@scramble - that is the best post I’ve seen on here in a while. Completely agree.
There are folks on this board that seem like they need to be pissed or annoyed at something, even if they have to manufacture scenarios in their mind to make it so.
With the hearing being August 8 and Pan Ams Aug 7-10. Zain couldn't go to Pan Ams then lose arbitration and have Yianni Aug 17 in Texas.I think he wins arbitration.But I understand him not wanting to risk it
This is a very reasonably thought out post and process.
My thoughts in response. How long after the score went on the board do you think the coaches (both FLWC and NLWC) and wrestlers (both Yianni and Zain) noticed what the score was? Specifically, do you think it took until the end of the match for NLWC to realize they were losing and the 2-2 should be challenged or do you think they realized that earlier in the match? I think they probably watched all the officials and the scoreboard to see how it was scored immediately. Just my pretty educated guess.
You say it is a difficult decision - So? They made the decision not to challenge. That is their right to do so. Coaches have to make difficult decisions all the time. Sometimes they make the right one, sometimes the wrong one and hindsight is always 20/20.
So lets say they throw the brick within 10 seconds of the score going on the board. I am pretty sure they knew they might want to challenge 1 second after seeing the score go on the board but lets just say it takes them 10 to find the brick or whatever. So now we have 0:23 left and the brick is on the mat. The mat chairman would see it immediately and then it is his judgement call as to if and/or when to interrupt the match. That is his job and what he gets paid for.
If he chooses to interrupt at 0:19, it gets reviewed and perhaps the ruling is it was Zain's points and now Yianni is down by 2. He has 0:19 knowing he is losing the match. Does he? who knows. I know i have scored to win in the last 0:19 of a match numerous times. I have also been scored on in the last 0:19 of a match to lose. We see it happen all the time.
If the mat chairman chooses not to interrupt, then it becomes a judgement call by the official, by the rules and no arbitration is needed. Sure, the score may have changed after the fact but the rules would have been followed. Of course, maybe Yianni sees the brick and knows the outcome could be in question and from one of his strongest positions, he works a little differently to score rather than run out the clock while winning. Is he able to? Who knows. At least the rules would have been followed and the outcome could not have been challenged.
The coaches knew the outcome of that scramble well before the end of the match and CHOSE not to challenge until they saw it was needed to win. That is not immediate and it is against the rules and the spirit of the rules.
To make this debate even more fun: What if they lose this arbitration hearing because the challenge shouldn't have been accepted but then NLWC wants to appeal because there was never an officials conference on the score like the rule book says?
This is why I think the outcome of the arbitration SHOULD be one of two possible scenarios:
1. Match 2 is thrown out because the challenge should not have been accepted which would make Yianni the winner but a conference should have been held by the officials which would have allowed for the challenge that made Zain the winner. Therefore, neither is the winner and Zain is up 1 match to 0. Yianni needs to win 2 in a row.
2. The purpose of the best of 3 series is twofold. Make sure the best guy is the representative by: not allowing for 1 fluke win and the guy who can recover in a relatively short period of time against top notch opponents similar to how the world championships are. For this reason they determine the whole series needs to start from scratch and we are in a true best of 3 series on a single day.
I think either is a fine representative but selfishly, I just want to see them wrestle each other more!!
Just want to say thanks to the folks writing on this thread. I enjoy reading about the Iranian wrestlers and the perspectives being shared. I know Iranian wrestling fans are legendary in a very positive way and I highly respect the wrestlers. It is great to have a window into this community.
It is NOT anti-Semitic. Iranian wrestlers compete against Jews from any other country. So it clearly isn't about being Jewish. This isn't a political blog, so I will refrain from educating you about the despicable apartheid state that the Iranians refuse to compete with.
I hope they rule against this challenge. Not only because I think it would be correct given all that applies, but also because If they rule in favor of it, they'll just encourage more legal challenges. That won't be good for the sport, imo.
I agree but thats not even the worst of it. If the officials would have followed procedure correctly for a failed challenge, Yianni would’ve won outright anyways after they reviewed the last part of the match, which they obviously did because you could see it being played on the big screen. Yianni got screwed in more than one way in this match and the fact that some people are okay with it is mind boggling. Just my 2 cents.