Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I thought the rule was a bit sketchy from the get-go but in the aftermath of big10s, its pretty clear that the hands to the face rule needs some tweaking. I think the positive aspect of it are decent (encouraging more hand fighting, reducing eye injury, etc.) but it's obviously apparent that the rule also is adversely affecting the outcome of some matches that are overall wrestled clean. Can't have tight matched decided by one tap to a guy's face in a physical sport. I think a good start would be to eliminate brick challenges on hands to the face, and maybe call hands to the face similar to false start cautions - two warnings, then a point. Thoughts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate the rule overall, but the refs applied the rule correctly with both calls (call and noncall) in the 125 match. I like your suggestions - an immediate point based on such a subjective call is a harsh penalty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most annoying part of rule is the amount of times the coaches want to throw the brick to try to get the call which kills the pace of the match.  Most of the time the possible incident the coaches want looked at didn’t even occur during any type of scoring opportunity.  

Edited by MadMardigain

Share this post


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

Most annoying part of rule is the amount of times the coaches want to throw the brick to try to get the call which kills the pace of the match.  Most of the time the possible incident the coaches want looked at didn’t even occur during any type of scoring opportunity.  

Exactly. No need to derail countless matches due to something as insignificant as these hands to face calls usually are. When the brick comes out, I generally view it with disdain because of how badly it kills the pace of the match.

The spirit of the rule is sound, if a guy is just peppering his opponent with face shots  or he is poking his eyes out then it should be called, but it's just plain horse**** for it to decide a match where two guys are very evenly matched and one of them does a head tap.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, TBar1977 said:

I don't believe it should be awarded via brick toss. The ref either calls or doesn't call it, but a Brands Bros. attempt at gaming the system is what I saw at 125 today. 

The Brands tried to get the call, just as NW coaches did in the third. If Rivera is able to get to SV on a brick toss hands to the face call, then Lee should be able to take advantage of the same scenario as well. Tbar you have to at least admit the possibility that Spencer Lee got hosed in that match from a stupid rule. These hands to the face points are being handed out like medical hardship waivers nowadays.

 

Share this post


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

The Brands tried to get the call, just as NW coaches did in the third. If Rivera is able to get to SV on a brick toss hands to the face call, then Lee should be able to take advantage of the same scenario as well. Tbar you have to at least admit the possibility that Spencer Lee got hosed in that match from a stupid rule. These hands to the face points are being handed out like medical hardship waivers nowadays.

 

I never realized it was such a problem and needed to be addressed with a direct penalty point.

Share this post


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

The Brands tried to get the call, just as NW coaches did in the third. If Rivera is able to get to SV on a brick toss hands to the face call, then Lee should be able to take advantage of the same scenario as well. Tbar you have to at least admit the possibility that Spencer Lee got hosed in that match from a stupid rule. These hands to the face points are being handed out like medical hardship waivers nowadays.

I will give you that it works both ways. In this case the right man won because Lee actually did, obviously, commit hands to face. Rivera did not. That doesn't change how I feel about the rule in general. I think awarding it on brick challenge, especially in OT, would be a terrible way to start deciding matches. That could be an OT match with no prior hands to the face, then we'd all hate the way the match ends. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, TBar1977 said:

I don't believe it should be awarded via brick toss. The ref either calls or doesn't call it, but a Brands Bros. attempt at gaming the system is what I saw at 125 today. 

Yeah trying to win a match by challenging for a hands to the face call is despicable! That would be almost as bad as winning on a head gear pull!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Eagle26 said:

Yeah trying to win a match by challenging for a hands to the face call is despicable! That would be almost as bad as winning on a head gear pull!

Well, in one case it happened, in the other it did not. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, TBar1977 said:

Well, in one case it happened, in the other it did not. 

So if Brands won that challenge it would have been ok with you because the penalty actually happened?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, TBar1977 said:

I will give you that it works both ways. In this case the right man won because Lee actually did, obviously, commit hands to face. Rivera did not. That doesn't change how I feel about the rule in general. I think awarding it on brick challenge, especially in OT, would be a terrible way to start deciding matches. That could be an OT match with no prior hands to the face, then we'd all hate the way the match ends. 

Rivera absolutely did have a powerful push to the face earlier on. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, TBar1977 said:

I will give you that it works both ways. In this case the right man won because Lee actually did, obviously, commit hands to face. Rivera did not. That doesn't change how I feel about the rule in general. I think awarding it on brick challenge, especially in OT, would be a terrible way to start deciding matches. That could be an OT match with no prior hands to the face, then we'd all hate the way the match ends. 

As a neutral observer, I saw a hard fought match, sent into overtime by a hands to the face call that was nowhere close to egregious. I suppose the rule was violated and the ref called it as it was written but I do not think the punishment fits the crime here. If someone is Jon Jonesing their opponent, ok make the call, otherwise let these guys do what they have been doing since grade school without screwing them over. 

Share this post


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

Or you're all for the "if the ref didn't see it, it didn't happen" ala WWE.

The ref almost always has the best view of the action and thus should be best able to judge intent with these hands to face situations.The point Rivera got was off of defensive action from Lee. What if he had instead given him a hard crossface in a similar scenario? This rule is nowhere near solid.

Edited by custom fitch
misspell

Share this post


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

I thought the rule was a bit sketchy from the get-go but in the aftermath of big10s, its pretty clear that the hands to the face rule needs some tweaking. I think the positive aspect of it are decent (encouraging more hand fighting, reducing eye injury, etc.) but it's obviously apparent that the rule also is adversely affecting the outcome of some matches that are overall wrestled clean. Can't have tight matched decided by one tap to a guy's face in a physical sport. I think a good start would be to eliminate brick challenges on hands to the face, and maybe call hands to the face similar to false start cautions - two warnings, then a point. Thoughts.

Serious reply - I'm not going to attack anybody or any team or display any sophomoric snark. I'm thinking...

  • Making it a non-reviewable call (or non-call) would be the most basic and clear change that can be instituted immediately. Let's do it.
  • Because of the potential injury risk, I'd advocate a wait and see approach on the warning idea. Give it another year and revisit this time next year.

 

 

Share this post


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

Serious reply - I'm not going to attack anybody or any team or display any sophomoric snark. I'm thinking...

  • Making it a non-reviewable call (or non-call) would be the most basic and clear change that can be instituted immediately. Let's do it.
  • Because of the potential injury risk, I'd advocate a wait and see approach on the warning idea. Give it another year and revisit this time next year.

 

 

Agree, I don't get into the tit for tat that goes on so much here, just a waste of time. Honest question, have there been significant injuries due to hands to the face? I don't remember any but there may very well have.

Share this post


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

The ref almost always has the best view of the action and thus should be best able to judge intent with these hands to face situations.The point Rivera got was off of defensive action from Lee. What if he had instead given him a hard crossface in a similar scenario? This rule is nowhere near solid.

If Lee used his forearms as a Crossfade there wouldn't have been a point awarded.

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

×