mmittee had recommended that one official from the Comptroller and Auditor Generals offi

Each week, ESPN.com writer Brett Okamoto provides his take on the hottest topics in the world of mixed martial arts.This week, Okamoto squares off with UFC featherweight Cub Swanson?to debate the latest news and preview Saturdays UFC 201 card. Swanson (22-7), 32, returns to the Octagon on Aug. 6 at UFC Fight Night in Salt Lake City against Tatsuya Kawajiri.1.?Heavyweight Mark Hunt has ripped the UFC for its handling of the Brock Lesnar?drug testing situation. Do you agree with Hunts take?Swanson:?I think he does have a great point. I dont know if I would have necessarily attacked the UFC about it, but I definitely feel like I would want some compensation for what happened to him. Its just not right, the whole scenario of somebody like Brock making that kind of money and then failing his drug test. I think when someone fails a drug test in general, its stupid now as far as the fines. I dont think athletic commissions should get any of that money. I think it should go to the fighter who went in there. Drug testing in this sport is better than what it used to be. I think it could always be better, but Im not sure exactly how. I dont know why, but I dont fully trust USADA [United States Anti-Doping Agency]. Theres big money on the line, and Ive heard people from the boxing community speak negatively about them. I appreciate what theyre trying to do, though. I think guys are scared to do stuff, and the guys who have been caught, its definitely making waves.Okamoto:?All right, so heres what I dont like about Hunts take: He sort of knew what he was getting into. He cant complain about the UFC waiving that four-month testing window for Lesnar now, since he knew that going in and agreed to it. He even spoke about it before the fight, basically saying, Its not right, but Im gonna KO him anyway. If you say that, you just dont have a leg to stand on to complain about it after. The rest of what hes saying? I agree with a lot of it. I dont buy into this idea the UFC knew about Lesnars failed test before July 9. I do believe, however, they could have known the results had they expedited the process of getting them. From conversations Ive had with people in the know, the UFC can accelerate that process, but its expensive. Were talking about UFC 200 -- and an athlete in Lesnar who already wasnt tested the mandatory four months prior to his fight. If youre not ponying up for expedited results in that situation, when are you? In that regard, the UFC let Hunt down, and hes well within his rights to be angry about it.2.?Chael Sonnens two-year drug suspension officially ended July 23. Do you expect him to fight again and, if so, whom should it be against?Swanson:?The problem with Chael is that hes an exciting talker but a boring fighter. So, I dont really care to watch him fight again. I think hes better off as an analyst. I just ... no. He talks a big game, and thats it. I think what has been great about Conor McGregor is that he talks a big game but hes also an exciting fighter -- which Chael fell very short of. So, I dont want to see him fight again.Okamoto:?Nope. Hes never fighting again. He said he retired, guys. Why would he retire if he was going to fight again? ... Just kidding. Of course Sonnen will fight, and Oct. 1 in Portland seems like a soft landing spot, wouldnt you agree? He has been added to USADAs testing pool and very strongly hinted at the comeback everyone knew was coming. So, who does he fight? No. 1 option is Nick Diaz, who is coming off an 18-month suspension in August. That matchup works for both fighters and is clearly outstanding for television ratings. And with the UFC falling into new ownership, with an exclusive television deal set to expire in two years, good television ratings would be a nice way to increase its potential value. Sonnen-Diaz is the way to go.3.?If Tyron Woodley defeats Robbie Lawler for the UFC welterweight championship on Saturday, how does he do it?Swanson:?By keeping a high pace. Everybody seems to be fighting Robbies fight, letting him keep distance and come in and out when he wants to. Youve got to bull him, level change and make him fight completely on defense. Woodley is very capable of doing that; its just a matter of having the confidence to rush right forward, and then be able to do that for five rounds. Tyron looks great in some fights, and others he hasnt looked his best. If he shows up at his best, I could see him winning that fight.Okamoto:?Knockout. Nobody is better in championship rounds than Lawler. If this goes five rounds, Lawler will find a way to win at least three. Woodley needs a finish, and the most likely way he gets it is a knockout. Woodley is a very good wrestler, but I dont think well see him go heavy on takedowns here. Lawler is very, very hard to hold down and posture up on. Woodley doesnt have bad cardio, but hes not a lean, 170-pound track star, either, a la Carlos Condit. He can be aggressive, as Swanson suggests, but he also needs to pace himself. Blowing energy trying to outwrestle Lawler for 25 minutes? I dont see it. I think hell try to be opportunistic on the feet and see if any of Lawlers durability has been compromised by the wars he has been in.4.?With the womens 135-pound division as chaotic as it has ever been, play matchmaker: What fights should the UFC be looking to put together?Swanson:?I couldnt even tell you, with everyone beating everyone. I love that, personally. I think when we have a dominant champion over the years, the division kind of gets stagnant. With things switching over and over, you can really do any matchup you want. The one Id like to see is Ronda [Rousey] fighting Holly [Holm] again. I lost a lot of respect for her, not coming back yet. Youve got to come back after your losses. Look at Holly -- she came back; she has lost twice now; shell be back again, fighting to prove to herself shes as good as she is. I think Ronda needs to do that.Okamoto:?If its up to me: Amanda Nunes-Julianna Pena for the title. Why not? Holm, Miesha Tate and Rousey are all coming off a loss. Valentina Shevchenko just beat Holm, but she also just lost to Nunes back in March. Pena might be young, but shes mean and wont give an inch. Stylistically, thats a fun championship fight. From there, Tate-Cat Zingano II makes sense. First one was close, Tate felt it was stopped early. Tate probably needs some time after UFC 200, but thats a fight with a story behind it. Rousey? What if she were to come back against Shevchenko? Fans would probably jump all over that as a gimme fight, but if theres one thing Ive learned, there are no gimme fights in this division right now -- and after a full year off, you know what? Id be cool with Rousey not jumping immediately back into the fire against the champion (Nunes) or her worst style matchup (Holm). Yeah, Ill allow it. That leaves Holm versus either a midlevel bantamweight to get back in line for the title or, if she wants it, a 140-pound super fight against Cris Cyborg Justino.5.?Looking ahead to UFC 202, who has a greater advantage in the rematch: McGregor, because hes now familiar with 170 pounds, or Nate Diaz, because he has a full training camp this time?Swanson:?I think Nate has the advantage. I know Conor is smart enough to make those adjustments and come in a little more prepared for Nate in general, but I think the biggest factor is Nate not caring. Most guys Conor has fought, he has beat before even getting in there. Thats not the case with Nate. I think Nate will be even more dangerous this time around.Okamoto:?When it comes down to that part of it, I think McGregor benefits slightly more. The knowledge and adjustments hell make for the rematch, I see them as being even greater than what Diaz will gain having a full camp. That does not necessarily mean Im picking McGregor to win. I just think he will go into the rematch with a completely different (better) tactical approach, whereas Diaz will fight similar to how he did the first time, just in better shape with better timing. Both will benefit from actually knowing ahead of time who they are fighting, clearly. But I think McGregor will benefit from it more. He has more he can change. Trai Turner Jersey . -- Jimmy Walkers first PGA Tour trophy came with a special gift tucked inside. Javien Elliott Jersey . -- The proud fathers huddled near the Dallas Stars dressing room, smiling, laughing and telling stories while wearing replica green sweaters of their sons team. http://www.cheappanthersjerseyselite.com/?tag=cheap-antwione-williams-jersey . -- Hunter Smith scored the winner with just 12 seconds remaining in the third period as the Oshawa Generals edged the host Sarnia Sting 5-4 on Friday in Ontario Hockey League action. Jared Norris Jersey . Pedro scored from a pass by Lionel Messi in the 33rd minute and added two more goals in the 47th and 72nd after Valdes saved his second penalty in four days following his stop in Wednesdays 4-0 over Ajax in the Champions League. Vernon Butler Jersey .B. -- The Baie-Comeau Drakkar took over sole possession of first place atop the Quebec Major Junior Hockey League on Thursday with their sixth straight win. The BCCI has been asked by the Supreme Court to give an undertaking by Friday, October 7, that it will unconditionally implement all the court-approved recommendations of the Lodha Committee. If the board failed to provide such an undertaking, the Supreme Court indicated it would pass an order on Friday to replace the boards office bearers with a panel of administrators.The court asked the BCCIs legal counsel Kapil Sibal to check with the board and respond by October 7; Sibal is understood to have asked for more time but the court refused.What do you want? TS Thakur, the Chief Justice of India and head of the three-judge bench hearing the matter, said. Either we pass orders tomorrow or you give us a statement that you will abide unconditionally by the recommendations and directions of the Lodha Committee.The latest developments in the tussle between the BCCI and the Lodha Committee took place in the Supreme Court on Thursday. The court was hearing the BCCIs response to the status report filed by the Lodha Committee last week, which recommended that the BCCI office bearers be superseded because they were impeding the implementation of the recommendations passed by a Supreme Court order on July 18.There was a dramatic turn of events towards the final half hour of the hearing. Sibals argument that the BCCI needed approval from two thirds of its member associations, according to the Tamil Nadu Societies Act under which the board was incorporated, received sharp response from Chief Justice Thakur.Thakur said the BCCI had been the face and forefront of defiance against the Lodha Committees recommendations. You are giving the lead to the associations, he said. You are trying to obstruct the Lodha panel. His suggestion to the BCCI in response to its members resistance was to either block their funding or to debar them.At that point, Thakur gave the BCCI an ultimatum: agree to push through the recommendations, agree to discuss with the Lodha panel and stop wasting our time.The BCCI then asked for time until October 17, keeping in mind that the court will take a 11-day break next week, but the request was denied. Sibal was asked whether he could give the BCCIs undertaking of acceptance by Friday, and when he said it was not possible because the board needed approval from its state associations, he was told: If you dont implement the recommendations, we will pass the orders.Justice Thakur reminded the BCCI and the state associations that their money was public money. He warned that funds would be stopped to states that did not want to accept the Lodha Committees recommendations. When Sibal said the state associations had their own by-laws and the BCCI had no control over them, the court said: If the associations are reluctant to reform, why do you continue to give thhem money? You are giving crores of money to them even as they refuse to reform?Sibal contended that halting payments to states would affect the domestic season - the 2016-17 Ranji Trophy had begun this morning.dddddddddddd Then there will be no domestic matches, Thakur was quoted by Hindu as saying. If matches are to be conducted, they will be held in a transparent manner. Season or no season, we will not allow a penny to be wasted. Objectivity and transparency is more important than seasons.At the start of the hearing on Thursday, the court heard submissions made by the amicus curiae Gopal Subramanium. If it were to approve the Lodha Committees recommendation to supersede the BCCI office bearers, the court asked Subramanium, would there be eligibility criteria for the people comprising the panel of administrators, and whether they needed to be cricketers? He said there was no criteria as long as the new administrators were of impeccable stature and integrity.Thakur then asked Sibal if the boards existing office bearers - the president, secretary, treasurer and join secretary - had any special skills. Sibal said BCCI president Anurag Thakur was a cricketer, having played one Ranji Trophy match for Himachal Pradesh.At this point Vikas Mehta, the lawyer representing Cricket Association of Bihar, one of the petitioners in the hearing, intervened. He claimed that Anurag Thakur, while serving as president of the Himachal Pradesh Cricket Association, had appointed himself chairman of selectors of the state team and played one Ranji Trophy match to fulfill the eligibility criteria set by the BCCI to become a national selector. Anurag Thakur eventually served as a junior national selector.Highlighting an example of the BCCI going against the court and the Lodha Committees directive, Subramanium said the board had transferred large sums of money - about INR 550 crore - last week to its state associations, despite not forming the disbursement policy mandated by the committee by the September 30 deadline. Subramanium said the horse had bolted the stable by the time the Committee found out about the transactions.Sibal defended the payment saying it was routine business and not related to the future as claimed by the Lodha Committee.The court was also told that ICC chief executive David Richardson had said the BCCI president Anurag Thakur had asked the ICC for a letter saying it would not allow any government nominee on the BCCI apex council. The Lodha Committee had recommended that one official from the Comptroller and Auditor Generals office be part of the nine-member Apex Council, which would replace the existing BCCI working committee.