Saturday, May 26, 2012Mostly Cloudy 20°C
MB Toronto

Morning Brew: mayoral candidates to gather in Scarborough, Pantalone and Mammoliti express interest in the UFC, Smitherman vows to create "signature parks," deadly fires in the GTA, Leafs and Raptors lose

Posted by Derek Flack / March 29, 2010

TD Tower and CN TowerToronto's mayoral candidates will be in Scarborough tonight for a Q & A session with local residents at Mary Ward Catholic Secondary School on Kennedy Rd. The event marks the first time the six leading candidates -- George Smitherman, Rocco Rossi, Giorgio Mammoliti, Joe Pantalone, Sarah Thomson and Rob Ford -- will be together to debate the issues and sell their platforms. Organizers have expressed hope that the candidates won't stack the crowd with supporters drawn from outside of Scarborough, which would defeat the purpose of the proceedings. I'm interested to see if anyone will distinguish him or herself in this early "battle."

Speaking of "battles," candidates Joe Pantalone and Giorgio Mammoliti appear willing to take on the provincial government in order to bring the Ultimate Fighting Championship and mixed martial arts to Toronto. While other candidates were non-committal, Rob Ford agreed that any event that can bring 50, 000 or more people to the city would be good for local business. Premier Dalton McGuinty maintains that the UFC is not a priority for his government.

Sticking with the mayoral race, George Smitherman is promising that "he'll revitalize and beautify 15 'signature parks' across Toronto by giving citizen advisory councils a big role in running them." The parks would ultimately be selected by City council after citizens propose what they'd like to see improved about their local green spaces. It's a good idea in theory. Why not, after all, let those who use the parks decide what to do with them? But funding remains the big issue. According to the Star, "Toronto's auditor general warned that the $233 million backlog in park maintenance and repairs could grow to $600 million by 2018."

The weekend saw a tragic string of fires across the GTA, which have left two people dead and another two in critical condition. Although it's rare that to have three significant and deadly fires occur so close to one another, there's currently no reason to suggest that this is anything but an unfortunate coincidence.

If you're reading this before embarking on a commute that'll take you north on highway 400, you might want to think of an alternate route. A tractor trailer has crashed and caught fire just south of Finch Ave. and only one lane is getting through. It sounds as though this might be an extended delay.

In Sports:

The Leafs put in a valiant effort against the Penguins, but ultimately couldn't stop the Sidney Crosby show. Falling 5-4 in a shootout, they can at least take consolation in the fact that they gave the Stanley Cup defenders a run for their money.

News was worse for the Raptors, who utterly collapsed against the Miami Heat. Outscored 19-7 in the final six minutes or so, the Raps remain in a dog-fight with Chicago -- who beat Detroit last night -- for the last playoff berth in the East.

And here's what we got up to on the weekend:

Photo by andyscamera, member of the blogTO Flickr pool.

Discussion

29 Comments

Christine / March 29, 2010 at 09:35 am
user-pic
On bringing the UFC fight to Ontario, who is McGuinty to decide for the entire population that this sport is 'not a priority'? i'm not a big fan, but government officials should not assume what is or isn't a priority for people (whether we're talking UFC or a big economic plan and despite the fact that there actually are thousands of Torontonians and GTA outsiders who would kill to watch it). Maybe they should remember we're a democracy and let the people decide what is our 'priority'. Dont assume what we want...Let us vote
Torontonian replying to a comment from Christine / March 29, 2010 at 09:52 am
user-pic
Maybe there's a concern about what would happen if you get 50,000 nearly bloodthirsty lager louts in the same place and the scene turns ugly (bad judgement call by a referee).

Look at what happened this past weekend when a hockey coach ironically named Playfair went ballistic in British Columbia.
He's only one person but can you imagine 50,000 in a like mood?
Mike replying to a comment from Torontonian / March 29, 2010 at 09:57 am
user-pic
That's an excellent point. All fans of MMA are drunken buffoons looking to riot.

Just curious: Where in the city were you able to find paintbrushes that wide?
Xavier replying to a comment from Christine / March 29, 2010 at 10:03 am
user-pic
By now we know that Dalton is far more interested in what limiting what we can do. It would be out of character to allow a sport that has a better safety record than boxing or football.
BTW: Can the Torontonian give an example of when rioting has happened at an MMA event? Its not like its an OCAP demonstration
Mike W replying to a comment from Torontonian / March 29, 2010 at 10:27 am
user-pic
How many incidents like this has UFC had in the past?
Jason / March 29, 2010 at 11:28 am
user-pic
Ok I had to say this. First off I absolutely agree that it's not fair to say all UFC fans will riot. What rock do you live under. Secondly how long has hockey be legal? I was on Young street after we won the gold and it was insane. That being said it wasn't even that bad, just people acting a little crazy. Lastly I think it is ridiculous the a politician can tell us what we want. At least put it to a vote. Why for free country it seems more and more things are not in our control.Oh boy don't get me started on that topic.
agentsmith replying to a comment from Torontonian / March 29, 2010 at 12:18 pm
user-pic
If you knew even the first thing about this sport, you'd know that this has never happened at a UFC event, EVER... not even back in the 1990's when there were (almost) no rules. Neither were there any incidents at either of the two events held in Montreal, and if the fans in Montreal don't riot, I highly doubt the fans in Toronto will.
agentsmith replying to a comment from Christine / March 29, 2010 at 12:20 pm
user-pic
What McGuinty really means is that it's not a priority for him to fight the Ontario Athletic Commission over a sport that he personally doesn't give a shit about one way or the other. The fact is that the head of the athletic commission doesn't like mixed martial arts and refuses to sanction it. It's as simple as that. Nothing will change until he's either replaced or pressured to change his tune.
Robyn replying to a comment from agentsmith / March 29, 2010 at 12:37 pm
user-pic
Exactly. McGuinty only has so much political capital (...ok...almost none) and there are much more important issues he needs to get behind to push through the legislature.
Todd / March 29, 2010 at 01:29 pm
user-pic
"Smitherman vows to create "signature parks," deadly fires in the GTA" - those are some serious accusations there...
agentsmith replying to a comment from Robyn / March 29, 2010 at 01:35 pm
user-pic
It's true, he does have much more important things on his mind... like screwing Toronto out of billions of dollars of transit funding, for example.
Xavier replying to a comment from agentsmith / March 29, 2010 at 02:02 pm
user-pic
Right, because everyone was surprise he broke yet another promise.
Roger / March 29, 2010 at 03:13 pm
user-pic
If Joe Pantalone and Giorgio Mammoliti battled it in a UFC fight, who'd win?
hbr / March 29, 2010 at 03:34 pm
user-pic
http://www.fightchat.com/108-bloodiest-mma-fight-videos/...... this is why Ontario should not entertain this so called sport....it is only a glorification of violence where steroid pumped, punch drunk cave men beat the shit out of each other...and don't even think of comparing it to hockey..... What the gov is attempting is to try and responsibly disallow impressionable eyes from seeing this crap and perhaps copying this idiotic behavioral pattern.... we've see the influence of popular gangster culture on the minds of developing children ....all we need is this sensless sport to be yet another aspiration...
jason / March 29, 2010 at 03:59 pm
user-pic
hahah Hey HBR so disillusioned with reality. Did you not see the hits that are happening lately, where people are throwing elbows and knocking people completely out in hockey. If you actually watch a fight you will understand that most of the fights are about holds and ground submissions. For example GSP who is one of the more popular fighters barely hits people, he will submit some with holds. Basically like high school wrestling. Yes there is blood but it's mostly small cuts that bleed. Blood won't kill you. Here is another argument. If parents can't raise a sensible kid don't blame is on TV. How many kids grew watching any number of wars on tv or in the news and didn't decide to go out and kill a number or people in a jungle. Thats just my two cents about how Canada is becoming to ultra conservative like the APPARENTLY FREE AMERICA.
Chris replying to a comment from hbr / March 29, 2010 at 04:02 pm
user-pic
Explain to me how that video you linked to is any worse than the infinite number of Don Cherry "Rock Em Sock Em" videos, or other videos of "hockey's best fights" routinely peddled by the NHL's neanderthal segment (i.e Don Cherry and his ilk, with the blessing of the NHL).

I'm no apologist for MMA generally or the UFC, but it seems to me that Ontario's refusal to sanction fights is hypocritical - it has nothing to with legality, since Quebec and BC both agreed to sanction the sport, and they were interpreting the very same proviions of the Criminal Code.

The Province continues to sanction boxing, which is every bit as bloody, and probably more dangerous than MMA. As long as that continues, their refusal to sanction MMA in Ontario, when there is a clear demand for the product, is absolutely hyprocritical.

hbr replying to a comment from jason / March 29, 2010 at 04:11 pm
user-pic
True about the NHL and recent hits....but the media and the NHL themselves are taking step to phase this sort of conduct out , in our modern times...And i completely understand MMA and submission holds and all that...i took martial arts,boxing/kickboxing for 17 yrs...and saw a shift in the perception of the fighter both through drug abuse and the increase in agressive testosterone driven behaviour, taking a martial"art" and turning it into a sailor's brawl and marketing skull clad clothes along with it...it's about the psycology...and regarding the war on tv comment you made, yes true, but there is an equal and opposite reaction to that type of domination and violence in the form of protest eg anti Bush/republican sentiment.parents raising kids?....that assumes that everyone is of sound mind and responsible attitude, even of mature age..
hbr replying to a comment from Chris / March 29, 2010 at 04:16 pm
user-pic
yes, and the don cherry brand of hockey is criticized,even by you...and is being legislated out of the sport due to it's destructive potential...yes we sanction boxing but boxers arent beaten to a pulp as they lay there semi concious, having there heads pummeled into the tarmac, the ref stops it as soon as there is a victorious blow or the opponent appears permanently compromised......i am not a lawyer so i cannot comment of the legal issues that BC and Quebec and Ontario need to adress regarding this sports mainstream visibility
jason / March 29, 2010 at 04:23 pm
user-pic
HBR - I think I do agree with you on a lot of areas your talking about. Hockey has been trying to clean up the hits. I would assume that if sanctioned the UFC would have to also. I know the UFC and MMA has taking martial arts to a weird new place. But in that same statement people like the change. So basically it's a watch it if you like it and don't if you don't. I don't think having it on TV will make the kids of Canada any more crazy. I think what the problem with kids now a days is there is no consequences for there actions and parents find an easy scape goat in blaming everyone but themselves. I remember when i got in a fight in grade school I got the strap. Now im not saying hit kids but come on something needs to change. Anyways different topic. Something I keep saying over and over is people bitch and moan and nothing is ever done. If we the people from Ontario want UFC why don't we do something about. Apparently this is a country where the people will be heard hahah
hbr / March 29, 2010 at 04:32 pm
user-pic
..and you are right too....kids today need the strap,lol...But don't you see a problem with society becoming more and more visually violent?...could it also be possible that with poor mentorship or parenting, that kids learn from what's popular and immediately accessible, a media with a lowered tolerance towards violence?
jason / March 29, 2010 at 04:48 pm
user-pic
hbr- true but I remember my dad showing me a rambo movie at 10. The perfect age to be subjected and changed by violence but my dad was there to tell me that this is not real life. He was always there for me. I know many and i say many dads or moms also are just not there for their kids. But don't blame that on TV. I don't think the country is getting more violent because of TV or movies I think it has more to do with jobs/after school programs and so on. Look at a place like Detroit. The lose of decent jobs. Anyways none of this really means anything about the fact they won't even let us vote for UFC. I would be the first person to respect the decision if 51% of Ontarian said they didn't want. Anyone know of a place were something like this has started? We should march on City Hall ( non violently of course)
agentsmith replying to a comment from hbr / March 29, 2010 at 05:06 pm
user-pic
You clearly have no clue what you're talking about. For starters, "tarmac" is the type of pavement used on airport runways... I think I can say with confidence that no MMA bout has ever been held on an airport runway, or any other paved surface for that matter. Second, fights are stopped in MMA as soon as the fighter is "not intelligently defending himself"... meaning that a fighter can be "knocked out" even when he is still completely conscious.
hbr replying to a comment from agentsmith / March 29, 2010 at 05:40 pm
user-pic
lol....you just make such a ridiculous ass of yourself every time you try and be a pick arse commentator...the tarmac ref is what some fighters use to describe going down in a dogfight... .the airport or tarmac is a reference to a controlled dogfight between two trained combatants...an allusion if you will...http://www.amazon.co.uk/Tarmac-Warrior-Violent-Extreme-Fighting/dp/1840186755....there you go fool should have goggled that too
hbr replying to a comment from agentsmith / March 29, 2010 at 05:42 pm
user-pic
clearly clearly obviously
hbr replying to a comment from jason / March 29, 2010 at 05:55 pm
user-pic
you're right on that point Jason...
agentsmith replying to a comment from hbr / March 29, 2010 at 07:23 pm
user-pic
The description of that book says it's about some guy's illegal bare-knuckle "fights on the motorways and A roads around Britain"... meaning literally on tarmac pavement. You're referencing this book in a discussion about modern legal MMA, and I'm the ridiculous ass? Congrats, you're retarded.
hbr / March 30, 2010 at 12:18 am
user-pic
no little fella....tarmac is a reference to illegal fighting surfaces and the extreme nature of the act, which the sport pushes to promote itself(extreme fighting),, sorta like rebel and burning skulls, there arent any real burning skulls racing around, but they become a representative symbol,like tarmac and fighting, get it finally?
agentsmith / March 30, 2010 at 12:59 am
user-pic
Yeah, it's some British street fighting slang, I get it. And you're using it in a conversation with Canadians about legalizing MMA in Ontario, claiming that UFC fighters are "having there heads pummeled into the tarmac", and we're just supposed to know that you don't literally mean tarmac. Plus all the other bullshit you're spouting, plus your awesome writing skills, equals you're dumb.
hbr / March 30, 2010 at 08:12 am
user-pic
"and we're just supposed to know that you don't literally mean tarmac"....exactly the point of my first response to you, thank you for coming full circle here...that point being, that you're too quick, like alot of the people on here to to find something to pick at while missing the greater point of the response.."You clearly have no clue what you're talking about". For starters, "dumb" means lacking the power of speech physically....see how one can run with that? ...so settle down little guy

Add a Comment

Other Cities: VancouverMontreal