Diaz Camp: Condit Never Wanted Rematch, Accepted Bout After Hearing Test Results
Carlos Condit might have accepted a rematch, but Nick Diaz's camp doesn't believe the UFC interim champ ever intended on actually fighting.
After a controversial decision at UFC 143, there was talk of an immediate rematch between Condit and Diaz, but Condit's camp turned down the offer and admitted they weren't interested in a rematch.
"At this point, [a rematch] is not something we're looking to do," Condit's manager Malki Kawa told MMAFighting. We're looking for Georges [St-Pierre]. People forget, Carlos waited a long time to get this fight. He was moved around, and shuffled around between fights. He won the fight."
"It doesn't interest us at all. I think clearly and decisively, he won the fight. Even [UFC President] Dana [White] scored it for him. All of the opinions that matter scored Carlos as the winner."
It was a bout that tested the importance of octagon aggression and strikes landed. Condit landed more strikes, but Diaz controlled the octagon throughout the bout by constantly pressing forward and attempting to engage.
With the MMA world in an uproar over the decision, the UFC went to work on setting up an immediate rematch. After turning down the initial offer, Condit's camp finally gave in and accepted another bout with Diaz.
Everything looked to be a go for the interim championship rematch, until Diaz's drug test results came in.
The former Strikeforce welterweight champion tested positive for "marijuana metabolites," which put a dagger in any rematch hopes.
Still, Diaz's camp believes the bout was doomed from the start. According to a post on Twitter, Condit never intended on fighting Diaz a second time.
"Condit accepts rematch after he was notified by @danawhite @ufc about test result. Never intended to rematch," the post read on Nick and Nate Diaz's conjoined Twitter account.
It isn't known who exactly sent out the tweet, but Condit wasted no time in posting a response to the accusation.
"It's bull [expletive]. I agreed to the rematch [Tuesday] morning. Ask @danawhite. That's a fact," posted Condit.
Stay tuned to Bleacher Report as more information comes in on this unfolding story.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?