Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
hammerlockthree

Howmany more matches does hands to the face have to ruin?

Recommended Posts

It seems odd that it's something subjective like stalling, but it isn't ruled the same way.  The refs seem to casually "warn" the wrestlers by telling them to "watch the hands" or "keep your hands off the face."  Maybe an actual warning like with stalling would be a better look.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Plasmodium said:

Is this supposed to prevent concussions? Why is there a fire all of a sudden?

Eye-pokes.

The rule's been there for a long time but not always called. If you don't want to get penalized do not but your hands on your opponents face. You can pout your hand above the eyebrows on the forehead, the top of the head and the side / back of course but not the face. 

I finally saw the match on Wrestling in 60 last night (they edited out any breaks for reviews, etc) but Suriano clearly violated the rule in a situation where it ended the match. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, hammerlockthree said:

I'm just doing my little part wear out this issue, but the refs in the Suriano Fix match made the right call....

RESCIND THIS IDIOTIC EMPHASIS. 

 

Or guys could just stop with face slaps. Which should happen as the season goes on and they get called for it a couple of times. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"ThiS is d1 WreSTlING tHOugh!" 

Even in the UFC there are rules against putting your hands in someones face, numbnuts. If you don't want to lose on a hands-to-the-face call, don't put your hands in someones face. I hate matches being decided like that, but I also hate matches being stopped because someone took a finger to the eyeball.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm OK with putting an emphasis on the rule but I hate that there is a zero tolerance policy on it.  Make it an emphasis to call it but give the guy a warning and after that it's a penalty point every time he does it.  I think that's reasonable.  As terrible as the Fix/Suriano match was and as much as people wanted to be put out of their misery it was a terrible way to end a terrible match.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, StallWarning said:

I'm OK with putting an emphasis on the rule but I hate that there is a zero tolerance policy on it.  Make it an emphasis to call it but give the guy a warning and after that it's a penalty point every time he does it.  I think that's reasonable.  As terrible as the Fix/Suriano match was and as much as people wanted to be put out of their misery it was a terrible way to end a terrible match.

Or maybe it was the appropriate way to end. As Obi-Wan said "....you're going to find that many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view."

Share this post


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

Or maybe it was the appropriate way to end. As Obi-Wan said "....you're going to find that many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view."

Maybe you're right.  Maybe the worst possible ending was fitting for the worst possible match.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, StallWarning said:

Maybe you're right.  Maybe the worst possible ending was fitting for the worst possible match.

I don't know if that was the worst possible match but there was WWWWAAAAYYY too much hand fighting with little to no wrestling. 

 

As for the worst. I seem to remember a NCAA final heavyweight match with a Northestern guy that went on for like 15 minutes with 8,472 whistle stoppages for OOB. Plus a 125 NCAA Finals match some years ago between I believe Nickerson and Escobedo that had at least 17 hours of ear-to-ear ties ups.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

take away the stoppages and there was nothing wrong with this match at all... they both displayed exactly what they have been taught their entire careers... use the hand fiohting to get your opponent out of position... don't take bad shots... 

the wrestling was very high level... the problem is that the rules of folk dictate that this is the way a match goes in those circumstances...

don't like it?

change the awful folk rules that reward not wrestling... 

Edited by LJB
piss- wrong thread... same sentiment...

Share this post


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

Wasn't the call unnecessary roughness, not hands to the face?

That's the category of the call. Hands to the face and blocking on face are terms used in the picture section of the book.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, hammerlockthree said:

no way you wrestled

There's nothing core to folkstyle wrestling about open palming a guy to the face. People already know they can't do it while on the mat and react accordingly. How often do you see a guy getting pinned that instinctively reaches out to push the other guy's head away but stops themselves because they know it's against the rules? They're trying to make them react the same way in neutral. Guys will adjust. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about a reasonable rule solution:  first offense is a warning.  Second offense is a point for one's opponent.   Same with third offense.

Not entirely sure what the rule (interpretation) was previously, but the change would likely prevent most bouts ending on (being decided by) a hands-to-face call and give guys time to adjust.  

I suspect most (or, minimally, many) hands-to-face are in some sense unintentional or at least a consequence of habit.  

Hope refs and wrestlers figure this out by the time of NCAAs.  No one wants to see a match at NCAAs decided by this kind of call.  

Same with very quick locked hands call from a standing position.   Recall the 174 pound finals a few years back where Matt Brown won on a locked hands call.    That's going out with a whimper rather than a bang.

Edited by dmm53

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This may be one of the worst rules that have been recently put in place.  It's already become overused.  I don't have the answer for what should replace it, but... I would definitely think that reverting back to whatever existed, prior to the existing rule, would be better until some new/better/revised rule could be implemented.  What we're seeing is some tomfoolery I tell you... tomfoolery... 

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...