Illegal Cutbacks (re: Clark vs Tomasello)

[wrestlingnerd 2,205]

I rewatched the infraction a few times and learned something new. I never thought what Clark did was a cutback, which I always thought had to involve a kicking or sweeping motion. I've seen kids do what Clark did many times before without getting called.

 

Is there any scenario in which a top wrestler can suck a guy back with a crab ride when the bottom man is standing or in a tri/quadpod? I bet Clark didn't even realize what he did was illegal.

 

I hated to see the match end on that. I honestly don't think the move had any effect on the outcome at all (the match would've been wrestled the same way with the same results had Clark not done it).

[TBar1977 2,956]

I have not seen this call made in years despite seeing MANY wrestlers suck back on a claw or crab ride. 

[figure4 40]

It's been illegal for a few years now, but I hardly ever see it called.  Actually, Clark got away with it twice in that period before it was called the third time.  I was screaming at the television and explaining to my wife that he was getting away with an illegal move.  I'm not sure where the line is though.  I think you are allowed to do it as long as you have at least one of your feet on the mat.  They just want to stop people from jumping and cutting back over both at the same time.  It seems weird that it is illegal still though because it isn't going against a joint.  All you are doing is forcing the knees to bend the way they are designed to bend. 

Edited March 6, 2017 by figure4

[wrestlingnerd 2,205]

Not only that, but Clark didn't even apply undue pressure. He just got into his crab ride from a standing position. How do you even injure a guy like that?

 

I think folkstyle has too many unnecessary rules on the mat. People complain about mat wrestling being boring, but I think the rules have a lot to do with that. The great top wrestlers of the past would have a hell of a time replicating their success in today's world.

[scrambler 43]

You cannot block the back of the knees.  I see a lot of guys do it by blocking the opponents heels and pulling them back, however to block the back of the knees is  illegal....

Edited March 6, 2017 by scrambler

[wrestlingnerd 2,205]

You cannot block the back of the knees. I see a lot of guys do it by blocking the opponents heels and pulling them back, however to block the back of the knees is illegal....

 

... unless you do it with an arm. How much sense does that make??

[tommytechnique 59]

You cannot leave both feet and block behind the calf/ knee area in this position.  You may block behind the knee but one or both feet cannot leave the mat.

[sockobuw 49]

my take on it from last year.....

http://www.flowrestling.org/article/39433-by-the-numbers-uni-vs-cmu#.WL8K7RCMzYI

[wrestlingnerd 2,205]

You cannot leave both feet and block behind the calf/ knee area in this position.  You may block behind the knee but one or both feet cannot leave the mat.

 

 

So if Clark had one tippy toe grazing the mat, it would've been legal? This rule gets stupider the more I read about it. I just don't see how it's dangerous without a kicking motion (and just a blocking motion).

[cauliflowerear 7]

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[klehner 161]

So if Clark had one tippy toe grazing the mat, it would've been legal? This rule gets stupider the more I read about it. I just don't see how it's dangerous without a kicking motion (and just a blocking motion).

 

 

Palacio got dinged for this at the EIWAs this weekend.

[wrestlingnerd 2,205]

my take on it from last year.....

http://www.flowrestling.org/article/39433-by-the-numbers-uni-vs-cmu#.WL8K7RCMzYI

 

 

This is exactly what I thought. KICK-back means kick. That is NOT what Clark did. From your article, the rule states: "the wrestler shall not use both feet to KICK behind the knees..."

[treep2000 714]

If a rematch is going to happen, I'll go out on a limb and state that the next match won't be as close.  NaTo now knows what to expect, he'll adjust, get to his hi-crotch, and take him down 2-3 times. 

[sockobuw 49]

This is exactly what I thought. KICK-back means kick. That is NOT what Clark did. From your article, the rule states: "the wrestler shall not use both feet to KICK behind the knees..."

Clark did exactly what you aren't allowed to do

[tommytechnique 59]

I saw a rules interpretation/clarification dated Oct of 2016 (I believe) like the one Cauliflowerear posted.  The rule was also in the NCAA manual in the 15-16 season.  I don't know how long it has been in effect though.

[wrestlingnerd 2,205]

Clark did exactly what you aren't allowed to do

He did no kick. Maybe the rule book is poorly worded and kick doesn't literally mean kick. But if a rule book can't be read literally, we have bigger problems than this rule.

 

I am not saying he shouldn't have been penalized. I am pointing it an inconsistency in the written rule and the way it's actually called.

[simple 161]

I think the rule is fine and it was interpreted correctly in Clark's case. The feet can get "stuck" to the mat since you're carrying the weight of two people and your calves/knees are being blocked. Can lead to blown out knees & ankles.

Edited March 7, 2017 by simple

[Buckeyebison 87]

It's almost same as football illegal chop behind knees. Illegal chop has been known to blow out the knees. So, I would rather to keep the knees intact. I didn't know of that kickback rule till that match. Seeing that again in replay- I can see why it is considered as illegal. It can lead to blown knees if done slightly improper. I'm surprised to see that Clark wasn't puzzled at all. It was if he understood what is happening.

[VakAttack 1,889]

Not the subject of the thread, but two things bothered me about the call:

 

1.  I feel like I see this frequently and it's never called.  I never thought twice about it as it was happening.

 

2.  It bothers me more that this was called and NaTo's clear headgear pull wasn't.

[tigerfan9311 223]

Not the subject of the thread, but two things bothered me about the call:

 

1.  I feel like I see this frequently and it's never called.  I never thought twice about it as it was happening.

 

2.  It bothers me more that this was called and NaTo's clear headgear pull wasn't.

Agree on both counts.  Headgear pulling is largely ignored by all refs, and completely by some.  Seems like when a coach protests the kick-back, the refs watch for it and call it, but only then.

[Gantry 1,264]

This was talked about on HR a little bit, but why didn't Brands and co review the headgear pull?  Is that something you can't review? 

[Buckeyebison 87]

The referees actually huddled about the head gear but called it off. I do wonder if it was accidentally caught in and he was trying to get the fingers out. I did have the fingers caught in the head gear at occasion. It can be interpret either way. It is up to the referees to interpret if it was intentional or not.

[jeffr_ideal 216]

Here is the video, looks just the way it is described in the rule book as an illegal move.  http://www.flowrestling.org/video/1123251-133-lbs-final-nathan-tomasello-osu-vs-cory-clark-iowa

[OfficialObserver 36]

Regarding the illegal move called on Clark...that move is illegal by application as soon as both feet leave the mat.

 

It's not as easy to catch in the moment as some may think because, even though, we officials are looking at the action, we may not be looking for that specific maneuver/action.

 

It usually happens quickly and we're more focused on locked hands, who's in control, getting in position for potential nearfall, etc...

 

It was a good call by the official, who happens to be one of the best we have.

[Zebra 532]

Regarding the illegal move called on Clark...that move is illegal by application as soon as both feet leave the mat.

 

It's not as easy to catch in the moment as some may think because, even though, we officials are looking at the action, we may not be looking for that specific maneuver/action.

 

It usually happens quickly and we're more focused on locked hands, who's in control, getting in position for potential nearfall, etc...

 

It was a good call by the official, who happens to be one of the best we have.

 

Agreed