Jump to content
Buckxell

Fix/Suriano - worst ncaa match of all time?

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, LJB said:

you never answered the question... was stalling called?

No, but they would have clearly been exercising proper discretion if they had.  By the second period, I and many other as would have.  Would definitely have been warranted 

Share this post


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

it is the same argument... 

the refs who are paid to call it didn't... why?

because they were not stalling as per the rules of folk...

you can't say they were afraid to call it because they were not afraid to drag the match out to make the right calls (which they did and did) and they damn sure were not afraid to end the match on a correctly called infraction of the worst rule in folk...

They didn't call it because in their (well I bet really only the head ref's) opinion they were not.

I'd argue that double stalling is probably the call that should be made more often but isn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if you want double stall called more frequently (and i would not argue against that) then you will have to change the way the rules are written...

as per the rules they were not stalling... shots are not synonymous with action...

they stayed engaged... they were both creating action... they stayed in the middle of the mat... neither avoided contact... neither ran... neither were stalling... 

don't like it?

blame folk... 

in free they would have been put on a shot clock and points would have been rewarded... just like they were in akron... i would not have disagreed with that happening... as per free rules the shot clock would have been warranted...

but, folk not so much...

again, why?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, LJB said:

if you want double stall called more frequently (and i would not argue against that) then you will have to change the way the rules are written...

as per the rules they were not stalling... shots are not synonymous with action...

they stayed engaged... they were both creating action... they stayed in the middle of the mat... neither avoided contact... neither ran... neither were stalling... 

don't like it?

blame folk... 

in free they would have been put on a shot clock and points would have been rewarded... just like they were in akron... i would not have disagreed with that happening... as per free rules the shot clock would have been warranted...

but, folk not so much...

again, why?

 

I’ve seen many matches where one or both guys were warned/dinged for stalling and were doing far more in the handfight and gaining position than suriano and fox were. 

You’re not interpreting the rules objectively  and seem to have personal reasons to overstate the quality of wrestling in the match 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, DEFan79 said:

I’ve seen many matches where one or both guys were warned/dinged for stalling and were doing far more in the handfight and gaining position than suriano and fox were. 

You’re not interpreting the rules objectively  and seem to have personal reasons to overstate the quality of wrestling in the match 

i've also seen way more egregious non-wrestling not dinged for stalling... 

clearly i am interpreting the rules correctly as per the no stalls called...

personal reasons?

you keep fishing...

Share this post


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

i've also seen way more egregious non-wrestling not dinged for stalling... 

clearly i am interpreting the rules correctly as per the no stalls called...

personal reasons?

you keep fishing...

The weight of opinion on the issue among the knowledgeable people here is massively against you. 

You’ve also made your disdain for folks rules blatantly obvious, which also calls into question your objectivity and credibility when it comes to this topic. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, DEFan79 said:

The weight of opinion on the issue among the knowledgeable people here is massively against you. 

You’ve also made your disdain for folks rules blatantly obvious, which also calls into question your objectivity and credibility when it comes to this topic. 

the weight of opinion on a forum means little... and what you term knowlegeable is suspect at best...

you claimed pre match it would be decided on stall calls... i laughed at that...  you know why?

because the way they wrestle is not stalling as per the folk rule set...

i was proven right and you wrong... it is why you keep coming back on this...

and yes, i have a very large disdain for folk rules because it rewards not wrestling... and no matter the score of fix v suriano... no matter how much the masses were so unhappy with that match... it was very good wrestling... as were their previous 2 matches... and they all looked the same... that is how it is going to go when they wrestle... regardless of the rule set... 

and as was proven, one rule set they got put on a shot clock and points were rewarded... one rule set they did not... but the matches were all the exact same...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/15/2019 at 10:23 AM, TFBJR said:

My biased view.  Suriano had his legs under his shoulders in a normal, aggressive stance the entire time.  Fix was bent 75 degrees at the waist and had his legs as far away as humanly possible.   It worked for him, but he clearly should have been dinged IMHO.  

I thought there stances were close to the same....just went back and watched again....still thought their stances were very similar, except that Fix may have stayed a little more disciplined in not coming out of that stance....just my take.....John Smith's stance was more bentover than that, but he didn't stand around....he was in on your legs like a cobra!!!

 

Edited by fadzaev2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, LJB said:

the weight of opinion on a forum means little... and what you term knowlegeable is suspect at best...

you claimed pre match it would be decided on stall calls... i laughed at that...  you know why?

because the way they wrestle is not stalling as per the folk rule set...

i was proven right and you wrong... it is why you keep coming back on this...

and yes, i have a very large disdain for folk rules because it rewards not wrestling... and no matter the score of fix v suriano... no matter how much the masses were so unhappy with that match... it was very good wrestling... as were their previous 2 matches... and they all looked the same... that is how it is going to go when they wrestle... regardless of the rule set... 

and as was proven, one rule set they got put on a shot clock and points were rewarded... one rule set they did not... but the matches were all the exact same...

 

If you take the " Folk Rules" literally. Two wrestler could stand in the center of the mat and practically do nothing as long as both stay in the center and do nothing equally and not be dinged for stalling. I have seen both wrestlers DQed for lack of action (albeit high school.)  

I'm not saying this was the case with Fix/Suriano. Both were hand fighting hard. I actually thought Fix was doing slightly more. He was at least dropping and thinking about a low single. Suriano's hips were back the whole time and he was obviously blocking  more in the face which ultimately cost him the match.  

Whatever, happen to forcing upperbody if you can't get to the legs?  I'm sure these two know plenty of throws.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, LJB said:

the weight of opinion on a forum means little... and what you term knowlegeable is suspect at best...

you claimed pre match it would be decided on stall calls... i laughed at that...  you know why?

because the way they wrestle is not stalling as per the folk rule set...

i was proven right and you wrong... it is why you keep coming back on this...

and yes, i have a very large disdain for folk rules because it rewards not wrestling... and no matter the score of fix v suriano... no matter how much the masses were so unhappy with that match... it was very good wrestling... as were their previous 2 matches... and they all looked the same... that is how it is going to go when they wrestle... regardless of the rule set... 

and as was proven, one rule set they got put on a shot clock and points were rewarded... one rule set they did not... but the matches were all the exact same...

 

When were the previous two matches?  Was one of those WNO?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the first 3 periods at WNO looked exactly the same... it was OT where they stepped it up a level or two... why?

because of the rule set... 

and to be fair, that match didn't have anything on the line other than the wrestling itself... that has to be factored in some fashion... last weekend there were implications beyond just that match...

Edited by LJB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, LJB said:

the first 3 periods at WNO looked exactly the same... it was OT where they stepped it up a level or two... why?

because of the rule set... 

and to be fair, that match didn't have anything on the line other than the wrestling itself... that has to be factored in some fashion... last weekend there were implications beyond just that match...

 

I agree that having less “on the line” in that match likely contributed to making it more exciting.

Its been a minute since I watched it but I thought the first 3 periods had more action.  Thought it used to be on YouTube but only option I saw was behind the Flo paywall.

Weren’t the OT rules basically the same, it was just unlimited instead of a minute?  In the OT Sunday there wasn’t much action though.  Fix did actually take a legitimate shot (probably the most legit shot to that point), but Suriano didn’t really do anything.  And dare I say it actually looked like he might’ve done a little backing up in that period. 

Edited by 1032004

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OT went on until the match ended... no rideouts... that was the difference... they could not rely on on getting through a minute and then escape or hold down for 30 seconds... that match was just gonna go on and on until it didn't...

and you are gonna love this...

i went back and watched the first 3 periods after biscuit flip made his bold prediction about stall calls deciding last weekend and i was snickering at him... i could not remember if there had been any stall warnings or not in that match... my assumption was that there had not been for all the reasons there were not any last weekend...

in the second the ref gave a double stall warning...

now, does he do that if it is not an exhibition match?

i can't say, but, it was definitely just a call for the ref's own sake... it didn't change any of the action... i'm guessing it just made him feel like he was doing somehting...

Share this post


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

OT went on until the match ended... no rideouts... that was the difference... they could not rely on on getting through a minute and then escape or hold down for 30 seconds... that match was just gonna go on and on until it didn't...

and you are gonna love this...

i went back and watched the first 3 periods after biscuit flip made his bold prediction about stall calls deciding last weekend and i was snickering at him... i could not remember if there had been any stall warnings or not in that match... my assumption was that there had not been for all the reasons there were not any last weekend...

in the second the ref gave a double stall warning...

now, does he do that if it is not an exhibition match?

i can't say, but, it was definitely just a call for the ref's own sake... it didn't change any of the action... i'm guessing it just made him feel like he was doing somehting...

My point was I would’ve thought there’d at least be more action in Sunday’s OT since especially with those 2 the rideouts are pretty much a crapshoot.  Maybe that means a double stall in the first period wouldn’t have changed much, but I still think it was warranted.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

rideouts are a crapshoot but that ride time is gonna give you choice and that is where it comes into play... particularly because they kinda screwed fix with putting down after the phantom lock hands call... that gave suriano an inflated ride time... all signs pointed to him getting choice... that was gonna be the deciding factor...

that is until he went all handsy...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and furthermore, i think we all can agree either one of them had a much better chance of riding the other out for a quick 30 seconds then taking a chance with a shot that wasn't 100% and the resulting countering of the other...

folk rules dictated that match...

 

 

oh yeah...

 

 

there was no stalling...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, 1032004 said:

 

I agree that having less “on the line” in that match likely contributed to making it more exciting.

Its been a minute since I watched it but I thought the first 3 periods had more action.  Thought it used to be on YouTube but only option I saw was behind the Flo paywall.

Weren’t the OT rules basically the same, it was just unlimited instead of a minute?  In the OT Sunday there wasn’t much action though.  Fix did actually take a legitimate shot (probably the most legit shot to that point), but Suriano didn’t really do anything.  And dare I say it actually looked like he might’ve done a little backing up in that period. 

There was a LOT more action in the first three periods of the WNO match.  This is revisionist history at its worst. 

Share this post


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

and furthermore, i think we all can agree either one of them had a much better chance of riding the other out for a quick 30 seconds then taking a chance with a shot that wasn't 100% and the resulting countering of the other...

folk rules dictated that match...

 

 

oh yeah...

 

 

there was no stalling...

Painfully wrong, once again.  People far more knowledgeable than you have disagreed with your assessment here, and have backed up their assertions far more competently than exclaiming “FOLK RULEZ R BAD!!!!”  Embarrassing 

Share this post


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

and furthermore, i think we all can agree either one of them had a much better chance of riding the other out for a quick 30 seconds then taking a chance with a shot that wasn't 100% and the resulting countering of the other...

Sure, but neither knew which one that would be.  I don’t think they wanted it to go to double OT.  They just didn’t want to take a bad shot worse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

im sure if you had asked either one of them they both would have said they wanted to end it in dominant fashion in regulation, but, you know, both being bad a$$es and all that...

Share this post


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

im sure if you had asked either one of them they both would have said they wanted to end it in dominant fashion in regulation, but, you know, both being bad a$$es and all that...

I think every wrestler would rather end every match in dominant fashion in regulation.

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...

×
×
  • Create New...