I’ve had several hours to digest the Diego Sanchez-Ross Pearson decision at Saturday night’s UFC Fight Night 42 event. At first, I figured I just missed some good moments by Sanchez while conducting play-by-play of the fight.

I try to be as objective as possible, but it’s hard to get all the strikes, kicks and action into the coverage and actually pay attention to the fight in itself. Things are missed, so when the decisions are rendered, I don’t normally get too excited when I am way-off-base from what was called.

Personally, I – along with many, many others – scored the bout for Pearson. In fact, I gave him all three rounds. However, before the third round began, I noted that Sanchez had closed each of the first two strongly after some hiccups, and that could sway judges pretty easily.

Looking back over the course of the fight, a different story is told. Pearson out-landed Sanchez 51-33 in significant strikes, including a plus-nine advantage in head shots and plus-10 in body attacks.

He also was more effective, landing 17 of 47 head shots to just 10-for-66 by Sanchez. In terms of takedowns, Pearson had one to zero from Sanchez. He was given a performance rating of 52 to just 38 from Sanchez by FightMetric, which also scored the contest 30-27 for the Brit.

The fighters on FOX Sports 1’s post-fight show were behind the masses, as Dominick Cruz, Michael Bisping and Gilbert Melendez all felt Pearson won. They did make a case for Sanchez, including Melendez who simply added that the fight was in his hometown of Albuquerque.

Cruz asked “Who knows what the judges were scoring?” and Bisping stated much the same, saying, “You never know what they’re looking at. It was a close fight.” Melendez continued that trend with “Sometimes it’s about who won the scorecards, not always about who won the fight.”

What did you think? Was it one of the biggest blunders in MMA scoring you’ve seen?