Alex Pereira Seeks Rematch with Ciryl Gane at UFC 334
Sport
⚠ Single-source
24m ago

Alex Pereira Seeks Rematch with Ciryl Gane at UFC 334

AI-synthesized · Bias removed · Facts only

Alex Pereira is looking to move past the controversy surrounding his loss to Ciryl Gane at UFC Freedom 250 and is targeting a rematch with the French fighter. The bout would take place at UFC 334 on November 14.

Nearly three months after Ciryl Gane knocked him out in a co-main event at UFC Freedom 250, Alex Pereira wants another fight with Gane. Gane’s win made him the second fighter in UFC history to win two interim titles in the same division and positioned him for a rematch with undisputed champion Tom Aspinall.

However, the aftermath of the fight focused on the 11 finishing shots Gane landed on Pereira, seven of which appeared to be illegal strikes to the back of the head. Pereira has publicly criticized referee Herb Dean and requested he not officiate his future fights, but so far, those requests have not been granted. Pereira stated in a recent Instagram video, “After much time, after resting what I needed to do, after much work, after my last fight, many people are talking with who will Alex fight? I'm seeing many opinions, but I think the fight that makes sense is Ciryl Gane.” He added, “That's the fight. I'm going to work on that and from what I'm seeing, it's something that's going to happen. How the last fight [ended], there were illegal shots. I think now, with another opportunity, I can come back and show what I can do, what I can achieve, which is the third belt. I'm very excited for that, and I'll work for that. Chama!”

Gane has also expressed interest in a rematch with Pereira, should Aspinall’s health prevent him from returning to the octagon soon. Aspinall has been sidelined for nearly 11 months due to accidental eye pokes sustained during a no-contest with Gane at UFC 321 and is undergoing further testing to assess his recovery. If Aspinall is unable to fight, Gane could potentially face Pereira in the interim.

Was this useful?

Read the original coverage

💬 Comments

📜 Comment Policy