Zain can be had

[boconnell 1,623]

Retherford struggles with the heavy hands to the head/face. Collica may have given him Pico flashbacks. Just recall how Pico consistently took Zain apart over the course of about 5 matches.

I think there is something to this.  Zain is a great finisher but doesn't really set up his attacks.  He dives from space and if he gets a hand on the leg he is almost impossible to stop.  Even in his close match with Sorenson he converted well when he touched a leg.

 

Against Collica he never got close enough to dive and touch a leg.  Collica kept him at a distance (with his jab) and Zain didn't have an answer in the first 3 minutes.  I bet you see some kind of adjustment from Zain and his coaches, but I bet it is also a bit of a style problem for him.  

Edited February 22, 2017 by boconnell

[TBar1977 4,481]

Collica should transition to MMA after he's done wrestling like Hendricks. He certainly has the striking down better than most. His left jab is better than Jose Aldo's. 

Edited February 21, 2017 by TBar1977

[pamela 1,334]

I am sorry...but did Zain loose??  Didn't think so.  People need to freakin relax!   Dude is as big a stud as they come and there is nothing wrong with him.  It is always weird to me when some people think that only one wrestler will make "progress" every year and get better...truth is, every kid in college is trying to get better and bust their a$$ to do so...this is high level wrestling and anyone can be beaten on any given day....even Synder.  Point is, the guy is still a national champ and I would bet he does not lose the rest of the year...any takers??

 

It's true though, Zain can be had. Just the other day I emailed him saying I was the cousin of a wealthy Nigerian astronaut seeking to transfer his fortune out of the country, and bam, just like that he sent me his bank account info, SSN and the secret to his bow & arrow ride.  

[lonewolf 19]

^True story

[LordNelson 552]

Collica should transition to MMA after he's done wrestling like Hendricks. He certainly has the striking down better than most. His left jab is better than Jose Aldo's. 

Zain is pretty heavy handed too there bud.

[wrestlingnerd 2,996]

Retherford struggles with the heavy hands to the head/face. Collica may have given him Pico flashbacks. Just recall how Pico consistently took Zain apart over the course of about 5 matches.

 

Good observation. I didn't make that connection until you posted it. That does appear to be a way to neutralize Zain's offense and even set up your own against him. There are very few people in this country who can do it effectively, but you are on to something.

[LordNelson 552]

Thing is that Zain can make adjustments too.

Until someone takes him down a couple times and doesn't give TD's up he is still the man because no one can ride him and he tends to ride well last I checked.

[VakAttack 3,969]

Thing is that Zain can make adjustments too.

Until someone takes him down a couple times and doesn't give TD's up he is still the man because no one can ride him and he tends to ride well last I checked.

 

Against Sorensen his riding didn't come nto effect until the last OT.  Despite getting two TDs, Retherford didn't get RT.

[Housebuye 2,417]

Against Sorensen his riding didn't come nto effect until the last OT.  Despite getting two TDs, Retherford didn't get RT.

He won the match because of his riding...

[Threadkilla 100]

Zain has been just as dominant as last year. He's had 2 close matches. He just beat Colica despite the questionable stall calls. He had an off day against Sorenson. He's going to put it together post aeason. People forget that he beat BJ Clagon on riding time last year 2-1 and beat Colica last year 4-1 at the Bryce. He beat Sorenson 4-0 in B10s, not exactly blowouts. He ended up destroying everybody at Nationals, because he's great when the pressure is on.

[VakAttack 3,969]

He won the match because of his riding...

 

In double overtime, but yes he did.  That doesn't negate what happened in the regulation portion of the match itself where his riding was not a factor.

[Joe24 90]

He's the best guy at the weight, but the gap is nowhere near as pronounced as last season.  Sorensen, Collica and possibly Mayes have an honest shot to beat him.  I'm still predicting he wins, but the field has closed on him significantly from last year.

 

I agree, and surprised by how many will disagree.

[Joe24 90]

He's wrestling a lot more conservatively than he was at the start of the season. I don't know if it's a confidence thing but early on, he'd constantly attack from neutral. I don't think he took 3 shots against Collica. 

 

I have mentioned this several times and will continue to repeat it: wrestling Nolf is probably quite humbling at this point.  While Nolf was progressing his first two years at PSU, it was probably close between him and Zain.  I think now Nolf has no problems with Zain.  I think this is likely, and may have an effect on Zain.  Speculation, but seems logical to me. 

[Joe24 90]

I'm pretty sure the Blue & White fans insist that he was sick with the flu against Iowa and prolly had a touch of it still hanging on against Collica.  Besides, it's much more important that Gubber (13-7) almost had a neutral fall.

 

Is this guy serious?

[Joe24 90]

I am sorry...but did Zain loose??  Didn't think so.  People need to freakin relax!   Dude is as big a stud as they come and there is nothing wrong with him.  It is always weird to me when some people think that only one wrestler will make "progress" every year and get better...truth is, every kid in college is trying to get better and bust their a$$ to do so...this is high level wrestling and anyone can be beaten on any given day....even Synder.  Point is, the guy is still a national champ and I would bet he does not lose the rest of the year...any takers??

 

What are you betting?  I think Zain is the favorite, but I am definitely willing to take odds.  Surprise me. 

[Joe24 90]

Retherford struggles with the heavy hands to the head/face. Collica may have given him Pico flashbacks. Just recall how Pico consistently took Zain apart over the course of about 5 matches.

 

Whatever happened to that Pico guy? 

[WillieBoy 713]

Yep, given time and circumstances anyone can be had. Osamu Watanabe was 187-0 in International freestyle and won two worlds and then Olympic Gold in 1964 and was never taken down in any of the matches.

Sadly, he lost in the perfect string a few decades later in Master's wrestling where he finished 2nd.

So yep, Zain can be taken.

 

Just ask Brent Metcalf, Ed Banach and Josh Lambrecht.

[MadMardigain 1,594]

Whatever happened to that Pico guy?

Recovered from injury. About to get his first fight in Bellator in the near future. Plans for another Olympic run are still up in the air. Edited February 25, 2017 by MadMardigain

[TBar1977 4,481]

Speaking of Zain, this came out today from the NCAA. I copied it from a post on BWI wrestling page. The rule is clarified to say basically exactly what I wrote following his match with Collica, but it uses the word "leg" instead of "legs", which is what I was saying after the match.

 

NCAA sent this out today as a direct result of the Retherford match:

Situation #4 on Page 119 of the rules book states:

Wrestler A has legs on Wrestler B. Wrestler B stands up with the legs still in. The referee stops the match for a stalemate. Wrestler A again applies the legs on Wrestler B while on the mat. Wrestler B again stands up. Question: Who should be called for stalling? Ruling: Wrestler B should be called for stalling for repeatedly standing up to break a legal move.

Clarification:

The bottom man should called for stalling, for standing up with the leg-ride in, only when the offensive wrestler has the leg in, while the defensive wrestler is completely down on the mat (hands and knees touching the mat with the leg-ride in) and the defensive man repeatedly rises to the standing position to secure a stalemate call.

In all other instances in which the offensive wrestler has the leg-ride in, or is attempting to get the leg-ride in, while the defensive wrestler is attempting to escape, it is the responsibility of the offensive wrestler to attempt to return the defensive wrestler back to the mat.

[TBar1977 4,481]

BTW, the NFHS rule on this situation does not require both legs be in either, only one leg must be "in". The other leg merely has to be off the ground, which was the case with Zain vs. Collica. 

[boconnell 1,623]

BTW, the NFHS rule on this situation does not require both legs be in either, only one leg must be "in". The other leg merely has to be off the ground, which was the case with Zain vs. Collica. 

But it also clarifies that the guy has to be completely down on the mat and it mentions all supporting points (hands plural and knees plural).  The rule is for when a guy puts in legs (or a leg), has the guy completely on the mat, and then the bottom guy stands up (most likely out of a tripod).  

 

The first time it happens and stalemate is called (4:19), Collica is not "completely down on the mat (hands and knees touching the mat with the leg-ride in)".  Same thing when Zain puts it in at 4:44.  Collica is not on his knees when Zain puts it in.  Same thing at 5:14 when Zain is called for stalling.  Zain repeatedly puts in the leg when Collica is not completely down, Collica stands up, and after the 3rd time Zain gets called for text book stalling.  The clarification you quoted shows exactly why it was correctly called stalling.   

 

http://www.flowrestling.org/video/1110955-149-lbs-anthony-collica-ok-state-vs-zain-retherford#.WLG3FfkrJPY

Edited February 25, 2017 by boconnell

[TBar1977 4,481]

But it also clarifies that the guy has to be completely down on the mat and it mentions all supporting points (hands plural and knees plural).  The rule is for when a guy puts in legs (or a leg), has the guy completely on the mat, and then the bottom guy stands up (most likely out of a tripod).  

 

The first time it happens and stalemate is called (4:19), Collica is not "completely down on the mat (hands and knees touching the mat with the leg-ride in)".  Same thing when Zain puts it in at 4:44.  Collica is not on his knees when Zain puts it in.  Same thing at 5:14 when Zain is called for stalling.  Zain repeatedly puts in the leg when Collica is not completely down, Collica stands up, and after the 3rd time Zain gets called for text book stalling.  The clarification you quoted shows exactly why it was correctly called stalling.   

 

http://www.flowrestling.org/video/1110955-149-lbs-anthony-collica-ok-state-vs-zain-retherford#.WLG3FfkrJPY

 

 

bo, I believe the way they wrote that rule will result in even further clarification this off season. Why? Because if you think about it, if a wrestler is down flat with all four points, two hands and two knees, it is almost impossible to get the legs in. At least one knee has to come up off the mat for the legs, or one leg, to come in, but most times when the one leg starts to come up the knee is off the mat very quick, or one hand is off the mat very quick. Now its 3 points and legs are in. You are correct in that a literal interpretation of the rules requires 4 points, but show me some video of riders who are getting legs in with the description given in that rule. I'd like to see that. 99% of leg rides occur when the legs come in with three supporting points. I'd bet on that. 

 

The whole point of the rule is to determine which wrestler is actually stalling. I believe the intent there is that if the legs or even one leg is in when the bottom man stands, or when he gets to his feet, then it is on him. I have seen this called probably 50x with Zain alone and every time it was called a stalemate with the exception of a handful of stalls on bottom man, until this match. 

 

I am not going to argue it because it is pointless, but I have seen officials on other boards state that it becomes stalling on bottom, and I have seen it called that way until this match. Why is it suddenly the opposite way from how it has been called the past few years in the matches I have seen? See the point?

 

I'll just stand on what I wrote. I think this will be further clarified in the offseason. The all 4 points on the mat makes no sense. 

Edited February 25, 2017 by TBar1977

[rstrong 75]

bo, I believe the way they wrote that rule will result in even further clarification this off season. Why? Because if you think about it, if a wrestler is down flat with all four points, two hands and two knees, it is almost impossible to get the legs in. At least one knee has to come up off the mat for the legs, or one leg, to come in, but most times when the one leg starts to come up the knee is off the mat very quick, or one hand is off the mat very quick. Now its 3 points and legs are in. You are correct in that a literal interpretation of the rules requires 4 points, but show me some video of riders who are getting legs in with the description given in that rule. I'd like to see that. 99% of leg rides occur when the legs come in with three supporting points. I'd bet on that. 

 

The whole point of the rule is to determine which wrestler is actually stalling. I believe the intent there is that if the legs or even one leg is in when the bottom man stands, or when he gets to his feet, then it is on him. I have seen this called probably 50x with Zain alone and every time it was called a stalemate with the exception of a handful of stalls on bottom man, until this match. 

 

I am not going to argue it because it is pointless, but I have seen officials on other boards state that it becomes stalling on bottom, and I have seen it called that way until this match. Why is it suddenly the opposite way from how it has been called the past few years in the matches I have seen? See the point?

 

I'll just stand on what I wrote. I think this will be further clarified in the offseason. The all 4 points on the mat makes no sense. 

 

..."show me some video of riders who are getting legs in with the description given in that rule. I'd like to see that. 99% of leg rides occur when the legs come in with three supporting points. I'd bet on that. "..

 

I see what you're getting at - but your logic is flawed here. Nobody is saying that the leg has to go in WHILE all four supporting points are touching. Only that once the leg is in, and THEN AFTER THAT the bottom man gets to all four supporting points touching - that THEN the bottom man can't then stand up repeatedly in order to get a stalemate call.

 

Bo is right on the money - stalling was called correctly in this match.

[LordNelson 552]

Rule has never really changed.

 

Stalling was calling right but........

I could be wrong but the first time Zain was hit for stalling they were both on their feet.....

I think the ref should've let the wrestling continue.

[boconnell 1,623]

..."show me some video of riders who are getting legs in with the description given in that rule. I'd like to see that. 99% of leg rides occur when the legs come in with three supporting points. I'd bet on that. "..

 

I see what you're getting at - but your logic is flawed here. Nobody is saying that the leg has to go in WHILE all four supporting points are touching. Only that once the leg is in, and THEN AFTER THAT the bottom man gets to all four supporting points touching - that THEN the bottom man can't then stand up repeatedly in order to get a stalemate call.

 

Bo is right on the money - stalling was called correctly in this match.

Yes.  At some point with legs in, the bottom man must be grounded.  If he is and he is waddling into a tripod standup to cheat a fresh start, then he is stalling.  If he is not, then the rule is very clear.  It uses the language "IN ALL OTHER INSTANCES IN WHICH THE OFFENSIVE WRESTLER HAS THE LEG RIDE IN"...it is the responsibility of the offensive wrestler to attempt to return the guy to the mat.  

 

This is why Cael and Cody do not argue that Collica initiated the stand up and thus is the stalling wrestler.  They only argue that Collica is putting Zain's leg in to make it look like stalling (an incorrect description of the action, but a correct rules argument).  They both understand that when the leg goes in from there the top man must attempt to return. 

 

When you slap a leg in on a wrestler who is not downed, it does not make it illegal for him to attempt a standup.  But if you have legs in on a downed wrestler, that guy can't get the advantage of a restart just by running a go nowhere standup.  

 

The action in this match is perfectly described and officiated according to the very rule you so kindly provided for us.  

 

And if you don't like the rules being applied by the letter of the law, than watch the action and ask yourself who is being helped by the stalemate calls.  It certainly isn't Collica.  The first few times he stands up he keeps moving through the position because his goal is an escape.  He is even willing to go back to the mat to get that escape.  His goal is not a stalemate.  Retherford is clearly looking for a stalemate every time.  He is lifting his off leg clear of the mat to stop action continuing.  He wants nothing more than status quo and the RT clock moving forward.

 

By every spirit of what stalling is, and by exact letter of the law, Zain Retherford is stalling there.  It was good match tactics to secure the RT and prevent the escape point, and it won him the match.  But the warning and the call were well deserved.