Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
gowrestle

Hair Cut

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, leshismore said:

He had a hair cover.  Don't play dumb. You know he did. 

I agree with JB... in over 40 years in the sport, I have never seen anything so ridiculous. I love people here trying to play the old psychological: YES BUT GAME.

Yes But... it was the rules... Yes But... it has happened all the time in the past... Yes But... Bla bla bla.

Bottom line.  The ref is a total, power-hungry #$%&@#. 

THIS is something we ALL know, and HAVE seen forever.  Refs who are on power trips (because they are basically insecure) and they go out of their way to make a bad call and screw a kid.... And do you know what excuse they always use?: It's the rule!!!

What happened was total nonsense.  Those defending this situation should really reflect for at least a minute. 

It would seem that you are in favor of the ref applying "common sense" as opposed to applying the "letter of the rule." Okay - fair enough, let's allow the ref to apply his/her own judgment to the rules. Suppose a ref believes that a half-pound difference in weight between two competitors does not give one wrestler a competitive advantage over his opponent so the ref allows a "fudge factor" for competitors during weigh ins - actually making weight not longer matters, just get close and we'll call it good. How does that sound as far as applying common sense? Seems absurd, doesn't it? That's what you are asking for when you suggest that refs should begin to apply their own discretion to the rules. They are rules for a reason and all competitors are asked to conform to the same set to make everything as fair as possible. Once you start allowing refs to pick and choose what rules to apply and how to apply them you destroy the whole purpose of rules; it is only then the system becomes unfair. Yes, yes, change bad rules, but until that time, everyone should follow the rules as written.

Edited by npope

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Housebuye said:

He did have a hair cover. The ref wouldn’t allow him to use it. 

To add to this, he wasn’t allowed to use that hair cover because it did not meet the rules requirement of being able to be attracted to the headgear.  It was a loose hair cover which has not been allowed the last couple years since that type more routinely fall off during matches which causes a stoppage to fix it. 

Edited by MadMardigain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/23/2018 at 8:38 PM, npope said:

I'd be interested to hear your thoughts

 

Sure thing. Just to be clear, your argument is this ref didn’t make a race based decision because a call was made against a white wrestler at some point for the same violation, right?

that in no way demonstrates this call wasn’t racist. This is about as weak as “I have a black friend” defense. 

Just because cops have shot white people, doesn’t mean that the shooting of Walter Scott is justified. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Housebuye said:

Sure thing. Just to be clear, your argument is this ref didn’t make a race based decision because a call was made against a white wrestler at some point for the same violation, right?

that in no way demonstrates this call wasn’t racist. This is about as weak as “I have a black friend” defense. 

Just because cops have shot white people, doesn’t mean that the shooting of Walter Scott is justified. 

Then can you please identify the aspect of the original incident in question that is racist. The ref may, or may not, be a racist, but his attitudes of race would seem to have no bearing on enforcing the rules in the same manner as other refs. You assume that just because the ref and kid of different races that it is racially motivated. That is about the "weakest" argument I have ever heard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, npope said:

It would seem that you are in favor of the ref applying "common sense" as opposed to applying the "letter of the rule." Okay - fair enough, let's allow the ref to apply his/her own judgment to the rules. Suppose a ref believes that a half-pound difference in weight between two competitors does not give one wrestler a competitive advantage over his opponent so the ref allows a "fudge factor" for competitors during weigh ins - actually making weight not longer matters, just get close and we'll call it good. How does that sound as far as applying common sense? Seems absurd, doesn't it? That's what you are asking for when you suggest that refs should begin to apply their own discretion to the rules. They are rules for a reason and all competitors are asked to conform to the same set to make everything as fair as possible. Once you start allowing refs to pick and choose what rules to apply and how to apply them you destroy the whole purpose of rules; it is only then the system becomes unfair. Yes, yes, change bad rules, but until that time, everyone should follow the rules as written.

"They are rules for a reason"... Great quote.  I used to live in Poland, 30 miles from Auschwitz. They said the same thing there.

And the pontificating "rules" people, you know this is complete BS.  Rules are there, and then there are interpretations of the rules.  Please, let's see how sanctimonious you are when a ref makes a "bad call" on one of your wrestlers that is his/her "interpretation" at the moment.  We have all seen this... you are no different. How often in tournaments do you hear the comment: "That was a BAD call".  Was the call within the "rules"... sure it could be interpreted that way... but we all know it was a bad call.

But I guess you are correct: 


"They are rules for a reason"

Oh, by the Way... who is They?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, leshismore said:

"They are rules for a reason"... Great quote.  I used to live in Poland, 30 miles from Auschwitz. They said the same thing there.

And the pontificating "rules" people, you know this is complete BS.  Rules are there, and then there are interpretations of the rules.  Please, let's see how sanctimonious you are when a ref makes a "bad call" on one of your wrestlers that is his/her "interpretation" at the moment.  We have all seen this... you are no different. How often in tournaments do you hear the comment: "That was a BAD call".  Was the call within the "rules"... sure it could be interpreted that way... but we all know it was a bad call.

But I guess you are correct: 


"They are rules for a reason"

Oh, by the Way... who is They?

A lot of times (not always) it's a defense mechanism to say the ref made a bad call instead of acknowledging our wrestler couldn't get the job done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, leshismore said:

"They are rules for a reason"... Great quote.  I used to live in Poland, 30 miles from Auschwitz. They said the same thing there.

And the pontificating "rules" people, you know this is complete BS.  Rules are there, and then there are interpretations of the rules.  Please, let's see how sanctimonious you are when a ref makes a "bad call" on one of your wrestlers that is his/her "interpretation" at the moment.  We have all seen this... you are no different. How often in tournaments do you hear the comment: "That was a BAD call".  Was the call within the "rules"... sure it could be interpreted that way... but we all know it was a bad call.

But I guess you are correct: 


"They are rules for a reason"

Oh, by the Way... who is They?

You seem to be taking this rather personal, leshismore; "sanctimonious"? Really? The best written rules have very little wiggle room for interpretation. Consider for example a rule that states that the hair net must be attached to the headgear in a previously described and approved manner. That would seem to constraint interpretation; that's what well-written rules are intended to do. 

And yes, refs sometimes make "bad" calls. It might be a misinterpretation of a rule, it may be the lack of enforcement of a rule as written, etc. It happens on occasion - I guess I don't understand your point on this one. Refs should make every effort not to make "bad" calls, i.e., deviate from the rules as written. Without enforcement of the rules as written nobody can know exactly how to proceed. Don't you agree?

As for "they," it refers to the body of statements and rules contained in the rule book. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, BigTenFanboy said:

A lot of times (not always) it's a defense mechanism to say the ref made a bad call instead of acknowledging our wrestler couldn't get the job done.

Classic YES... BUT...YES... BUT...YES... BUT...YES... BUT...

And many other times the ref had a bad interpretation.  If you cannot acknowledge I am very sorry.  We have ALL seen it. So have you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not familiar with NJ rules. In any case this is something that should be nipped in the bud. The way it was handled at the last minute was humiliating, especially at the high school level. As I recall, part if not all of the reasoning behind the technical fall was to prevent humiliation. 

Edited by Cooch1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, leshismore said:

Well... you sure got us all here.  "They are rules for a reason"

I answered your question. If your question isn't the one you wanted answered then please form a better question next time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, leshismore said:

 How often in tournaments do you hear the comment: "That was a BAD call".  Was the call within the "rules"... sure it could be interpreted that way... but we all know it was a bad call.

 

I still remember my  college coach  telling us "if a bad call cost you the match,you didn't deserve to win".

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Cooch1 said:

"The best written rules have very little wiggle room for interpretation. "

How about:  the referee shall not take issue with hair length once a wrestler steps onto the mat. This will force officials to be more careful and render judgment prior to the bout.

That would be fine by me - I like well written rules. You see, there are at least two different issues (actually more) being debated in this thread. One particular group is arguing that the personal domain of a kid should not be invaded, it should be respected - period. Another group is arguing that established rules should be adhered to because... (the rationale for that position has been varied on this thread). Then people begin to mistakenly "cross-debate" with individuals who aren't even debating the same point. Without some clarity as to what the issue at hand is, e.g., some clarity of thought that could perhaps be ensconced in a rule perhaps, confusion and chaos ensues. Rules serve the purpose of providing guidance so that all involved have the same understanding and expectations for certain behavior. Once an established rule is randomly ignored, confusion takes the place of ordered behavior.

Personally, I don't think a 65 mph speed limit is reasonable on some roads I drive, so I drive 75 when no one else is around. Would anyone think I have the "moral" high ground on this point when I argue with a cop who stops me when I explain that it is a dumb law and that I should be allowed to use my common sense regarding my speed? Of course, we all know you don't win that debate because the rule is the rule. I knew in advance that if I broke the rule there would be a penalty. After the fact, it does not matter whether the speed limit is appropriate or not - you pay the penalty. And if you really don't like the speed limit, you lobby the authorities to change it going forward.

Edited by npope

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, leshismore said:

Wow, what a genius retort. More YES but GAME...but, but, but.... 

Maybe it slipped his mind to give a technical violation.   Maybe he was so engrossed in the moment where he had the power to have a kid's hair chopped mat-side. 

I don't know why. Do you? Why don't you ask him?

Again, if you think this is ok... well... good for you. I don't. Many people don't. JB doesn't.  These are the people I prefer to hang out with.  You can choose to defend the power-hungry ref or not.  Your choice.

Just pointing out the flaw in your logic.  If he was “going out of his way to screw the kid,” surely he would have penalized him when he should have, right?  According to track he also penalized the opposing wrestler for stalling twice in the same period.  Remember Mr. Johnson won in overtime.  If he didn’t want him to win, he could have easily made it happen.

 

Keep in mind this is a guy that has been reffing for like 40 years and has reffed the state finals, in an area and state with plenty of African American wrestlers.  Yet you’re telling me he went “out of his way” to try to make this kid lose in a meaningless early-season dual meet between two average teams?  Sorry it just doesn’t add up.  If that was the case, surely we would have heard about his racist reffing previously, especially after the story about what he said to the other official.  I know plenty of people that have criticized his reffing ability, but have never heard of him being accused of racist reffing.

 

I like JB, but on this issue he is wrong (and must not have been paying attention if he’s never seen a matside haircut in 25 years).

 

2 hours ago, leshismore said:

"They are rules for a reason"... Great quote.  I used to live in Poland, 30 miles from Auschwitz. They said the same thing there.

And the pontificating "rules" people, you know this is complete BS.  Rules are there, and then there are interpretations of the rules.  Please, let's see how sanctimonious you are when a ref makes a "bad call" on one of your wrestlers that is his/her "interpretation" at the moment.  We have all seen this... you are no different. How often in tournaments do you hear the comment: "That was a BAD call".  Was the call within the "rules"... sure it could be interpreted that way... but we all know it was a bad call.

But I guess you are correct: 


"They are rules for a reason"

Oh, by the Way... who is They?

 

Apples and oranges.  Most calls during s match are judgment calls.  I guess the hair length could be considered a judgment call, but as mentioned, what is or isn’t a legal hair cover is not.

Besides, even when people criticize calls during a match, they usually don’t accuse the ref of racism, demand he be fired and banned for life and launch civil rights investigations. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, DuckFor2 said:

where's the outcry from the Beast with these 2? No Hair net?

hairnet.jpg

long hair.jpg

 

Blair kid looks legal.  Howard is in both pics so not sure what you mean by “2.”  For one, he’s already been brought up in regard to this topic.

But what’s your point?  If it’s about the inconsistency of this rule’s enforcement, again already been discussed.   But again, just because someone gets away with something one time doesn’t mean they should complain if they don’t get away with it another time.  And honestly I wouldn’t be surprised if a ref does tell Howard he needs a hair cover after all this (although I’m sure he’ll do it at skin checks).

If you’re trying to say he was let wrestle because he’s white (not saying you are), Kurt McHenry looks to have similar hair as Johnson and he wasn’t wearing a cover either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, leshismore said:

He had a hair cover.  Don't play dumb. You know he did. 

I agree with JB... in over 40 years in the sport, I have never seen anything so ridiculous. I love people here trying to play the old psychological: YES BUT GAME.

Yes But... it was the rules... Yes But... it has happened all the time in the past... Yes But... Bla bla bla.

Bottom line.  The ref is a total, power-hungry #$%&@#. 

THIS is something we ALL know, and HAVE seen forever.  Refs who are on power trips (because they are basically insecure) and they go out of their way to make a bad call and screw a kid.... And do you know what excuse they always use?: It's the rule!!!

What happened was total nonsense.  Those defending this situation should really reflect for at least a minute. 

The kid tried wearing a winter beanie, how is this anyone else's fault but his own. Just because the kids black everyone wants to cry racism. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Perry said:

Why have any self accountability when you can just cry racism later?

Why worry about implicit bias, other bias when the ref's history of racist behavior takes second to notions of self accountability?

Perry's comments here make her/his anti-Iowa potshots look thoughtful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×