Jump to content

Recommended Posts

i mean even in the NFL, everybody knows it was interference that cost the saints that playoff game.

but they also all know that it's not reviewable. (even tho i know there was a ref right there looking at it)

and now plans are being made to change that.

 

in this situation and many others like it in our little world of wrestling,  NO ONE , no one,  KNOWS.

not even three highly respected refs on a mat at the highest level competition our nation has.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Katie said:

The rules don't directly address how a defensive wrestler becomes an offensive wrestler.  The closest I can find is this:

What does that mean?  I'm not sure.

It seems to say that an offensive wrestler can only be scored on if the defensive wrestler blocks his hold "under control" or "by a counteraction." 

Did Yianni ever block Zain's hold? I'd say no. He merely rolled through Zain's hold while he was very close to being scored on.  That interpretation of the rules would logically make sense with the requirement that a defensive wrestler put the offensive wrestler in a "bridge position" before he can score.

Anyway, someone needs to re-write the rules because they are not clear. I'm out.

You're being intentionally obtuse by quoting poorly written rules in English written by many people who don't speak English as a first language to obscure the obvious. This situation occurs in freestyle regularly, and is called consistently. Zain attacks the legs. Yianni sits the corner. They are in the crackdown position for 23 seconds with almost no change. In other words, Yianni has stopped Zain's initial attack, forcing him to move to another finish. Zain works to shelf the foot on his hip. In the process, his hips come up. He pauses for a second with the leg elevated. Yianni plants his left foot and drives off it, taking advantage of Zain's elevated hips, to take him through with the chest wrap for 2. The direction of Zain's body changes and his legs are straight out in the air, signifying his attempt to lower his hips to prevent the roll through. Is there anybody here who is seriously arguing that it was Zain's intention to roll across the top there? He was taken there against his will. There should be no debate that Yianni scores 2 here. Clear as day it was his move. The only debate should be whether Zain elevated the leg enough to score his own exposure just before Yianni's chest wrap to make it a 2 and 2 situation.

Btw, love that you quote "by a counteraction" and then only address whether Yianni blocked Zain's move (he did btw). What is more of a counteraction than a chest wrap? Come on.

Share this post


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

I agree that Yianni pushes off with his left leg when he was already in a very bad position.

But as the defensive wrestler, one of the two ways Yianni could have scored at all was to first put Zain in a “bridge position.”  That in turn means Zain’s hold would have to have been completed or stopped before Yianni’s roll through. I simply don’t think that happened. 

(The only other way for Yianni to have scored was for his action to have been conducted “on a continuous basis.”  But i don’t know what that means.)

The definition you've constructed to suit your argument eliminates just about every counter exposure score in freestyle wrestling. No chest wraps, no crotch lifts, no belly tilts. What could be more stopped than being frozen in the crackdown position for 23 seconds? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, qc8223 said:

The definition you've constructed to suit your argument eliminates just about every counter exposure score in freestyle wrestling. No chest wraps, no crotch lifts, no belly tilts. What could be more stopped than being frozen in the crackdown position for 23 seconds? 

Not "just about every"... but EVERY. There is a very clear difference between what happened in that match versus what the rules were written to describe, e.g. a guy blast doubles his opponent and the opponent neck wrenches him to his back as he is getting blasted. The two situations are not the same, to say the very least.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, qc8223 said:

You're being intentionally obtuse by quoting poorly written rules in English written by many people who don't speak English as a first language to obscure the obvious. This situation occurs in freestyle regularly, and is called consistently. Zain attacks the legs. Yianni sits the corner. They are in the crackdown position for 23 seconds with almost no change. In other words, Yianni has stopped Zain's initial attack, forcing him to move to another finish. Zain works to shelf the foot on his hip. In the process, his hips come up. He pauses for a second with the leg elevated. Yianni plants his left foot and drives off it, taking advantage of Zain's elevated hips, to take him through with the chest wrap for 2. The direction of Zain's body changes and his legs are straight out in the air, signifying his attempt to lower his hips to prevent the roll through. Is there anybody here who is seriously arguing that it was Zain's intention to roll across the top there? He was taken there against his will. There should be no debate that Yianni scores 2 here. Clear as day it was his move. The only debate should be whether Zain elevated the leg enough to score his own exposure just before Yianni's chest wrap to make it a 2 and 2 situation.

Btw, love that you quote "by a counteraction" and then only address whether Yianni blocked Zain's move (he did btw). What is more of a counteraction than a chest wrap? Come on.

this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, wrestlingnerd said:

Not "just about every"... but EVERY. There is a very clear difference between what happened in that match versus what the rules were written to describe, e.g. a guy blast doubles his opponent and the opponent neck wrenches him to his back as he is getting blasted. The two situations are not the same, to say the very least.

and this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure how convincing the "The rules are vague and terribly written and don't actually describe basic wrestling positions" argument is.  IF we aren't going to have rules which we can go back to for grounding when reviewing controversial calls, then we should absolutely have the refs grab a mic on the mat and explain their final calls , and USAW should release videos on a regular basis to explain their position of interpretation of big calls at major events (whether or not the refs got it right at the time).

Share this post


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

I'm not sure how convincing the "The rules are vague and terribly written and don't actually describe basic wrestling positions" argument is.  IF we aren't going to have rules which we can go back to for grounding when reviewing controversial calls, then we should absolutely have the refs grab a mic on the mat and explain their final calls , and USAW should release videos on a regular basis to explain their position of interpretation of big calls at major events (whether or not the refs got it right at the time).

Exactly....but first, even better would be United World Wrestling to release videos of the top 20ish tough calls to make and the different scoring scenarios.   This would eliminate most of the  translation between countries and languages.  Hopefully this would educate officials, coaches, wrestlers and fans and curtail much of the grey areas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm not sure how convincing the "The rules are vague and terribly written and don't actually describe basic wrestling positions" argument is.  IF we aren't going to have rules which we can go back to for grounding when reviewing controversial calls, then we should absolutely have the refs grab a mic on the mat and explain their final calls , and USAW should release videos on a regular basis to explain their position of interpretation of big calls at major events (whether or not the refs got it right at the time).

Almost 100% sure Zach Errett
does this on a regular basis, at least for the USWOA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

JB, since you posted and seem to know high level officials, if you don't know yourself, perhaps you know someone who can answer these two questions:

1. Is it possible for refs to decide a match based on a review after the match is whistled over? My understanding is no (I am aware the mat chairman can interrupt a match and ask for a consultation, but not clear on whether he can do so after the match is complete unless the scoring sequence occurred right as the match ended and he asks for a consultation after time is up but the match is not whistled complete).

2. Is it possible for refs to review action on a contested call on the mat beyond the scoring/non-scoring move being contested? My understanding is no (in other words, when doing video review, I thought the review was restricted specifically to the contested action).

Obviously, I'm talking about the Zain/Yianni match, but I am curious overall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, wrestlingnerd said:

It's funny how having a discussion on controversial reffing immediately means to some that people must have rooting interests. This was one of the most controversial calls in domestic freestyle in many years, and we can't have a few posts about it on a wrestling forum? I guess guys like Jordan Burroughs, Tony Ramos, Ben Askren, Pat Downey, and many others who found the outcome so outrageous they took the time to tweet about their views must all have "partisan" opinions. To quote JB, "they would have had to bring in security to get me to leave the mat."

Bad look by JB. Anyway, “getting screwed” in sports is fictional. Now some kid who contracts a terminal disease is someone who really gets screwed. 

I’m much more concerned about the murders in Chicago than the outcome of a sports contest. 

Share this post


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

Bad look by JB. Anyway, “getting screwed” in sports is fictional. Now some kid who contracts a terminal disease is someone who really gets screwed. 

I’m much more concerned about the murders in Chicago than the outcome of a sports contest. 

Agree and disagree.

Agree -- that, if that's what Burroughs said, it's a bad look.  Not only the heightened rhetoric, but I don't think that anyone on this world team, or that still has a chance to be on this world team,  should be getting in the middle of this.  Askren or Ramos, fine, there's nothing to criticize in them voicing their opinion, in fact I want to hear their opinions.  But there's been a lot of talk, which I agree with, including by people on the team, about supporting people who are on the team, regardless of what we think of them or how they got on the team.  So I don't think team members or potential team members should be saying, essentially, that the guy who was named as a team member yesterday doesn't deserve it.  He's on the team; there's a process to challenge that, and it will play out.  

Disagree -- that it's overkill to say that an athlete can get screwed.  If a world class athlete performs brilliantly in the sport which they've devoted their life to and gets denied a victory at or near the pinnacle of that sport  by a terrible call, particularly when an established process is violated, I  think it's ok to say that.  Just like the term is used all the time in academics, business, etc., when the merits of a process are thwarted.  If what they were doing wasn't a serious endeavor that has meaning, then ESPN and Flo and this message board wouldn't exist.  I would agree with the basic point that people overreact to things that aren't nearly as serious as 4,000 people a year getting shot in Chicago, but I'm ok with "screwed" or other strong language being used if someone loses on an unfair call even though the sun will come up for them tomorrow while it won't for tonight's shooting victim.  Otherwise none of us should be on the board and instead we should all be spending that time volunteering on the South Side.  

Edited by drag it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is one of the worst calls I have ever seen at a WTT or OTT.  What a disgraceful moment for USAW.  It was absolutely NOT a bad look for JB to call them out-the guy is a legend of the sport and is giving his opinion.  Hopefully it is overturned and they are forced to wrestle match 3.  If this were an international event and Retherford were named Retherfov, there would be accusations of match fixing.  Obviously, this wasn't fixing and just a case of terrible USA officiating.

Edited by Billyhoyle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
yanni was on his A** for several seconds..both guys hanging out, but during this yanni posts his left leg up... and then pushes hard.
Freestyle would have more appeal for me if 1) referee discretion were reduced 2) initiative from neutral were better rewarded. More carrot (vs. stick e.g. shot clock) ... 3 point TD, award TD once a wrestler's A$$ is on the ground are carrots that would improve things for me. Putting a wrestler on his ass is more exciting than a pushout, why not reward it as well.

As it stands, neutral passivity (hanging on) and defensive counter wrestling (flash exposure and return to hanging on) being incentivized by scoring rules are pretty much only discouraged by referee discretion (shot clock), but that adds to an already over-abundance of referee discretion that plagues the sport. Fans relying on referee interpretation to understand scoring wrestling turns the sport into synchronized swimming or figure skating. (For this bout our panel of expert judges give Yanni a 9.1 and Zain a 9).

I wonder what percent of TD attempts end in stalemates or defensive exposure points only?

Anyhow, you're probably right. Under current freestyle rule dystopia, Yanni initiated a move from hanging out. Of course, if they were both hanging out, a stalemate existed and they should have been returned to neutral so Yanni's move should never have happened. So for Yanni's move to be valid, it must have come in the course of continuous action.

I guess I need a panel of judges or I'll never escape from circular reasoning hell.





Sent from my moto e5 play using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, gowrestle said:

Bad look by JB. Anyway, “getting screwed” in sports is fictional. Now some kid who contracts a terminal disease is someone who really gets screwed. 

I’m much more concerned about the murders in Chicago than the outcome of a sports contest. 

Silly argument. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The ruleset has never been better or more easily understood than they are currently. The situation in question always has been and always be controversial and will continue to be called differently by officials. You would need to know what was in the mind of the wrestler to get these calls perfect.

My personal opinion is different from the call.

  • The roll through was not a result of the momentum of Zain's finish, it was clearly initiated by Yanni
  • Zain attempts to stop the roll with two different actions:  with his right arm, he releases the single and blocks the inside of Yanni's right groin. He also throws his legs back as a counterbalance

For me, letting go of the single with one of his arms to block indicates it was Yanni's move. Refs typically give the benefit of the doubt in these roll-throughs if the attacking wrestler maintains their lock on the leg(s) through the roll.  Zain dropping his right hand into the crotch is a defensive move.

I do hope they don't change the result though. I hate video review passionately, but I hate Monday lawyer video review even more.

Share this post


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

Fans relying on referee interpretation to understand scoring wrestling turns the sport into synchronized swimming or figure skating. (For this bout our panel of expert judges give Yanni a 9.1 and Zain a 9).

 

awesome!! LOL this is good stuff

i agree we also need to incentivize action.  but in WIN magazine wayne baughman made some good points about the 3 point TD not being so great...

 

and yes after 23 seconds of nothing they should have called a stalemate.

after 5 or 6 would have been better, then the brick could have been thrown earlier.

 

Share this post


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

The ruleset has never been better or more easily understood than they are currently. The situation in question always has been and always be controversial and will continue to be called differently by officials. You would need to know what was in the mind of the wrestler to get these calls perfect.

My personal opinion is different from the call.

  • The roll through was not a result of the momentum of Zain's finish, it was clearly initiated by Yanni
  • Zain attempts to stop the roll with two different actions:  with his right arm, he releases the single and blocks the inside of Yanni's right groin. He also throws his legs back as a counterbalance

For me, letting go of the single with one of his arms to block indicates it was Yanni's move. Refs typically give the benefit of the doubt in these roll-throughs if the attacking wrestler maintains their lock on the leg(s) through the roll.  Zain dropping his right hand into the crotch is a defensive move.

I do hope they don't change the result though. I hate video review passionately, but I hate Monday lawyer video review even more.

 

And here is the problem with these situations not being clearly defined, my opinion matches the call. 

  • I think the roll thru is initiated by Zain. Zain lets go of the single with his right arm long before the roll thru even begins. Five or more seconds before if you go and re watch it. He is using that hand to post to the mat. 
  • People say Yianni is pushing off the mat with his left leg, but I see him on the inside of his left foot not with his foot fully planted to the ground which is how you would want it if you were going to use it to push off the ground. I  see no push off the ground  from Yianni there. Yianni's hands can't post because they are in the chest wrap. His right leg obviously can't post. And we can see his left leg only the very inside of the foot is even on the ground. Nearly every score you see from a chest wrap occurs when the defensive wrestler gets not just one foot posted, but both feet posted and gets his hips forward. But Yianni can't do any of these things. He can't post both feet. He can't move his hips any farther forward or he'll be exposed. He's on his butt in a terrible position that Zain put him in. 
  • IMO, the wrestler who is working to push off the ground is obviously Zain, not Yi anni. Zain continually works in a clockwise direction and continually works to elevate Yianni's right leg. He only lets go of the single with his right hand because A) he wants to post off the ground B) he has that right leg secure with his left hand which is proved by the fact he still has the leg after the roll thru
  • Of course Zain throws the legs back to counter balance. That's is what anyone would do there. 
  • One more thing. I believe the rules require for the defensive wrestler to score from a chest wrap the defensive wrestler has to stop the offensive wrestler's movement, even if for only one second. They are in the position for more than 20 seconds with Zain continuously working towards that final exposure. Zain has Yianni in a very defensive position that Yianni just can't free himself of. He can't get behind Zain which is his normal go to from that crackdown. He obviously can't stalemate the position. He's going to get rolled eventually there, which is what happens. He just goes with it while trying to make it look like his action. 

Let's look at this from both wrestler's perspective before the roll thru. What is each wrestler trying to do? 

Zain - Zain needs to score because he is trailing 6-4. He needs to work for a TD or exposure. One or the other. His calculation is either break the chest wrap which probably gets him both the TD and exposure OR he calculates Yianni will never let go in that situation so he works for exposure which he needs to get. He must get the exposure, which he is obviously working for and, in his mind, his corner's mind, and the referee's mind, he gets. 

Yianni - As Yianni is fighting to not give up points he is in a clearly defensive position. Zain has the single leg and is circling. Yianni gets the chest wrap and sits the corner. What is he hoping for here? What outcomes favor Yianni? 1) Yianni can just hold on for dear life and hope for a stalemate. That is one possible outcome. I give that outcome a small chance as hard as Zain is going to work in that situation. 2) Yianni can turn the scramble into his points by freeing his right leg and working around Zain to turn this into his TD. Odds are extremely low once Zain has Yianni's leg in the air. 3) The best odds for Yianni is to try and turn Zain's action into his own action. He knows Zain is going to expose his back, he can feel it, and he tries to time it to make it look like his action. Smart move on his part, but over ruled once the replay was reviewed. 

 

Final note - I do not believe the result will be changed. The match was scored by two of the best officials in the sport. They scored it, it is over. What are we going to allow here? That Koll can say he disagrees with the scoring so let's get some different refs that agree with a different interpretation? That would make this sport a joke. I don't believe the timing of the brick throw will change anything either. The NLWC will easily be able to cite hundreds of brick throws that happen after the clock reads 0:00 that have been reviewed in the past, probably dozens for action that occurred more than 5 seconds prior. So I don't believe they will go down into that rabbit hole. The result will be upheld and Zain will rightfully represent the USA at Worlds. 

Edited by TBar1977

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Freestyle rewards the offensive wrestler.It was called correctly.If this happened in Europe it would be a non issue.We can't get folkstyle out of our heads and as a fan base Americans don't understand freestyle which has turned this into something it doesn't need to be.Even some of the most influential people in our sport don't understand the rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Old, but somewhat applicable to the timeliness of the challenge and initiation of action(s).  The official that is being interviewed was the same member of the review jury during Final X.  Once the challenge is accepted, the three man officiating crew is out of the decision loop and the two man jury makes the final decision based of watching the video.  

https://www.flowrestling.org/video/5519057-head-official-explains-ruthreader-and-marstellermassa-explanations-christian-pylesmp4

Edited by Rakkasan91
Clarify

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Rakkasan91 said:

Old, but somewhat applicable to the timeliness of the challenge.  The official that is being interviewed was the same member of the review jury during Final X.  Once the challenge is accepted, the three man officiating crew is out of the decision loop and the two man jury makes the final decision based of watching the video.  

https://www.flowrestling.org/video/5519057-head-official-explains-ruthreader-and-marstellermassa-explanations-christian-pylesmp4

Great video, Rakkasan91. Tucci speaks to which wrestler takes the risk and whether or not the defensive wrestler stops the action. Applied to this match in question, Zain took the risk and Yianni never stopped the action, imo. 

Tucci even addresses the 5 second rule. He talks about in World competition bricks being thrown 10 and 15 seconds later than the score going up. The emphasis from Tucci is that when the call can decide a match, getting the score correct takes precedence over the timing of the brick throw. He talks about the action stopping and a coach looking up and the score isn't what the coach thinks it should be, so the coach throws the brick. Tucci explains this to be reasonable because they want to get the score right. Pretty clearly that applies here. 

Edited by TBar1977

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This ruling is similar to some of my issues in sport in general. The rules are too complicated. It is similar to the catch rule, tuck rule, etc. in football. In efforts to bring clarity to those officiating the rules have become so complicated that what everyone watches and agree should be ruled one way is often contrary to the letter of the rule.

If you want to fix wrestling you make them wrestle until pinfall. No scoring. It might take forever and it would be considered dangerous because of the potential time on the mat but it is really the only way to solve these kinds of issues.

Share this post


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

The only fair way to decide this is ..Let the greasy lawyers decide the match on Monday

You mean the people who studied no less than seven years after high school in order to understand the law, regulations, language, and nuance?  The same people who then passed a notoriously rigorous multi-day examination to determine whether they can even practice the profession they spent the previous seven years studying for?  Those greasy guys?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Final note - I do not believe the result will be changed. The match was scored by two of the best officials in the sport. They scored it, it is over. What are we going to allow here? That Koll can say he disagrees with the scoring so let's get some different refs that agree with a different interpretation? That would make this sport a joke. I don't believe the timing of the brick throw will change anything either. The NLWC will easily be able to cite hundreds of brick throws that happen after the clock reads 0:00 that have been reviewed in the past, probably dozens for action that occurred more than 5 seconds prior. So I don't believe they will go down into that rabbit hole. The result will be upheld and Zain will rightfully represent the USA at Worlds."

I tend to agree with you even though I had scored 2 for Yianni.  The officials involved in this are the best in the US.  The Referee, Chairman and two member jury have officiated multiple Olympic Games.  Since, 1983, only five American referees have been awarded the Golden Whistle at a senior World Championship or Olympic Games.  Three of them were involved in this match (Errett, Tucci, Stecklien (sp)). One of the referees is a UWW instructor and there are only like six of those in the World.  While seasoned officials can get calls wrong, the resumes of those involved in this match are impressive and I would think offers a great deal of credibility with the USOC protest.

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

×