WI State Champ out of states for 2 unsportsmanlikes

[tbert 556]

Did it before and they won.  

[jon 120]

On 3/10/2019 at 3:29 PM, tbert said:

Did it before and they won.  

LOL. Your ignorance kinda entertaining. https://intermatwrestle.com/articles/21824

[1032004 342]

So the actual ruling was just that he served the suspension via a JV tournament right?  Not that the judge disagreed with the penalty?

[tbert 556]

1 hour ago, jon said:

LOL. Your ignorance kinda entertaining. https://intermatwrestle.com/articles/21824

LOL, Your stupidity is quite prevelant if you think it is over.  Maybe you should read the article you post before you actually post it.

[npope 120]

Just to clear up some of the miscommunication being disseminated on this particular event. The WI court recently ruled against the WIAA (the governing sports body) when it sought to lift the temporary injunction (which was the original court ruling) that was issued because the WIAA had no formal appeals process for such transgressions. Subsequently, the WIAA proceeded to endeavor to have the temporary injunction rescinded, and that motion was only recently denied. So the kid's title (he ended up winning his second state title) would appear to be safe.

There is some confusion as to whether the coach actually entered the kid in a JV meet to serve the suspension (although he may have, hard to know for sure without seeing the weigh-in log since the kid never actually stepped on the mat for a JV meet). The WIAA actually has language written into its governing documents that do not allow such violations (for football) to be served at a lower level of competition, e.g., a JV meet. I have not seen anything to support the notion that that strategy had any bearing on the court ruling. 

[1032004 342]

51 minutes ago, npope said:

Just to clear up some of the miscommunication being disseminated on this particular event. The WI court recently ruled against the WIAA (the governing sports body) when it sought to lift the temporary injunction (which was the original court ruling) that was issued because the WIAA had no formal appeals process for such transgressions. Subsequently, the WIAA proceeded to endeavor to have the temporary injunction rescinded, and that motion was only recently denied. So the kid's title (he ended up winning his second state title) would appear to be safe.

There is some confusion as to whether the coach actually entered the kid in a JV meet to serve the suspension (although he may have, hard to know for sure without seeing the weigh-in log since the kid never actually stepped on the mat for a JV meet). The WIAA actually has language written into its governing documents that do not allow such violations (for football) to be served at a lower level of competition, e.g., a JV meet. I have not seen anything to support the notion that that strategy had any bearing on the court ruling. 

 

Well that would seem to set an interesting precedent then...

[jsmalls131313 18]

On 2/8/2019 at 8:22 PM, tbert said:

Well I guess I hope so too... I would hate to be a ref in any of his matches.... and be called into court over something like a missed locking hands infraction...  Your Honor .... .... was the knee down??   We have evidence from a facebook video that proves his knee was down and he was screwed. over because he lost by one point and cant advance to state. 

 

Id hate to be a wrestler that a corrupt ref tried to rob without a system of checks and balances. Glad the kid got his rightful state title. Thankful the old fool retired because he should not have been reffing. Credit to the judge. 

[tbert 556]

1 hour ago, jsmalls131313 said:

Id hate to be a wrestler that a corrupt ref tried to rob without a system of checks and balances. Glad the kid got his rightful state title. Thankful the old fool retired because he should not have been reffing. Credit to the judge. 

1 hour ago, jsmalls131313 said:

Id hate to be a wrestler that a corrupt ref tried to rob without a system of checks and balances. Glad the kid got his rightful state title. Thankful the old fool retired because he should not have been reffing. Credit to the 

Good reasoning.  Your mom should be proud of you. 

[jsmalls131313 18]

4 minutes ago, tbert said:

Good reasoning.  Your mom should be proud of you. 

Solid addition to your 1300+ posts exposing yourself as a fool with no life. I'm sorry that you so closely relate to a deluded, old, corrupt ref. By all means, keep responding to every post on this thread with incredibly weak BS. At your age its about all you have left.

Edited April 22 by jsmalls131313

[1032004 342]

2 hours ago, jsmalls131313 said:

Id hate to be a wrestler that a corrupt ref tried to rob without a system of checks and balances. Glad the kid got his rightful state title. Thankful the old fool retired because he should not have been reffing. Credit to the judge. 

So are all states going to require a “formal appeals process” for official’s calls made during a competition now?

[BobDole 836]

2 hours ago, jsmalls131313 said:

Id hate to be a wrestler that a corrupt ref tried to rob without a system of checks and balances. Glad the kid got his rightful state title. Thankful the old fool retired because he should not have been reffing. Credit to the judge. 

I'm not sure the ref retired, you might be thinking of the butt drag incident. The ref in Wisconsin was considerably younger...meaning not old as dirt.

[jsmalls131313 18]

3 minutes ago, 1032004 said:

So are all states going to require a “formal appeals process” for official’s calls made during a competition now?

Not unless there is blatant corruption like in this case. A close call in a match is one thing. DQ'ing a guy out of states b/c of ego surely requires an appeal. 

[Fletcher 504]

Glad the best wrestler won - even if he's a bad sport.

The takeaway for all HS governing organizations should be to have fair rules and appeals processes for the competitors; otherwise you risk a judge taking it out of your hands and doing that for you.

[potentiallydangerous 120]

If it was the ref's intention was to teach the wrestler and his family that actions have consequences, he succeeded.

 

[Housebuye 1,760]

12 hours ago, potentiallydangerous said:

If it was the ref's intention was to teach the wrestler and his family that actions have consequences, he succeeded.

 

The ref should stay in his lane. Officiate the match.  

[1032004 342]

48 minutes ago, Housebuye said:

The ref should stay in his lane. Officiate the match.  

He did.  The ref didn’t DQ/suspend the kid, the state’s rules did.

Edited April 23 by 1032004

[fadzaev2 124]

I just saw this thread and watched the video, then read some of the arguments....no dog in the fight....neutral bystander who coached and taught for over 40 years., refereed for around  20....the one point at the end could have been 2!!! The kid had gone from bottom(red singlet) to top with leg(s) in and the kid in question(green singlet) was countering pretty well and putting red singlet in danger, but hadn't gotten there yet as time ran out.  The first technical point was for grabbing the headgear (Suriano/Fix move) with his  spiral ride.  And at the end, the official turned to what must have been green singlets dad, and talked him about being removed from the gym....green singlets flex wasn't directed to that part of the bleachers ....it was toward the right of that.....just my take from the cheap seats, but it's not my first rodeo.....41 NCAA's/26 Big Ten's, 17 World Cups, 20+ Midland's and hundreds of other tournaments.  Where I stand on it, I'll keep that to myself.

[Housebuye 1,760]

51 minutes ago, 1032004 said:

He did.  The ref didn’t DQ/suspend the kid, the state’s rules did.

Did you watch the match and still think the ref didn’t suspend the kid? The calls he made were ridiculous and directly led to the suspension. Unless you are saying the ref didn’t know the rules?

the DQ call was terrible. The ref is either incompetent or malicious. 

[1032004 342]

2 hours ago, Housebuye said:

Did you watch the match and still think the ref didn’t suspend the kid? The calls he made were ridiculous and directly led to the suspension. Unless you are saying the ref didn’t know the rules?

the DQ call was terrible. The ref is either incompetent or malicious. 

He didn’t DQ him. He was still credited with winning the tournament in question, correct?

The ref made 2 separate unsportsmanlike calls, which based on the available evidence I would argue were correct.  Maybe not all refs make the same call(s), but that doesn’t change the fact that they were correct.

The wrestler was only suspended because of an additional rule the state had which was not part of NFHS rules.   I’d probably agree that that penalty was too harsh, but the referee did nothig wrong.

[Housebuye 1,760]

1 hour ago, 1032004 said:

He didn’t DQ him. He was still credited with winning the tournament in question, correct?

The ref made 2 separate unsportsmanlike calls, which based on the available evidence I would argue were correct.  Maybe not all refs make the same call(s), but that doesn’t change the fact that they were correct.

The wrestler was only suspended because of an additional rule the state had which was not part of NFHS rules.   I’d probably agree that that penalty was too harsh, but the referee did nothig wrong.

He DQd him from the postseason (or tried to), just not the match itself. 

Fact is, the ref, with a clear reason for bias against this wrestler, made the specific calls that would lead to him getting DQd from the postseason. The ref should know about this additional rule. He is the ref. Not knowing means he isn’t qualified for his job, but by all accounts he is experienced, so that leads to 1 possible conclusion - he did this on purpose. 

The penalty wasn’t just too harsh. It was down deliberately to punish the athlete. The refs overstepped and thankfully the situation was fixed by people with more power than a rogue ref. 

[1032004 342]

2 hours ago, Housebuye said:

He DQd him from the postseason (or tried to), just not the match itself. 

Fact is, the ref, with a clear reason for bias against this wrestler, made the specific calls that would lead to him getting DQd from the postseason. The ref should know about this additional rule. He is the ref. Not knowing means he isn’t qualified for his job, but by all accounts he is experienced, so that leads to 1 possible conclusion - he did this on purpose. 

The penalty wasn’t just too harsh. It was down deliberately to punish the athlete. The refs overstepped and thankfully the situation was fixed by people with more power than a rogue ref. 

 

Remind me what the "clear reason for bias" was?   I think he used to be a teacher (not a wrestling coach to my knowledge) at the school where the opponent went?   C'mon, that is not a clear reason for bias. 

So basically your argument is that the ref should have made incorrect calls just because the state association has a rule that is unnecessarily harsh?  Again, I think not all refs make those same calls, but I don't fault this ref at all for making the correct calls there.

To me, the reason I didn't feel bad initially goes back to the wrestler complaining about a literally meaningless call and allegedly swearing at the ref in doing so.   If he doesn't do that, the fact that he got hit for what some would argue was a questionable unsportsmanlike for flexing wouldn't have mattered.

Edited April 23 by 1032004

[Housebuye 1,760]

59 minutes ago, 1032004 said:

 

Remind me what the "clear reason for bias" was?   I think he used to be a teacher (not a wrestling coach to my knowledge) at the school where the opponent went?   C'mon, that is not a clear reason for bias. 

So basically your argument is that the ref should have made incorrect calls just because the state association has a rule that is unnecessarily harsh?  Again, I think not all refs make those same calls, but I don't fault this ref at all for making the correct calls there.

To me, the reason I didn't feel bad initially goes back to the wrestler complaining about a literally meaningless call and allegedly swearing at the ref in doing so.   If he doesn't do that, the fact that he got hit for what some would argue was a questionable unsportsmanlike for flexing wouldn't have mattered.

Did the ref not know the rules? Pretending he isn’t at fault for the DQ is ridiculous. Why did this ref choose not to penalize the other wrestlers for flexing after matches he officiated? 

The judge himself mentioned that it obviously wasn’t taunting. The claims about foul language were only made after the ref had already given his reasoning. It was added after the fact. Don’t you think that is suspicious? 

He did make the correct call for either offense. Twice in a row he picked on a wrestler. Now we should ask, why?

1. He lost his temper and punished a high school sophomore for the sake of his own ego

2. He was bias towards the other wrestler as he used to teach at that school 

we can’t know he was doing this because of his bias, but the bias is extremely likely to exist. The alternative explanation however is #1 above. I’m not sure if that’s better, but sure it’s possible. 

Why do you keep claiming the calls were correct? They obviously weren’t. The ref made up additional excuses after the fact and the state wrestling folks had his back becuase it made their rules look bad. 

Im glad the courts protected this teenager from being abused by a rogue ref. 

[npope 120]

Sorry Housebuye, but I think your understanding of the facts of the case are off. You suggest that this particular ref didn't penalize any other wrestlers for flexing? Can you tell us how you know that he was even confronted with another wrestler flexing? As for the "fact" that you cite that he didn't penalize them, please see the first point. If you are going to argue a point, please stop making up stuff that you have no information about. As for the "claims about foul language were only made after the ref had already given his reasoning," could you please give a source for that information. That is not my understanding.

[tbert 556]

On 4/22/2019 at 10:36 AM, jsmalls131313 said:

Solid addition to your 1300+ posts exposing yourself as a fool with no life. I'm sorry that you so closely relate to a deluded, old, corrupt ref. By all means, keep responding to every post on this thread with incredibly weak BS. At your age its about all you have left.

Yep, mom is proud...  when are you moving out of basement?

[tbert 556]

1 hour ago, Housebuye said:

Did the ref not know the rules? Pretending he isn’t at fault for the DQ is ridiculous. Why did this ref choose not to penalize the other wrestlers for flexing after matches he officiated? 

The judge himself mentioned that it obviously wasn’t taunting. The claims about foul language were only made after the ref had already given his reasoning. It was added after the fact. Don’t you think that is suspicious? 

He did make the correct call for either offense. Twice in a row he picked on a wrestler. Now we should ask, why?

1. He lost his temper and punished a high school sophomore for the sake of his own ego

2. He was bias towards the other wrestler as he used to teach at that school 

we can’t know he was doing this because of his bias, but the bias is extremely likely to exist. The alternative explanation however is #1 above. I’m not sure if that’s better, but sure it’s possible. 

Why do you keep claiming the calls were correct? They obviously weren’t. The ref made up additional excuses after the fact and the state wrestling folks had his back becuase it made their rules look bad. 

Im glad the courts protected this teenager from being abused by a rogue ref. 

A Rogue ref(who is an athletic director at a prominent local high school) that followed the WIAA communication exactly as stated. This was  sent out to every referee, athletic director and coach before conferences started and was recommended to be covered with every participant. 

No one is disputing who was the better wrestler. 

Another "rogue ref" cost this wrestler's' team the chance for a team title last year by penalizing the same mentioned  wrestler for unsportsmanlike conduct after he won his match and cost the team a point. The team lost by one point.

The call was correct as per WIAA rules.  The kid could of walked away and celebrated with his team.  He chose to stick it to his prior team (you know, the one his behavior cost them a possible state title last year)

Do we really want the legal system getting involved in balls and strikes?