Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
newyorkwrestler

ref inconsistency

Recommended Posts

Garrett ran away for the last minute. Ref had the balls to call it properly. Congrats to Tony!

What a total loser you are.  Tony showed everything he is or is not.  Garrett has more class in his pinky than TR's entire soul.

Edited by leshismore

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't even know what you're watching,Vak.  If you showed that match to 10 Russians (ie. no Iowa love or hate), I'm betting all 10 would say that match was officiated improperly on multiple occasions.  Rewatching Ramos' takedown, he gets Garrett's leg up, sweeps the other leg, but never gains control of other leg or hips while holding Garrett's left leg below the knee.  The ref awards the TD while Garrett is posted on both hands and feet.  Ref blows whistle and Garrett collapses.  There was no TD (despite what the official and Shane Sparks say) at the time of the whistle.  I do see the official gesturing to Garrett but cannot hear what he's saying.  If he's warning him for passivity then the official has no idea what passivity is.  Garrett is hand fighting with Ramos while circling.  When he awards the final point, Garrett is literally standing in the center circle while Ramos is outside.  Yet, people say "controlling the center of the mat" is more important than executing offensive moves.  Garrett was the more aggressive wrestler in that match.  I'm not sure if the official was influenced by the partisan crowd or simply wanted Ramos to win, but that was an awful call.  I've watched 1000s of freestyle matches and I've never seen passivity called as it was in that match.  

 

1.  Oh great.  Bolstering your argument with a fictional group of 10 people.

 

2.  First, Cornell could have challenged the TD.  It was literally right in front of Koll.  If you're right, which you aren't, why didn't they challenge?  Or even make a move to do so?  Further, how do you know when the TD was called?  The ref isn't on screen when he calls it.

 

3.  Cool, so now we're going to pretend that the reason the referee kept pointing at Garrett was because he was...I don't know, encouraging him?  Please, tell me what he was doing by constantly pointing at Garrett and yelling at him?

 

4.  Garrett "circled" after being chased by Ramos across the mat, over and over again.  He ended up in the center of the mat not because he was controlling the center, but because it was the spot recently vacated by Ramos.  The announcers, both during this match AND during Ramos' subsequent match against Scott discussed this call and said it was the right call.  Willie Saylor, noted Iowa fan (please note my sarcasm), said the call was fine.  People on this board who have never shown an Iowa affiliation said it was fine.  To put a fine point on it, you're just wrong about what you think people would think about it because you're projecting what you and the general Iowa-hating public think about it.  I'm sure there are people who aren't Iowa haters who agree with your side of the argument, but I've already shown people that aren't Iowa fans agreeing with mine, so....

 

 

 

Pushing isn't a shot attempt. Ramos didn't take 8 shots the whole tournament.

 

Ramos shoots at 2:55, 2:42 (not particularly threatening, but he shoots), 2:02, 1:26 (Ramos' countershot to Garrett's single leg-lift attempt), 0:25, 0:21, 0:19, and 0:15.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This has absolutely nothing to do with passivity.

The wrestlers are supposed to be attempting to score, that is kinda the reason for the match. 

"Passivity is a tool that the officiating crew can use to stimulate action from a wrestler who is not actively attempting to score. "

I guess the USA Wrestling rule book is wrong. 

 

If passivity has nothing to do with scoring points or attempting to score points than why does the UWW have a rule mandating a passivity call if no points are scored after a specific time?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...

c. When there is less than 30 seconds remaining in either period, if all three of the refereeing body agree a wrestler is evading and/or blocking his opponent, then his/her opponent is awarded a point (i.e fleeing the hold). This situation can be challenged to the “Jury of Appeal”.

d. If a wrestler initiates his action some seconds before minute 2:00 with a 0:0 score or some seconds before the end of the activity period, the referee will not interrupt the bout and will allow the wrestler to finish the action. If the action ends with points, the bout will continue without any interruption. If the action doesn’t end with points, the referee will stop the bout and will apply the right procedure.

.

 

So Garrett's corner (Koll and Hahn?) screwed up as well not challenging the call and not realizing the decision had to be unanimous.  If he is going to lose the match anyway on that call why not throw the block?

Plus not realizing that the

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The wrestlers are supposed to be attempting to score, that is kinda the reason for the match. 

"Passivity is a tool that the officiating crew can use to stimulate action from a wrestler who is not actively attempting to score. "

I guess the USA Wrestling rule book is wrong. 

 

If passivity has nothing to do with scoring points or attempting to score points than why does the UWW have a rule mandating a passivity call if no points are scored after a specific time?

 

 

You should read the UWW rulebook first:

 

The passivity zone that is orange coloured, is provided for the purpose of detecting the passive wrestler.

 

 

Now you see why a some people are saying passivity has nothing to do with taking shots, it's about control of the center of the mat.

Edited by Axe_Spartan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You should read the UWW rulebook first:

 

The passivity zone that is orange coloured, is provided for the purpose of detecting the passive wrestler.

 

 

Now you see why a some people are saying passivity has nothing to do with taking shots, it's about control of the center of the mat.

I have read the UWW rulebook.  About passivity

The role of the referees, among other vital duties, should be to evaluate and distinguish what is real action versus a feigned attempt to waste time.
 
Is attempting takedowns not real action? There is more to passivity calls than just controlling the center of the mat. 
There is a rule mandating passivity be called under specific circumstances, so controlling the center isn't all it is about.
If after 2:00 minutes into the first period neither wrestler has scored, the referees must mandatory designate one of the wrestler as inactive.
 
If both wrestlers are staying centered, than in your opinion what is going to influence that call - the wrestler that attempted a takedown(s) or the one that didn't?  
 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I have read the UWW rulebook.  About passivity

The role of the referees, among other vital duties, should be to evaluate and distinguish what is real action versus a feigned attempt to waste time.
 
Is attempting takedowns not real action? There is more to passivity calls than just controlling the center of the mat. 
There is a rule mandating passivity be called under specific circumstances, so controlling the center isn't all it is about.
If after 2:00 minutes into the first period neither wrestler has scored, the referees must mandatory designate one of the wrestler as inactive.
 
If both wrestlers are staying centered, than in your opinion what is going to influence that call - the wrestler that attempted a takedown(s) or the one that didn't?  
 
 

 

 

I think that's the only case taking a shot would influence an official to call the other wrestler passive, the case being both wrestlers in the center (inside that small orange circle) and one tries a takedown after the 2 minute mark, and the score is 0-0. Now, the reality, if you watch freestyle wrestling you would see that's a really rare occurence, where both wrestlers stays on that small orange circle at the same time, normally one stays there and other doesn't or if both are not there, one of them is at least closer, then it's much more easy to call the passive.

Edited by Axe_Spartan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On FRL pyles noted that in the nashon-ramos match, nashon actaully won becuase the rule states all 3 officials have to agree on fleeing the hold call in the last 30 seconds not just 2/3. and one official white paneled it.

If true, that is unbelievable. There's what happened to Ian Miller at last year's NCAAs (miscalculating total points scored in the semifinals), which is a travesty, and then there's what the refs did to Garrett. Nothing is worse than botching the rules for a quadrennial event that is considered the peak of achievement in the sport. Beyond ridiculous.

Edited by wrestlingnerd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If true, that is unbelievable. There's what happened to Ian Miller at last year's NCAAs (miscalculating total points scored in the semifinals), which is a travesty, and then there's what the refs did to Garrett. Nothing is worse than botching the rules for a quadrennial event that is considered the peak of achievement in the sport. Beyond ridiculous.

 

That's indeed true, it's on the rules. And this appears 2 times on the rulebook!

 

 

When there is less than 30 seconds remaining in either period, if all three of the refereeing body agree a wrestler is evading and/or blocking his opponent,then his/her opponent is awarded a point (i.e fleeing the hold). This situation can be challenged to the “Jury of Appeal”

 

If there are less than 30 seconds remaining in a Freestyle bout and the refereeing body agrees unanimously that one of the wrestlers is passive, they may issue 1 point for fleeing-the-hold. Should this point determine the winner of the match, the other wrestler may request a challenge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that's the only case taking a shot would influence an official to call the other wrestler passive, the case being both wrestlers in the center (inside that small orange circle) and one tries a takedown after the 2 minute mark, and the score is 0-0. Now, the reality, if you watch freestyle wrestling you would see that's a really rare occurence, where both wrestlers stays on that small orange circle at the same time, normally one stays there and other doesn't or if both are not there, one of them is at least closer, then it's much more easy to call the passive.

So, you're saying the ref is tracking the seconds for each guy controlling the center or near center and that supersedes actual scoring attempts. 

Now, you know why people tune out.  That will be easy for people watching the Olympics to follow. 

 

As for the "if you watch freestyle.." crack, what is with posters thinking people that criticize the rules don't watch?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, you're saying the ref is tracking the seconds for each guy controlling the center or near center and that supersedes actual scoring attempts. 

Now, you know why people tune out.  That will be easy for people watching the Olympics to follow. 

 

As for the "if you watch freestyle.." crack, what is with posters thinking people that criticize the rules don't watch?

 

No, I'm not saying this, reread what I wrote.

 

Because it really seems you don't watch that much when your hypothetical situation simply doesn't happen in reality.

Edited by Axe_Spartan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, I'm not saying this, reread what I wrote.

 

Because it really seems you don't watch that much when your hypothetical situation simply doesn't happen in reality.

Sure looks like you are stating scoring attempts are superseded by proximity to the center circle. 

 

I posted straight from the UWW rule book: The role of the referees, among other vital duties, should be to evaluate and distinguish what is real action versus a feigned attempt to waste time.

 

Scoring attempts are real action.  Is it not as real as closer proximity to the center circle?

 

Action goes throughout the central wrestling area, not every match is one wrestler anchored in the center circle and the other circling around him or has one guy riding the edge of the passivity zone.

 

I watch plenty of wrestling. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Ramos shoots at 2:55, 2:42 (not particularly threatening, but he shoots), 2:02, 1:26 (Ramos' countershot to Garrett's single leg-lift attempt), 0:25, 0:21, 0:19, and 0:15.

Your definition of a shot is extremely weak. Ramos only touched a leg once and the "counter shot" was a spin behind. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your definition of a shot is extremely weak. Ramos only touched a leg once and the "counter shot" was a spin behind.

Have you watched the match at all? Do you know what a spin behind is? He grabs a single leg then locks up a cradle. Then elevates the single when he loses the cradle. And lol at your counterargument. He changes levels, shoots forward and a knee hots the ground as he reaches for a leg. What elf you call that but a shot?

 

Sent from my SM-G925P using Tapatalk

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...