Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
madcat11

What was the problem with this move?

Recommended Posts

I haven't seen the Iowa match, but I would assume he thought it was an illegal cutback, because in the match that you posted it was pretty close to being that. It's illegal to defend a single leg with a cutback where you use your leg behind the opponent's leg, because of the possibility of injuring the knee. A cutback is legal, however, if you use your arm behind his leg. In the Kilgore/Campolattano match, the move Campolattano used was almost a cutback but not quite and was really more of an ankle pick in which he used his right foot to block Kilgore's right heel and then he picked the ankle in a more traditional way, not a cutback. If he have jumped down and cut Kilgore back using his right leg it would have been illegal. At least that's my take on it, maybe a ref could give a better answer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see it as a cutback at all although I could see someone argue that point. The rule itself (pg wr-46 5.8.1) only says that a leg cut back is illegal. But the picture (pg wr-89 #66) shows the defender in the air free leg at and behind the shooter's knee. The wording says that you can't use the leg in a whip-like fashion. That was hardly whip-like and he was nowhere near the knee.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the Kilgore match Camp blocked down at the ankle. Last night was closer to the knee. Either way the weight of the defensive wrestler on the opponents knee could potentially injure.

 

If you block with a hand, then the move is legal.

 

I thought Brands had a right to want the illegal move called last night.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I believe for a cutback to be LEGAL, you have to have a hand placed on the mat. A standing cutback with no hand is ILLEGAL.

 

 

Right. A "standing cutback" with no hand and legs above the opponent's ankle is a pretty dangerous move. Known as a "flying scissors" throw - and illegal - in Judo, BJJ, and I think MMA because it has caused so many injuries in competition (though I believe it is a standard move in Russian Sambo). It's a pretty good counter to a single leg, but the technique really does put a lot of pressure on the opponent's legs & hips, while restricting all torque in the fall to the torso.

 

One way to think of it is: imagine having your feet glued to the ground and being pushed backwards. If you fall straight back, you're probably OK as long as you don't whiplash down to the mat on your neck. Now imagine your feet planted to the ground and falling backwards with even the slightest twist or turn. Ouch!

 

Here's a guy getting his MCL torn by a flying scissors (@1:42). It's pretty brutal:

 

 

I'm not sure what happened in the Iowa match, but Brands would have every right to complain if Campolattano threw a flying scissor; probably less so if it was more of a cutback/trip at the ankle like in the Flo vid above.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont know about the Iowa match, but the video posted was an ILLEGAL move. I used to hit it in college and one day a ref nailed me on it and I was sure it was legal. My coach showed me the rule book and I couldnt argue: ILLEGAL. The only way it is legal is if the hand is on the ground or comes behind the opponents knee. I thought it was stupid until someone ripped one on me in an ADCC match and damn near blew out my knee. I was scared shtlss for a few seconds and was diving to my back faster than a sorority girl on pledge week.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I dont know about the Iowa match, but the video posted was an ILLEGAL move. I used to hit it in college and one day a ref nailed me on it and I was sure it was legal. My coach showed me the rule book and I couldnt argue: ILLEGAL. The only way it is legal is if the hand is on the ground or comes behind the opponents knee. I thought it was stupid until someone ripped one on me in an ADCC match and damn near blew out my knee. I was scared shtlss for a few seconds and was diving to my back faster than a sorority girl on pledge week.
:lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure where some of this comes from but the move in the video is not at all of a cutback. And I'd like to see someone put his hand on the mat while performing the move. The move is based on having one hand at the opponents upper body- likely in a whizzer- and the other at the knee. It's using the foot that might make it illegal. Even then it must be in a whip-like manner. And there is no rule or picture stating or showing anything about the hand being on the mat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As gimpeltf points out, the rule says a cut back is illegal. Then there is an explanatory photograph of a cut back that looks like the flying scissors that pamela linked above. The caption says, "No. 66—illegal leg block (cut back). Defensive wrestlers are not allowed to use their leg in a whip-like fashion to take their opponent back to the mat."

http://www.ncaapublications.com/productdownloads/WR13.pdf

From what I'm seeing, Campolattano releases his whizzer and dives away, then foot sweeps his opponent to set up a reshot against his opponent's legs. The foot sweep may torque the knee a bit, but it's not a flying scissors, and the opponent can avoid the torque by going to the ground.(In fact, the counter against Burak was less effective, even though it had more torque on the knee, because Campolattano's leg was trapped on the inside like a three toes.)

I don't know why it would be called illegal -- the pressure is not backwards, and the sweeping leg is not whip-like.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Camp tried to hit this same move against Burak tonight and Brands seemed adamant about it being illegal.

 

Was it different positioning? Someone clarify this for me.

 

(7:45)

 

http://www.flowrestling.org/coverage/24 ... Ohio-State

The difference from this one versus the one against Burak is the positioning of Camp's left leg. Against Kilgore it is outside or on the hamstring of Kilgore's right leg. Obviously at this angle, less pressure against the joint is generated. With the Burak match Camp's left leg stayed infront or on the quad of Burak. In both instances Camp goes low to the ankle, but in my opinion, the one against Burak had the potential to generate more force against the joint.

It goes without saying that the ability of wrestlers to scramble in these situations create opportunities to be bent in manners which we are not suppose to bend. It is amazing to watch how deep wrestler A could be on a shot only to have wrestl,er B scramble out. In college wrestling, only about 5% of takedowns are uncontested. The other 95% is a scramble war.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Camp tried to hit this same move against Burak tonight and Brands seemed adamant about it being illegal.

 

Was it different positioning? Someone clarify this for me.

 

(7:45)

 

http://www.flowrestling.org/coverage/24 ... Ohio-State

The difference from this one versus the one against Burak is the positioning of Camp's left leg. Against Kilgore it is outside or on the hamstring of Kilgore's right leg. Obviously at this angle, less pressure against the joint is generated. With the Burak match Camp's left leg stayed infront or on the quad of Burak. In both instances Camp goes low to the ankle, but in my opinion, the one against Burak had the potential to generate more force against the joint.

It goes without saying that the ability of wrestlers to scramble in these situations create opportunities to be bent in manners which we are not suppose to bend. It is amazing to watch how deep wrestler A could be on a shot only to have wrestl,er B scramble out. In college wrestling, only about 5% of takedowns are uncontested. The other 95% is a scramble war.

 

 

A lot of positions can be considered illegal that are outside of specific rules. I still don't see this as a cutback at all but what you're describing here is possibly to be considered within general prohibitions. I look at the other guy here (Burak) and note that he moved forward through the action and secured the takedown very quickly in spite of it so I don't understand how it would cause this much consternation but ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I watched this more than a few times and thought of it more as a pick than a cut back. Kilgore had Camp's leg on the outside and Camp required a hand on the mat for balance, as well as the whizzer hand to drop to the ankle to finish the move. Using the foot by itself wouldn't have accomplished the finish on Dustin.

 

Against Burak, given that Burak had stepped around Camp's leg and came up with it inside, from where Camp was forced to defend, I can understand why Brands was calling it the way he did, especially when seeing Burak's knee cave a bit on the attempted finish. This is coming from a guy who tore his MCL in a similar fashion this past November.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...