Joao Carvalho's death was an accident because Charlie Ward didn't mean to kill him... but what the sport requires will result in tragedy and the fighters have no control over this 'accidental' part of the contest

I'm guessing there aren't articles and comments like this on a weekly basis because of how often a Mixed Martial Arts fight ends this way. Those of you who are obviously biased against the sport would do well to consider making a stronger argument based on the normalcy of this event rather than choosing the most pejorative words to express your sudden outrage. How many of you have even seen a fight ended by 'ground and pound' like this before? It's really quite routine, so treating it as bloodthirsty barbaric savagery solves nothing. Death as an outcome is very rare, but this should draw attention to the possibility that many fights are much closer calls than we ever realise. How many fighters survive less severe brain haemorrhaging that never gets diagnosed or reported? Practical questions like this would be a lot more constructive than all the moralistic editorialising – or am I simply in the wrong place to have such expectations? PF, Afghanistan.

Afghanistan? Well, if that's you real address I'd say you are in exactly the right place for the sort of stuff you're talking about: barbaric savagery, haemorrhaging, loss of life. What you are also dealing with is shock. Those people who watched the film – and it's right here if you wish to be completely informed – will have been startled by what they saw in context of a sporting contest. Others will just have been appalled by what they read about the death of welterweight Joao Carvalho. So, plainly, before anyone starts thinking in a practical way, they will react on an emotional, or moral level. The thought 'something must be done' always precedes actually doing something, and it's the same here. The gut reaction of many to the footage would be to ban MMA. You may notice I didn't go down that path in the column, because there are plainly dangers in forcing a physical contact sport further to the margins. Regulation, and certainly signing up to umbrella bodies such as UK Sport, would undoubtedly help going forward – but you've got to let people get over their visceral shock first. It's easy to play the only grown up in the village but if you are truthfully in Afghanistan, you may be used to a higher level of violence than the man, or woman, in the street, and capable of reacting in a more rational way when confronted with it. When the conflict in Northern Ireland was at its height, the Rolling Stone writer PJ O'Rourke travelled there, and built his report around a phrase used by a British official to describe the situation. 'An acceptable level of violence,' he called it. And no doubt the level of violence in MMA is acceptable to its fans – but it isn't to everybody, and will be appalling to some. You can't blame them for not immediately reacting in a calm, analytical manner. So today's debate centres around Monday's column, which concerned the brutal death of MMA fighter Joao Carvalho after a fight in Dublin, have taking nine punches from his opponent Charlie Ward, while on the floor offering no resistance. The brutality aside, there are serious question about the way MMA is organised and regulated, here and in Ireland where its popularity has grown hugely through local hero Conor McGregor. Death or serious injury in the ring has been debated extensively of late, so at the halfway point we'll be revisiting another column that concerned boxing and the brain injury to Nick Blackwell last month. I'll start by making one point clear: I have never advocated banning combat sports, but I do think there is a point at which the human race needs to evolve. See below.

The man was beaten to death. It wasn't an accident. If it happened anywhere else Ward would be charged with murder. When Phillip Hughes was hit with a cricket ball and died, that was an accident. A car crash on your way to work is an accident – but car manufacturers are constantly improving safety features and one of the outcomes of the Hughes tragedy was an improvement in helmet design. Player safety is an issue for officials and referees in most sports, whereas a 13th death in MMA suggests the sport's authorities don't give a damn. Stephen, Canberra.

I think they do care, Stephen, but are faced with a problem because what sets MMA apart from the other major combat sports – the ground and pound ending to bouts – also seems to me to be what makes it dangerous. I don't think we can take sport out of its context and place it in the street, either, because then much of what happens on the field of play would be considered illegal and actionable – from bowling bouncers in cricket to even the most routine foul tackle in football. So the link to murder is hardly fair. Yet it is hard to watch what happened to Carvalho and see it as anything more sophisticated than a man being beaten to death; and that is why there are so many issues around it. It's an accident because Ward didn't mean to kill him; but what the sport requires Ward to do will result in tragedy occasionally, and the fighters have no control over this 'accidental' part of the contest.

Is it not the fighters' responsibility to be more cautious? I understand the heat of the moment argument, but Ward must have known that he was hitting him an unnecessary amount of times, even if the referee didn't stop the fight. MattTheGooner, Caterham.

I know what you're saying Matt, but everything in the training of these fighters is telling them to end it, by any legal means, and ground and pound is an accepted closer in MMA. I think it must be very hard to detach from training and instinct and ask the referee, 'Are you sure about this?' In those circumstances, Ward will be looking to the referee to step in where appropriate and, if he does not, will not stop to wonder why.

The comments deriding MMA are just unfair; the same thing could have happened in a boxing match the week before. The only answer is to ban all sports where someone has died, from horseracing to motor sport and rugby. Sport will cease to exist. Bampy, Cardiff.

No, plainly that isn't the answer. Regulation and better structure, however, is a solution and can be easily achieved without going to daft extremes.

Anyone who is a true, knowledgeable fan of all combat sports will tell you that, when compared, boxing is the more dangerous. Firstly, MMA features much more than just striking, and the mix of wrestling and jujitsu grappling make for fewer prolonged blows to the head. In the fights which are fought on the feet, whenever an opponent is hurt or hits the canvas, the fight is usually stopped not long after; if the opponent is out cold or not defending himself it will be stopped within seconds. Yes, there may be a few extra blows landed which were not needed, but that is just the winner making sure the fight is over and taking his chance. In nearly all MMA fights that I have watched the two fighters hug and show respect after. In boxing the fighters take non-stop punches to the head and body and, when hurt, have 10 seconds to get back up and take more punishment. Jon Stark Targaryen, Manchester.

Now, I'm no advocate of prohibition, but can anyone else see that what Jon has described here are in essence two very flawed sports? Combat sport is like religion. If it didn't exist, knowing what we know now, we surely wouldn't invent it.

Joao Carvalho was punched repeatedly despite having been downed and the referee did not stop the fight

I used to watch MMA – Ultimate Fighting Challenge mainly – but it was ground and pound that turned me off it in the end, mainly having watched Chris Weidman lose to Luke Rockhold that way. I understand the appeal of watching a fair fight, however watching a defenceless person being attacked isn't for me. Fortier, Birmingham.

Just watched it. Ten punches to the head while on the floor, and counting. Not sure all were clean but the majority were, and there was a lot of blood. Nobody died, but I can see why you were repulsed. I'm thinking of the previous poster, Jon, who said 'if the opponent is out cold or not defending himself it will be stopped within seconds. Yes, there may be a few extra blows landed which are not needed…' – how is that discussed so casually. How can a man who is unconscious have to withstand even a second of punishment? 'Just the winner making sure the fight is over?' The man has been relieved of his senses. Believe me, it's over.

Blaming MMA alone is ridiculous. Look at Nick Blackwell the other week. When you get hit in the head for a living you are taking a risk with your own health. Every single fighter recognises this. Also, Carvalho died after a very small show in Ireland where I doubt they had the correct medical staff that you would see at a big boxing event or the UFC. UFC has never had a death in 20 years, not even in the more brutal days. IForceMyselfUponCats, Margate.

As I understand it there was no fault with the medical services at the Carvalho bout, but the fact that you can make an excuse of it being a small show demonstrates that greater regulation is needed. And maybe some sort of feline protection service on the Kent coast, if you don't mind me saying so.

This is precisely why I dislike MMA. Hitting a man on the ground is universally recognised as cowardly and unsporting. Yet it's par for the course in MMA. Once an opponent falls to the canvas, he should be given the opportunity to recover. If he fails to do that, the fight should be called off. Those are the rules that govern boxing, written almost 150 years ago yet still way ahead of the MMA. Redman, London.

And how do you propose utilising this stand-up rule in the sport of jujitsu – a main component of MMA? Can people with no idea about this sport just go away and boil their heads please? WolfgangNAK, Edinburgh.

The boiling of heads presumably being one of the many ways to win an MMA fight, much like holding your semi-conscious opponent up and beating him around the skull repeatedly. I understand that with martial arts being a component of MMA the fight will continue when a man is on the floor, I'm just struggling to reconcile it with a flurry of blows to the head while in the prone position. Surely there is a balance between martial arts and ground and pound because I've seen combat martial arts bouts and they don't end up looking like the climax of a Tarantino film.

Lighter gloves are used in MMA, so concussed fighters are knocked out and the fight stopped – as opposed to continually being hammered by heavy gloves for half an hour without a stoppage, resulting in brain damage. Read the statistics, boxing is far more damaging. Get your head out of the sensationalism and read up before you weigh-in. The ignorance on here is laughable. WolfgangNAK, Edinburgh.

Says a man whose argument, unless I am wrong, reaches its logical conclusion in a return to bare-knuckle fighting because this would achieve the quickest knockout of all. And why obsesses about gloves when a KO can also be delivered with the feet?

It says a lot about western society that MMA has mushroomed in the last 20-odd years. You would hope that humanity would be on the road to abolishing combat sports for a living not returning to a glorified version of Victorian-era prize fighting. Then again to see Floyd Mayweather getting paid a king's ransom for the pugilistic version of parking the bus, perhaps it is not surprising that MMA is so popular. MJ175, Swansea.

I think you've hit on an interesting dichotomy here, MJ, because as appalled as I am by the conclusion of some MMA bouts, I can also remember very recently paying for the Carl Frampton-Scott Quigg fight and cursing at the lack of action. I may be wrong here, but I think of MMA as a young person's thing; we have a generation reared on the intense, explosive violence of computer games, and MMA better fits that experience. My dad is a huge boxing fan, but I've never heard him express the slightest interest in MMA – whereas my sons, the oldest is 20 and we have twins of 18, all watch MMA as well as boxing, as do their friends. It is interesting that you compare it to Victorian prize fighting because when I saw some of the more brutal MMA events my first thought was of bare knuckle contests on the Downs, and the atmosphere that would have surrounded those occasions.

The lack of a regulatory body will see more end up the same way as Carvalho. Should he have even been facing the fighter that killed him? Mismatches happen in boxing but normally the referee steps in quite quickly. This referee watched Carvalho get pummelled. UKDean, Redditch.

Interesting point, Dean. It was a welterweight contest, but that doesn't instantly mean that they were well-matched welterweights. Obviously, the more splintered the regulation and organisation the greater the chance of a match-making mistake. I'm not saying that was the case here, of course.

I worry more about what MMA teaches kids. In any sport where you strike an opponent, you walk away when your opponent is down. MMA says it's OK to continue to strike after that. Kids doing this on the street will end up killing each other. A Drunken Horse, United Kingdom.

…or in prison. Philip, Merseyside.

Another valid point. It's amazing how lucid these debates can become when we leave the realm of trite Premier League name-calling.

That Carvalho's death was perfectly legal and sanctioned questions the credibility of MMA as a sport

The blame lies with the referee. As soon as someone is not intelligently defending themselves the bout should be stopped. Football Dave, Stourbridge.

Yes, but it could be argued Carvalho was defending himself because he had one arm raised in protection. Look, it seems to me the referee made a mistake, too – but I think MMA is a sport where some serious flaws make the potential consequences of referee error huge. When tragedy happens, there is always sympathy for the winning fighter, yet the emotions of the official in charge are seemingly forgotten. A man died in the ring that he was supervising: I imagine the referee of the Carvalho fight has gone through mental hell since.

If the fighters are happy to fight, then what is the issue? We wouldn't petition to ban Formula 1 if a driver crashed and died, just as we wouldn't ban boxing if someone ends up in coma. Don't forget that these guys choose to do it and genuinely love the sport. Jimbo1984, Torquay.

I'm not talking about banning, Jim, I'm talking about governance. All of this talk about how it's only one incident reminds me of nothing more than The Day Today cod-news feature about a local swimming pool. Steve Coogan played the night security watchman, Keith Mandemant, with the flattest voice imaginable. Here's my favourite part:

Keith Mandemant: This pool's been open nearly 40 years and in all that time I only slipped up once, to my mind. I was engaged in a particularly tricky word puzzle and 40 people had broken in to the pool and were, sort of, playing around, ducking, bombing, doing all manner of prohibited activities and eventually someone was killed.

Interviewer: Given that your sole responsibility is to maintain the security of the pool, isn't that an indictment against yourself?

Mandemant: Well, I would say this. I've been working here for 18 years, in 1975, no-one died; in 1976, no-one died; in 1977, no-one died; in 1978, no-one died; in 1979, no-one died; in 1980, someone died. (Pause). In 1981, no-one died; in 1982, there was the incident with the pigeon; in 1983, no-one died; in 1984, no-one died; in 1985, no-one died; in 1986 – I mean, I could go on…

Sound familiar?

If the MMA or UFC promoters want to prove it is more skill than barbarism then why not ban head shots? That way the martial artists could use skilful submission holds. Steviejay99, Colchester.

Not sure, Stevie. Isn't the sheer variety of the methods used to win a MMA fight what sets it apart?

MMA has had seven deaths in the last 10 years. A report published on boxing deaths in 2011, showed an average of 133 deaths a decade since 1890, including nine between 2010 and 2011. Double D, London.

Well, I've found 10 MMA deaths since 2007, so that's 10 in nine years not seven in 10 years – quite a difference. Equally, the boxing numbers you quote are from the Manuel Velazquez Boxing Fatality Collection which lists 923 deaths between 1890 and 2007, although the figures are disputed including, as they do, one fatality through 'over-indulgence in iced water' plus fights on Marine barracks, and other anomalies. I'm not defending boxing, and Velazquez used his research to advocate abolition, but I think it is disingenuous to compare boxing fatalities from two centuries ago with MMA deaths now, given the full advantage of modern medicine. And now, as Double D appears to have introduced rather a lot of death to the debate, here's Double Dee – and, I think, Danny Tenaglia – to balance it out with lashings of sunny, happy Italian house. You know, before we get back to extremes of violence.

The sudden rise in popularity of MMA over the past few years says a lot about the fascination with violence and the ability of promoters to exploit this with flashy packaging. If it is to be recognised as a legitimate sport then it has to be organised and regulated as one. Boxing, while still dangerous, does its upmost to protect the fighters from serious harm. You wonder who in MMA ultimately takes responsibility when death happens. What lessons will be learned and what improvements, if any, made? Nick, Aylesbury.

Going into the 2000 Olympic Games in Sydney, the most dangerous sport in the world was three-day eventing. At all levels, elite, through to amateur and youth, there had been 12 fatalities in the two years leading up to the competition, all involving the cross-country discipline. And when a sport is properly regulated it can take action. The Hartington committee made recommendations to improve rider safety that were implemented. Many also believe Mike Etherington-Smith, Sydney's course designer, set out to minimise the risk of a major incident occurring during the games, by making safety a priority. Again, in the 18 months leading up to Beijing in 2008, there were a dozen fatalities. It was thought eventing might not survive to the 2012 Games, so the International Equestrian Federation (FEI) began collecting data on falls and using it to champion the right protective equipment. One advance saw research into the prevention of rotational falls, when a horse somersaults over a jump and crashes onto its back, because riders were left disabled in a quarter of those incidents. As a result the death rate fell to less than one rider per year. Of course, eventing is still dangerous and rotational falls still occur – one claimed the life of 17-year-old Olivia Inglis at the Scone Horse Trials in Sydney last month – but this shows what can be achieved with proper regulation and the financial support that comes from it.

Most of the people commenting on here, and Martin, have never trained or even had a fight inside an MMA ring. Zfarfan, London.

You don't need to be a trained fighter, or even a referee, to know when someone is unable to defend themselves. Nick0069, London.

Everyone has an opinion on politics, and we're not all politicians. The issues around MMA concern governance, process, safety and ethics. I don't think being repeatedly punched in the face would necessarily help a person's understanding.

It may not sound satisfactory but it's just one of those things, unfortunately. Not one fighter has ever been seriously hurt in top level MMA. This man was an adult and chose to step inside the cage and I'm sure he'd be horrified that uninformed and self-important writers were trying to interfere in the sport he loved. Cdh83, England.

Yes, I would have checked with him before I started but he's, like, dead. Personally, I think he'd be more horrified to hear his passing, at 28, described as 'just one of those things' but again, we'll never know. Because he's, like, dead.

UFC has doctors in place, they also stop the fights before too much damage is done. Other MMA promotions should take note. I know UFC makes millions and has the money to put better practice in place, but if you can't afford best practice to protect your fighters, you shouldn't be running an MMA promotion. Raymondo07, Newton-Le-Willows.

I can't see how anyone can argue with that, although I understand medics were on site at the Carvalho fight.

Those people who watch such organised brutality, packaged as sport, really need to take a hard look at themselves. As for calling this activity Mixed Martial Arts, that's an insult to the traditional, disciplined, highly skilled, respectful and even spiritual martial arts. Instead of changing the name, in order to try to give it some credibility, they should have stuck with cage fighting – it's far more appropriate. Contrarian viewpoint, Czech Republic.

I suppose that's where the mixed part comes in: it's the traditional, disciplined, highly skilled, respectful and even spiritual martial arts, mixed with what would happen if you opened the door of the worst boozer in town at 10.59pm on a Friday and shouted, 'Anyone fancy a fight?'

What's the difference between MMA and gladiatorial combat in the Coliseum? Njc37, United Kingdom.

Lions. mate. Throw an angry lion in there and you've got a whole new ball game.

MMA isn't a sport. It goes beyond into the realm of barbaric violence. Fortunately, I don't believe it has rising popularity as you suggest. I think its popularity has plateaued – there are only so many knuckle draggers in the world. Bernie Bayou, Madrid.

I don't think MMA fans are knuckle draggers, Bernie. As I said, my sons watch it, they are all university students and I wouldn't describe any of them as violent individuals. I also accept there are fans of martial arts who find it a richer and more explosive contest than boxing, with its many conventions, and I am certain there are MMA fans who understand and debate the need for reform and increased regulation. I just don't see how any of that is going to be achieved unless those at the top embrace the mainstream and associate the sport with the proper administrative umbrellas. At the moment, the only people involved in MMA's process are those wedded to MMA and that is not healthy. One only has to look at the state of athletics to see what happens when a sport exists inside its own little world.

MMA is not more dangerous than boxing. This tragedy happened because of the incompetence of the referee. How many deaths have happened in boxing? That's combat sports for you. Do your research, Martin. The simplest example would be a fighter getting knocked down in boxing and becoming, basically, concussed, before getting the chance to beat the count, as most fighters will. Combat sports in general come with that territory, but to claim MMA is more dangerous than other professional combat sports makes you look ignorant. Just say you're not a fan. Xan, London.

As ignorant as quoting something from the column that just isn't there? Where did I say MMA was more dangerous than boxing? Apart from one reference to combat sports that take place in a ring – and in that context I was referring to any closed space, not specifically the boxing arena – the only mention of the sport is in this sentence. 'What happens next is called ground and pound. It is what separates MMA from professional combat sports like boxing. Opponents can still be attacked, while down.' No mention of comparable danger, but I will say this. In all my years of watching boxing, I've never seen a fight in which I thought someone was beaten to death. Now this may be a false perception, based around the loser being upright until the final blow, but I can only speak truthfully. Looking at what happened to Carvalho made me think he was, in essence, beaten to death. It looked exactly like the way I imagine a fatal beating on the street and I think many people, on seeing it, would agree. I take your point about concussion and boxing, but as we've all seen rugby players or footballers play on concussed I'd say this probably happens in MMA too. There are a lot of people on here who want to turn this into an argument about boxing being a more dangerous sport, and I think that's hiding, and missing the point. This isn't a competition to identify the most dangerous sport. It's about finding a way to stop fighters being killed. 'We're not as bad as boxing,' really isn't an argument.

Carvalho died in Beaumont Hospital two days after taking on Ward in Dublin (above)

I doubt Martin Samuel has the self-awareness to notice the irony that in his first article he complains that poor administration and leadership of MMA results in poor officialdom and incompetence which leads to combatants having a chance to finish off a competitor fatally; and in the second article he says poor officialdom and incompetence by the LLDC is just tough luck and any casualties like Leyton Orient can be damned. IWWT, London.

I doubt I Write Witless Twaddle has the brains to see that in the business world people must have the freedom to make mistakes, or strike good deals, and that is a little different to not ensuring best practice in MMA and ending up with a dead fighter. In business, as in sport, there will always be winners and losers. That will never change and we accept it. Death, however, is to be avoided. If as a result of awarding the Olympic Stadium to West Ham people were dying – as they are in Qatar as a result of giving the country the 2022 World Cup – I think you would find my attitude rather different.

The Daily Mail supports MMA and UFC wholeheartedly: they took great delight in telling me that after football it is their most viewed sport. I had complained about their appalling biased Victorian coverage of rugby league. They were more than happy to reveal their delight in covering the sport of MMA instead, because it brings in far more readers. You won't be seeing a campaign to get it banned by this paper. EricTCat, Hull.

Reading between the lines Eric, I'd say your complaints about the rugby league coverage probably included a moan about the space devoted to MMA by way of comparison, and that is why the reply you received contained a justification of MMA stories. You mention the Daily Mail, but I'd wager you are a MailOnline reader because there is very little coverage of MMA in the print newspaper. Again, this is a generational thing. The readers of the paper tend to be older, and less interested in MMA. It is different online, where the readership is younger and MMA is increasingly popular. I'm sure that is what was being explained as my colleagues are not in the habit of offering random sermons on the delights of covering MMA if the subject hasn't been raised. Eric, you have chosen to consume your news in this way, so this is the world online readers are creating. It is governed by clicks. Advertising rates are relative to clicks, page dwell time – how long a reader spends on the page – and a whole host of numbers that can be precisely identified. The only reason you are reading this debate column – if you are reading this debate column – is because it is, apparently, quite popular. If it wasn't, I wouldn't do it, because that's how online works. On Tuesday night, I went to Newcastle versus Manchester City and my report featured prominently in the paper. How many people read it? God knows. It commanded space and profile because it was the match of the day but in terms of specific interest, we're clueless. Not so online. By the next morning, there was evidence that several other stories were more popular, so they got the projection instead. I've written about this before. Manchester City fans are always moaning that their team falls down the page so quickly, but the fact is City are well down the Premier League table in terms of online interest. In an ideal world, it would all be a meritocracy. Leicester would get the biggest number of clicks, and in the summer attention would switch from football to cricket. It isn't like that. Even now, a lot of the sports and stories we cover are up there because we are journalists and instinctively want to feature the news agenda. If we let the clicks wholly dominate, MailOnline would be topped off by 20 Manchester United stories each morning. MMA does well online, so does boxing – so, no, the Mail won't be campaigning for a ban anytime soon. But that doesn't stop them printing criticism in this article, or the original column. It's a broad church, and it does include rugby league, but online news is dictated by the reader in a way newspapers never were. The trick is to find a balance that pleases most people. Our online numbers suggest we make a fair fist of that, but I am sorry if you feel we sell rugby league short. Believe me, if the numbers added up, we wouldn't. Anyway, since when was this the bloody complaints section? On with the debate…

The excitement and constant action of UFC is a major selling point and something the vast majority of pay-per-view boxing events cannot match, but I will never be able to recognise or respect it as a sport as long as one person is allowed lay on top of the other person to pound them with punches while they're confined to the canvas. It's absolutely barbaric and despite its excitement and value for money, it will never top boxing for me. Hendrox, Newcastle.

It is interesting where people are drawing their line in the sand. Ground and pound seems to be the one.

You cannot get away from the fact it was a fair fight, between two people trying to do the same to each other. That is the end of the matter. It is their body, their life, no-one else gets harmed, and no one else has a right to tell them what they can and can't do. Freddie LS, London.

Of course, the same argument would prohibit any government advice or interference on health issues as a result of smoking, drinking or obesity. Free will is rather a complex thread to start tugging, Fred. What, for instance, of drug use? Some governments make it illegal but it's your body, your life and your choice just the same.

It's not sport, it's blatant violence. The worst of it is that guys train for it in towns and cities all over the country, are wound up like springs, and have the potential to try out moves on innocent people if they're out drinking or partying hard. This needs to be stopped and soon. Ban it. ChuckLoads, London.

I think there's rather a lot of extrapolation in that argument, Chuck. I don't know we're greatly troubled by marauding cage fighters in Britain. If I recall rightly from my youth, the Saturday night violent pillock quota was always quite high before anyone had ever heard of MMA. Although MDMA did much to curb it.

Some of the referees are a joke in MMA. Herb Dean lets one fight go on too long, the next he has stopped before you know it. How Do, Co. Tyrone.

Herb Dean? I knew his sister, Pearl-Anne. Thank you. Thank you. I'm here all week.

If you don't like it, don't watch it. No one is forced at gun point to fight, they choose to, and I'd rather have these people in the ring, with a career, than out on the street with potentially no direction in their lives. The Voice of Reasons, United Kingdom.

I think society should be able to deal with those drawn to violence in a more civilised manner than simply legalising their violence. Combat sports promoters always talk as if they are providing some public service, rather than just making money, and I'm unconvinced.

MMA in the United States has been a commission regulated sport for 15 years. It is regulated by the same State Athletic Commissions that take charge of boxing, and all Commission-regulated MMA takes place using the Unified Rules. The idea that it is some free-for-all is nonsense. When you see a UFC event in, say, Nevada, the referee is working for the State Athletic Commission. As for MMA versus boxing, and I say this as a big boxing fan, there is no credible fact-based argument for a society allowing one and not the other. Argue that all combat sports should be banned and that's a credible position. Argue that boxing is fine but MMA unacceptable and you are making a case based on aesthetics. The most comprehensive study we have, which was done by John Hopkins University and based on six years' worth of data provided by the Nevada State Athletic Commission, showed that the overall injury rates in boxing and MMA are comparable but that the instances of brain injury are more prevalent in boxing. DukeLDN, United Kingdom.

Thank you for that, Duke. Really informative, knowledgeable and well argued. As I'm sure you know, I wasn't advancing boxing as a safer sport than MMA and I completely agree that the difference is largely aesthetic, although I remain hugely uncomfortable about ground and pound. The first part of your post shows what can be done in terms of regulation and control, which was the main thrust of the column. It is also interesting to note that when State Athletic Commissions are involved, trustworthy data can be collated and meaningful research conducted to better improve fighter safety.

The fighters agree to fight knowing the worst case scenario. People agree to watch because they want to. You don't like it? Fine, go watch something else. And, by the way, since 2003, more people have died playing rugby than in organised MMA fights. BigDongle, London.

That's a savage misuse of the facts. The use of 'organised' in the MMA statistics rules out many deaths, while your rugby numbers include every facet of the game, including massive worldwide amateur participation.

I worked for a company that sponsored an MMA event in South Africa last year. One guy got knocked out so badly that he was in intensive care for two weeks. The problem lies with those who fight with blatant disrespect for the rules or their opponents. Who knows what juice they are on to spark that rage? Quaba, Limassol.

The promoters have to take responsibility, too. And those sponsors, and everyone involved who can see something is wrong, but do not act to stop it.

To think this barbarism is allowed, whilst a set of medics publish a report suggesting no tackling for Under 18s rugby. What an absolute farce. Anthony42, Manchester.

I don't think a debate around safe sport is unhealthy, Anthony, if it leads to better procedures and education, rather than a ban. And now, the promised boxing debate around a column published on March 29, after Nick Blackwell was placed in a coma, following his fight with Chris Eubank junior. You can read that piece here. Speaking personally, I feel conflicted on boxing – enjoying the sport, at the same time finding it impossible to justify. I don't hold with the standard mitigations about discipline, honour and how every boxer seems to have been saved from an inevitable life of crime, or extreme poverty. Chris Eubank junior, for instance, was born into relative wealth and educated at the independent school, Brighton College. What was he escaping? Classics? Equally, after Blackwell fell ill, I felt the referee in that fight, Victor Loughlin, was unfairly criticised as if he, and not the sport, was responsible for Blackwell's condition. I think when terrifying injuries happen it is simply boxing doing what boxing does: you can't have a sport in which one of the objects is to incapacitate the opponent and then talk of serious injury as an accident or a referee's error. It isn't accidental: it's what boxing can do, and fighters have no control over it. Anyway, on we plough…

Let's get real: if Chris Eubank's father could spot the danger signs then so should a ringside medic. How about campaigning for a doctor to have the right to examine the fighters whenever he's worried? Dave, Wimbledon.

I would imagine that facility already exists, but doctors do not act on it as they trust the judgement of the referee and corner. Equally, as the article pointed out, leave it to a doctor to stop the fight when he sees danger and chances are he'd step in around about the time this starts playing. And not just because of the saucy language (you have been warned).

You don't offer a view. Do you want it banned or not? The thrust of the article would suggest you do, but you do not say so. SimonCT, Bahrain.

I do. In the final paragraph, I wrote: 'This isn't, by the way, an abolitionist talking. Some people like to fight, others like to watch fighting, and there is the potential for mayhem if boxing is driven to the margins.' So I don't want boxing, or MMA, banned. Am I comfortable with either sport? Not really, no. As I say, I feel conflicted.

There is more concussion suffered in rugby than in boxing, so why not ban all contact sport and watch Coronation Street instead? Please turn off your TV if you don't like watching and stop telling people what they should do. Rosshill20, Newmarket.

I'm sorry you did not understand the column, Ross. Have you, by any chance, been punched in the head lately?

Although the ultimate aim is to stop an opponent boxing, defending yourself is a key part of the sport. You train not only to be strong and fast enough to hurt, but also to be strong and fast enough not to get hurt. Mayweather built a career on his defence. This point is often overlooked. You are right that the barbarity of the sport is to blame, and this is hard to defend even by those of us that are involved in it. Hindsight is always beautiful in fights like this and the referee is in a horrible position. Howard Foster was slaughtered for stopping the Carl Froch/George Groves fight early and now this referee is vilified for not stepping in sooner. Equally, if Blackwell was responding to his corner men how were they to know what was happening inside his head? Maxj, London.

Fair point about defence, Max. The 'sweet science' as AJ Liebling called boxing. I think the rise in popularity of MMA has a lot to do with the all-out attack of the fights. The point about Blackwell's corner men is well made, too. Dave, one of the earlier posters, said that the doctors should get more involved, but trainers and referees are equally primed to look for signs, and much of the damage cannot be seen. Even Carvalho, the MMA fighter who died, was sitting up and talking to people in the wake of his savage beating: it was only later that the full, tragic, toll became apparent.

I agree with your boxing points, Martin, up to the analogy with horse racing. The horse isn't choosing to be there. The horse has little if any free will. Boxers do what they do. We all know it's a blood sport, as of course do they. Horses, no. I'm unaware of a modern sport involving humans that involves being assaulted with a whip, and where failing can also mean euthanasia. I'm not a PETA member, nor even an animal lover, frankly. It's about free will. Animals should not be made to compete and die for our entertainment. Kiwi Plonker, New York.

I wasn't comparing the sports, more the dangers. If you recall in other columns, my initial objection to Victoria Pendleton riding at Cheltenham concerned horse safety based on exactly that point: she knows what she is getting into, the horses don't know that there's a novice in the race. Thankfully, she proved me wrong by riding beautifully for a first-timer.

Nick Blackwell ended up in an induced coma after his fight with Chris Eubank Jnr at Wembley Arena

Chris Eubank Snr could be heard telling his son to stop hitting Blackwell's head as the ref hadn't stopped it

I don't think boxing could be any safer than it is now. More footballers die on the pitch than boxers die in the ring. JMOWT, Belfast.

Again, that really isn't true. The participation numbers in football, including amateurs, are vast. If, say, two poor souls playing for pub teams have a heart attack each year that bears no comparison to the deaths in combat sports if taken as a ratio. There were 31 deaths from swimming in Germany between 1997 and 2006. That makes it one of the most dangerous sports in the world. Yet we know swimming is a healthy activity, and its influence is largely positive. Yet as people of all ages swim, there will be those who simply overdo it, or have underlying health issues that prove fatal. The numbers must always be taken in context. Football isn't more dangerous than boxing. You know it and I know it. It just isn't.

Couldn't agree more about boxing. I love boxing, watching and sparring, but I can't come up with a good argument to defend it. I want to, and I don't think you can beat a fight atmosphere, but I can't. JDG86, United Kingdom.

Welcome to Mart's wide, wide world of internal conflict.

With the advances of neurology, I'm sure enough evidence of the lasting effects of being repeatedly struck full force to the head will become very apparent in the next two decades and boxing and MMA will die out. It's barbaric and won't see out this century. Mcsquared22, United Kingdom.

That is the logical view, of course. Yet neurologists are equally sure about the negative health effects of many American sports, and they aren't going away. Maybe the NFL will end up like the NRA, it will become part of the inalienable right of every American to suffer severe brain trauma playing college football, grow depressed in later life, and then shoot himself with his own, legally-held, gun.

Maybe they should start wearing protective head masks that will reduce the intensity of the punch. Firstus, Nigeria.

They've scrapped head guards in amateur boxing because it actually causes more internal damage. Bigted79, Wigan.

The injury is caused by the brain moving inside the skull when the head is jerked around. The head guard will protect boxers from cuts that might stop the fight, so there is more risk of the fights lasting longer. In theory, you could stop head punches and give scores for body shots to decide the fight – but I wouldn't want to watch that. Nogbad T. Bad, Aberdeen.

Nor would I. This is the problem. We want our combat sports to be explosively violent, but we don't want the protagonists to be seriously hurt. The stances are incompatible.

The world would be a lesser place if Muhammad Ali had stayed in Kentucky and flipped burgers. An Englishman In LA, Los Angeles.

Yes, but not every boxer is an icon like Ali. There are plenty of working stiffs, journeymen, punch bags and stooges. You have picked arguably the greatest sportsman in the world to justify boxing. It's like looking at some washed up skag-head on the corner and rationalising it because without drugs The Beatles wouldn't have made The White Album.

Boxing is dangerous. You punch your opponent unconscious or render him unable to continue – it's hardly going to end like a cake decorating competition is it? DivineFury, United Kingdom.

Not necessarily. As my mum said to me at the school fete that day: 'This Victoria sponge wins first prize, or that fat bitch in the frock is going down.' What a weekend that was.

It's a dangerous sport, but I've got a quote for you, Samuel, and it's from the film Cinderella Man. Jim Braddock: 'You think you're telling me something? Like, what, boxing is dangerous, something like that? You don't think working triple shifts and at night on a scaffold isn't just as likely to get a man killed? What about all those guys who died last week living in cardboard shacks to save on rent money just to feed their family, 'cause guys like you have not quite figured out a way yet to make money off of watching that guy die? But in my profession – and it is my profession – I'm a little more fortunate.' Oversandout, Maidstone.

So that's movie dialogue not something that Braddock is ever recorded having said. Maybe that's exactly what he thought – or maybe there is some dramatic license, as there is in the same film's portrayal of heavyweight champion Max Baer. The film depicts Baer as a dreadful person, gloating over the fact that two of his opponents, Frankie Campbell and Ernie Schaaf, died in the ring. His family was outraged by this because Baer was regarded by all – even Braddock, who wrote kind words about him in his autobiography – to be a gentle and warm individual. His son, Max junior, says he hated boxing, and wept over the death of Campbell. He was so distraught he lost four of his five fights after Campbell died, but later raised $10,000 to help Campbell's widow – a huge amount of money in Depression era America. As for Schaaf, far from being Baer's victim, he died after a fight with Primo Carnera, six months after being knocked out by Baer. I wouldn't advance Cinderella Man in the name of boxing. However watchable it may be, it is not the truth.

Your piece is let down by one crucial point. You don't understand the sport of boxing or the principles behind allocating responsibility to referees and corner men. No amount of matter of fact assertions can disguise that. Blundie, Galway.

Are you are coming round to thinking combat sports are barbaric but don't quite have the heart to say it? Has this incident put you off boxing? It would be a shame as the improvements in safety standards and medical treatment which you highlight mean boxing has evolved and earned the right to exist as a serious, respected sport. Dave, Dublin.

I grew up in a house surrounded by copies of Ring magazine. A great, great grandfather on my mother's side – I might be short a great or two there, the family tree is a bit hazy – was Gypsy Jack Cooper, a legendary bareknuckle fighter from the 19th century. I've had friends who fought in the ABAs and my dad's market stall was opposite the Canning Town gym that was home to Frank Bruno. I'm old enough to have reported on Erroll Christie, I've reported on Mike Tyson's fights, Lennox Lewis as world heavyweight champion, covered Audley Harrison winning gold in Sydney in 2000 and later Anthony Joshua, so I've been around plenty of boxing, Blundie. I'm afraid Dave is nearer to it. I'm probably to too close at heart to being a peace and love hippy to ever be truly comfortable with combat sports. If I had ringwalk music it would be the song that Homer Simpson used before his fight with world heavyweight champion Drederick Tatum in the eighth season episode 'The Homer They Fall'. Press play to find out. Until next time.