC 232 fight against Megan Anderson. The hotly anticipated women’s featherweight fight ended in a TKO win for Anderson, after a head kick she threw rendered Zingano unable to continue. However, the controversy came when replays clearly showed Anderson’s toe gauging Zingano’s eye. While not intentional, the end result was uncomfortable to watch, and resulted in iris and retina damage, increased pressure in the eye, as well as a hemorrhage.

MMA Junkie was first to report the news on Monday, and obtained a copy of the appeal. In it, Zingano’s legal representative argues that “the language of the Unified Rules regarding eye gouging is non exhaustive and the examples listed, namely ‘eye gouging by means of fingers, chin, or elbow’ are not meant as the only methods by which a foul may occur.” The rules, which Nevada has adopted, state that “eye gouging of any kind” is illegal, before citing the specific examples listed by Gable.

Gable goes on to argue that “had the Unified Rules intended to limit this foul to only the examples that followed and exclude toes from this foul, this rule would have been written with limiting language such as, ‘only eye gouging by means of fingers, chin, or elbow is illegal’ and omit the words ‘of any kind.'”

His final argument suggests that should the ruling in the cage stand (made by referee Marc Goddard), it would encourage toe pokes and endanger fighters.

That having been said, former ref ‘Big’ John McCarthy, who played a major role in constructing the Unified Rules of MMA, stated back in December that Goddard made the right call. Responding to a question about the result on Twitter, he stated that “Cat was kicked with a legal kick, it was a toe that caught her in the eye, but it was not illegal and is not the same as being poked with a finger.”

“You punch with a closed fist,” he added in a follow-up response. “If you sustain an eye injury based upon a legal punch the eye injury could lead to you losing the fight via TKO. A fighter can not control toes in the same fashion they can fingers. That’s why we do not call toe pokes to the eye.”

Time will tell if Cat Zingano’s attorney can successfully argue otherwise. The case will be heard by the athletic commission sometime next month, per CSAC Executive Director Andy Foster.