Jump to content

ironmonkey

Members
  • Content Count

    549
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by ironmonkey

  1. People do grow and/or he wouldn't be the first wrestler to possibly decide against cutting weight. It's not like 33 is a vacant weight class. It is arguably a tougher run to the finals at least. Not sure this easier way out narrative holds up.
  2. Lack of training and missed time right before the end of the year crunch could definitely affect both his energy levels and overall performance. Though I tend to agree that he looked like himself, we can't accurately judge what went on in his head during the semi and final with no other national tournament experience to compare it to. On a different note, I love that Lee was beatable after midlands last year, unbeatable after nationals, and is now beatable again. Maybe he hates wrestling during the holidays or peaks when it matters most. I wouldn't bet against him (made that mistake last year) and I am a Rutgers/Suriano fan!
  3. Like most of you, I have been following this story since it broke. It has been interesting to note differing opinions of family, friends, and coworkers based on race, age, education, and sex. Granted, this sample is biased in countless ways, not the least of which is nearly all are from one area and are filtered through me; far from empirical evidence for much of anything. Nevertheless, it was interesting to note that people who on the surface share at least some common variables had widely different perceptions of the event. I admit what I initially thought seemed like a clear case of media manipulation of facts to "create" a story, is more to many people. When it first broke, I assumed the story would eventually be debunked as junk by the wrestling community itself. Clearly I was wrong. I have seen some questionable social science offered as explanations for certain perceptions of the incident. With all of the sociology being thrown around, I have been waiting for someone to draw upon psychology to offer additional insight. I am surprised nobody has mentioned confirmation bias and belief perseverance when seeing rational fact based arguments discarded in favor of possible explanations. Confirmation Bias occurs from the direct influence of desire on beliefs. When people would like a concept to be true, they end up believing it to be true. This error leads the individual to stop gathering information when the evidence gathered to a point confirms the views one would like to be true. Once the view is formed, information is embraced that confirms it while other information that casts doubt on it is ignored or rejected. Confirmation bias strongly suggests we don't perceive circumstances objectively. We pick and choose data that confirms of prejudices. This can often explain how seemingly neutral circumstances can be interpreted differently by different people. Belief perseverance is the tendency to cling to one's initial belief despite receiving new information that contradicts or disconfirms the basis of that belief. In other words, people tend to hold on to their beliefs even when it appears they shouldn't. Conclusions drawn from experience during different circumstances bias our beliefs during the specific one being examined. The interesting catch here is that it potentially applies to people on both sides of the argument and/or even those somewhere in between. With that said, comparisons to Jim Crow laws and Auschwitz, both of which were offered during this discussion, seem outlandish to me. I am not overly interested in discussing institutional racism on a wrestling forum though I certainly think it exists (though I dispute it as evidence that particular races are or aren't more or less guilty of racism. If racism is objectively wrong as a moral absolute, it follows that it applies to everyone. Logically. Otherwise it isn't absolute.). Respectfully, shouldn't the burden of proof lie on those making accusations rather than on those defending against the accusations? I understand this isn't a court of law so we don't have to presume innocence, but if racism is a charge we want taken seriously, is it fair to make accusations based on suspicion without proof? I have yet to see any proof that this was a racist incident. I only see proof that some perceived it as racially insensitive which makes sense in retrospect while others suspect sinister intentions motivated a ref they likely don't know based on their personal experiences and or preconceived ideas. The ref may very well be racist and may have been motivated to enforce the rule on proper hair cover because of it, but is there any proof of this *in this incident*? Those focusing on the rules and the application of the rules may not be saying racism didn't play a part and/or doesn't exist. Rather, they likely are focusing on what they see as the only facts to be analyzed to determine if the argument has merit. I don't think they are saying the ref isn't a racist. I think they are saying there is no way to know based on the evidence which conversely explains why they are arguing against the racism charge. On a more relevant note considering the forum, I assumed based on my personal experience these hair rules were applied more to white wrestlers than other races. I admit having wrestled in the 90s though, haven't been to a high school match in nearly a decade, and attend duals for two specific colleges which both are located in the same area. Is the charge that the rule is affecting some races more than others accurate?
  4. No worries. Intent is often lost in text. I understand what you meant now. Yikes. Whatever truth there was in this incident is long lost at this point. Now seems like a good time for me to stop posting about this. I hope the kid does well this season and doesn't let this incident distract him from his goals (on and off the mat)!!
  5. How is the rule unfair or racially biased? It doesn't target any specific race. You could argue that the rule is unfairly enforced. However, I see no objective argument that the rule itself is racially biased. Any athlete can compete with long hair if they have the proper equipment. I don't think the ref from the prior week is a hero or a villain. I assumed he allowed the athlete to compete because he didn't want him to miss out on the competition which was early in the season and not a major tournament, but I won't pretend to understand what motivates other people without knowing them. It never occurred to me he was making some sort of social stand.
  6. I'm not defending the ref. If what he was accused of earlier is true, he should have been removed from the position which I said in my initial post. Not only to punish him, but to prevent a situation like this where his judgement would be questioned. I am loathing the justice by mob rule without facts. The head official in the state already stated the rule was applied correctly. The rule is question is documented. You are right that the mob doesn't care about the rule but that stinks. Not for the refs sake if he is a known racist, but because it shows the truth doesn't matter. Anyone can step in a landmine and be tarred and feathered via social media. Look at the poor trainer for instance who neither made the rule nor enforced it. She was simply assisting the wrestler who wanted to compete and now she is being attacked and accused of racism. I don't think this kind of thing is good for anyone even if it is the reality we currently live in. When governors are weighing in after reacting emotionally to edited clips and false narratives without investigating the rules or circumstances of the clips, isn't that scary?
  7. Semi related - I always thought the shave rules were sort of discriminatory based on pseudofoliculitis barbae. If someone looks like this after shaving, should they be forced to do it? Since one particular race is known to have a higher probability of suffering from shaving related ailments, I am surprised nobody has taken issue with it. Can you get a shave exemption from a doctor? I remember shaving dry a number of times in college and I had sensitive skin and it annoyed me. I imagine if my neck looked like this after, it would have really annoyed me and potentially seemed unfair.
  8. This seems to be a far more clear issue than you are making it out to be. There is a rule in place. The rule wasn't followed either willfully or accidently. The athlete was given time to be in compliance or forfeit so the rule was enforced objectively. The athlete chose to deal with the problem the best he could in the moment and chose to have his hair cut. Nobody could forsee this turning into what it did. The athlete wasn't put on display or purposely shamed. The trainer wasn't taking delight in attacking the young mans identity. This is all coming from people who have never wrestled being outraged over a clip they didn't understand. That outrage ends when they log off the internet. If they log off the internet. Are you suggesting we cater to the mad herd that is twitter in deciding when to follow rules and when not to? Not just in wrestling but in life? Is Twitter really our first concern?
  9. Props to the kid for keeping focus and winning! Seems to be an afterthought but should be highlighted. Refs using racial slurs at social gatherings with other officials shouldn't be allowed to continue to officiate if there is sufficient evidence of the usage. Past incidents shouldn't be used as evidence of latent motivations that can't be proven. The rules are the rules and the ref evidently was just enforcing them which is his job. Any other narrative isn't very objective. Unfortunately most news sources are running with narratives that ignore investigating the equipment issue that led to the hair cutting altogether. It is sad that a kid is in the middle of a story blowing up on Twitter where thousands of "adults" will argue endlessly. I imagine that would be super confusing at that age and impossible to ignore. I hope his coaches find a way to reframe all this into a positive growing experience for him.
  10. I bet Kentucky Mudflap would be interested.
  11. The all ear team was funny. A lot of wrestling fans have no sense of humor. I dig the coverage!
  12. Loved his interview. Loved the passion. I even loved the veiled shot at other programs which he just earned the right to make. Not a fan of tossing headgear though. if we teach kids they shouldn't do it when they lose, they definitely shouldn't see the superstars of college wrestling doing it when they celebrate. Just my two cents as someone who works with the kids.
  13. Suriano has beaten Cruz twice (a national champ). I am not sure he hasn't already separated himself. Adding strength? I really dont think that is an issue at all. Outside of Tomasello, who was (is) stronger than he was (is)? He just lost to an extremely talented wrestler. Lee was lights out this weekend. Props to Lee. I don't think Suriano needs a complete overhaul of his approach though. He just was runner up in a tough weight class while less than 100%.
  14. ​I would totally agree if it were not for 3rd place. These guys are on camera shooting the breeze during the consi finals while guys are wrestling their hearts out. And if you want to grow the sport, you best show those matches and not tell people to break out their laptops during on air coverage of the medal rounds. If you are going to cover it, show the matches!
  15. The guy likes wrestling. I like his inclusion in the broadcast. With that said, the consi finals coverage was horrible. Entire weight classes missed. What happened here???
  16. Suriano makes it physical. Lee gasses in the third. Suriano keeps pace through 3 periods and takes a close one.
  17. What do freestyle results have to do with college careers? pretty cool list. fun!
  18. I totally agree. Seems pretty mature to me. He left what would seem like perfect situation to find his personal perfect situation, or closer to it anyway. Every transfer isn't selfish. That narrative is hogwash. He has said some things that seemed questionable to me in the past (had a national title taken away??), but nothing about changing his surroundings seems questionable at all. HE wanted something different and he went and got it. Now we will see how it works out. Keep in mind the results may not tell us how it works out for him personally; only how it works out on the mat.
  19. Massa has gone full on Heel mode in the past.
  20. Surprised there isn't more buzz around Richie Lewis. He is right with the top guys at this weight class heading into nationals and held his own against Imart.
  21. weak showing following a rough year. I get that they caught the injury bug, but lots of teams do. They just weren't very good this year even though they competed hard for the most part.
  22. The 4 time AA needs the shirt even less than the guy who might just develop into a starter by year 4 or 5. One is ready to compete and win. One isn't. I agree with you about redshirts being terrible unless Olympic or injury related though. I am less sold on the Olympic even. The original intent as I understand it is completely lost in some of the arguments above. Redshirts are now only for AA quality wrestlers who enter college most ready to compete?
  23. No doubt. Rutgers has a strong recent history of prioritizing duals. I definitely applaud that. Doesn't change the fact there was another option though, and they were not going to forfeit.
  24. Gantry pretty much summed up everything I was thinking. They had another option available. But who knows why or what they were doing? We obviously don't have all the details. We have enough though that the decision definitely seems odd. Regardless, it is great news that Suriano is ready to go. Not an easy way to get back to it with this particular weight class in the big ten though.
×
×
  • Create New...