Jump to content
1032004

WI State Champ out of states for 2 unsportsmanlikes

Recommended Posts

13 minutes ago, npope said:

Understood - but stripping the title from the guy after-the-fact does nothing for the kids beaten along the way by that guy - they don't get to go to state or compete for placement. Other people get screwed because this kid was a dick. Sorry, but that just sucks.

 

wiaa ruling.JPG

Share this post


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

Glad to see the kid can wrestle at state. His DQ was unwarranted.

 .... brought the ref into court to testify too, was cross examined by wrestlers attorney ...   what a system

Whats next....  stalling??? backing out of bounds?? 

Share this post


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

Glad to see the kid can wrestle at state. His DQ was unwarranted.

To wrestle at state, he still has to go through regionals and sectionals

Share this post


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

 .... brought the ref into court to testify too, was cross examined by wrestlers attorney ...   what a system

Whats next....  stalling??? backing out of bounds?? 

The beauty of it, and take this with a grain of salt because I"m not a lawyer, but doesn't the losing party have to pay the court costs?

Share this post


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

The beauty of it, and take this with a grain of salt because I"m not a lawyer, but doesn't the losing party have to pay the court costs?

I have no idea on that.  The only thing I know is that it is not over...     I guess the good thing is the wrestler with the better wrestling skills will be wrestling in a regional this weekend.  Thats about the only positive I can come up with.   Everything else is a little concerning to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Im glad that he will still be able to wrestle, because I still feel that little one second flex even with a grunt, shouldn't be getting UC. That being said, hopefully this was a wake up call, and he learns from the other UC incident.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, TobusRex said:

He was state champ last year. I like his chances at regionals/sectionals.

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. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, npope said:

Understood - but stripping the title from the guy after-the-fact does nothing for the kids beaten along the way by that guy - they don't get to go to state or compete for placement. Other people get screwed because this kid was a dick. Sorry, but that just sucks.

Only the kid beaten in the first round of regionals (would be worst seed).  Everyone else would get to wrestle back.  Unless it has changed in the last 27 years since I wrestled in The WIAA.  And yes, there would be someone at regionals and sectionals that would lose out on the last placement as well even if they didn’t directly lose to him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, tbert said:

that was another real strange one...    sibling fight turns criminal

Siblings and teammates “fighting” turns into domestic battery for the male sibling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 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. 

 

You are going to have to get over it.  The call was egregious and this is the best outcome under those circumstances.

If the old man didnt have lawyer money,  he'd be SOL.  That is something for society to consider.

Share this post


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

You are going to have to get over it.  The call was egregious and this is the best outcome under those circumstances.

If the old man didnt have lawyer money,  he'd be SOL.  That is something for society to consider.

I dont want to get over it ... this is just too cool of a story to let go.

We are just slowly sliding down a slippery slope..      but fittingly, the old mans lawyers did pick the correct judge....  recently called on the carpet and admitted to 2 judicial misconducts of his own... 

 

Share this post


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

I dont want to get over it ... this is just too cool of a story to let go.

We are just slowly sliding down a slippery slope..      but fittingly, the old mans lawyers did pick the correct judge....  recently called on the carpet and admitted to 2 judicial misconducts of his own... 

 

Trump appointee

Share this post


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

Ref should have done his job better and maybe he wouldn't need to make an appearance in court

Is the ref actually a defendant?  I think the issue is more with the WI rules—I could be wrong but I don’t believe the 1 match suspension is noted in the NFHS rule book.

Share this post


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

True

There is a phrase in the rulebook saying the referee’s decisions “shall be final” but again I’d say that more pertains to the act of giving the 2 UC’s.  If the suspension that results is not part of the NFHS rules then that aspect may not really be final. 

Share this post


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

There is a phrase in the rulebook saying the referee’s decisions “shall be final” but again I’d say that more pertains to the act of giving the 2 UC’s.  If the suspension that results is not part of the NFHS rules then that aspect may not really be final. 

The reasoning has not been made public. But I would make a large bet that the judge ruled that the consequences of the calls were wrong, not that the ref's call itself was wrong.

Share this post


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

The reasoning has not been made public. But I would make a large bet that the judge ruled that the consequences of the calls were wrong, not that the ref's call itself was wrong.

Well, there is no attempt to overturn the call.  That is sort of impossible.  I doubt the judge disagrees with the suspension rule itself, it is the sheer pettiness of this individual call that precipitates the injunction.

Share this post


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

The reasoning has not been made public. But I would make a large bet that the judge ruled that the consequences of the calls were wrong, not that the ref's call itself was wrong.

It was a "temporary" restraining order to restrain WIAA from keeping him from wrestling until they "figure it out".  Wisconsin has a provision that allows the participant to keep performing and then strip any outcome later.  

Share this post


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

It was a "temporary" restraining order to restrain WIAA from keeping him from wrestling until they "figure it out".  Wisconsin has a provision that allows the participant to keep performing and then strip any outcome later.  

Sure it was a TRO, but you don't get a TRO just for asking. The judge must find that there is at least some merit to the claim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...