Jump to content

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, TBar1977 said:

It seems to me that:

Msg. Board Team Yianni wants to protect the integrity of the challenge rule process ... for the good of wrestling.

Msg. Board Team Zain wants to protect getting the score correct ... for the good of wrestling. 

oh i think the score was correct. with 40 seconds left.

for the good of wrestling, we should address the idea that the score can be changed after a match, from something that happened well before the end of the match.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not the first freestyle wrestler that thought they got screwed.

Most understand the rules are subjective,  get over it and improve

Some follow their fans and coach's foot steps and blame others for their failures.

Either is fine by me.

 

Share this post


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

Not the first freestyle wrestler that thought they got screwed.

Most understand the rules are subjective,  get over it and improve

Some follow their fans and coach's foot steps and blame others for their failures.

Either is fine by me.

 

is that why they threw the brick?

Share this post


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

It should be and wss settled on the mat. Taking it to a new jury to get a ruling you like better than the one on the mat is terrible for the sport. 

Wrestling coaches shouldn't be jury shopping to get results they like better than what was scored that night. 

you are right. it was and should have been settled on the mat.

then someone threw a brick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, GockeS said:

you are right. it was and should have been settled on the mat.

then someone threw a brick.

Not really.  Some people are focusing on the apparent improper enforcement of the 0:05 with the brick and completely ignoring the apparent improper awarding of the points in the first place.  Neither of these things are judgement calls, both are procedural.  They needed to fix the first one regardless of the brick.

 To argue it was settled on the mat because the improper score got posted for 0:35 is ridiculous.  A valid judgement on the scoring was not reached.  If Zains corner was challenge a properly reached judgement - say 2b was confirmed by the judge then it would be a different story and I’d agree that the brick could be considered too late and a result was being reversed.  

Share this post


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

Not really.  Some people are focusing on the apparent improper enforcement of the 0:05 with the brick and completely ignoring the apparent improper awarding of the points in the first place.  Neither of these things are judgement calls, both are procedural.  They needed to fix the first one regardless of the brick.

 To argue it was settled on the mat because the improper score got posted for 0:35 is ridiculous.  A valid judgement on the scoring was not reached.  If Zains corner was challenge a properly reached judgement - say 2b was confirmed by the judge then it would be a different story and I’d agree that the brick could be considered too late and a result was being reversed.  

Zain's near exposure after the craziness  was reviewed based on the red brick and unfounded.  Why?  ...and why no 1pt blue? What's crazier is that it was reviewed before they rewound 50 seconds. Procedural missteps aside, it gives the look, that an outcome for red was desired by somebody. I don't understand how you get a free pass to look for missed pts on an exposure in a package deal with 1/3 of the rest of the period. If they'd just gone back to the 50 seconds left without looking for Zain's 2, I might bite on some of this rule book procedural rhetoric.  The fact they looked for the 2 first is shady AF, especially bc blue had a near exposure afterwards as well. 

Edited by brewland

Share this post


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

Not really.  Some people are focusing on the apparent improper enforcement of the 0:05 with the brick and completely ignoring the apparent improper awarding of the points in the first place.  Neither of these things are judgement calls, both are procedural.  They needed to fix the first one regardless of the brick.

 To argue it was settled on the mat because the improper score got posted for 0:35 is ridiculous.  A valid judgement on the scoring was not reached.  If Zains corner was challenge a properly reached judgement - say 2b was confirmed by the judge then it would be a different story and I’d agree that the brick could be considered too late and a result was being reversed.  

Agree. Had there been agreement on 2-2 then the brick can't come in at the end and a review can't change that agreed upon score. The problem was they had three different scores and they needed to come to an agreement on a single score. The jury performed that function at the earliest possible time. 

Taking this to a second jury because Koll doesn't like the score from the first jury, and the way Koll is doing it trying to get Tucci thrown out of the sport seems very wrong. Down the road I bet he regrets some of what he said to Dernlan. 

Edited by TBar1977

Share this post


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

Agree. Had there been agreement on 2-2 then the brick can't come in at the end and a review can't change that agreed upon score. The problem was they had three different scores and they needed to come to an agreement on a single score. The jury performed that function at the earliest possible time. 

Taking this to a second jury because Koll doesn't like the score from the first jury, and the way Koll is doing it trying to get Tucci thrown out of the sport seems very wrong. Down the road I bet he regrets some of what he said to Dernlan. 

I'll take that bet. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah I don't know that Koll is so much making it personal or just trying to address his grievance in the only way possible by UWW rules.  I thought he said sanctioned not "thrown out of the sport."  Now of course USAW rules and the USOC rules apply which might give them other options, but under the UWW they do not allow the match result to be overturned or modified by protest, however they can sanction the official if he abused his power in reviewing that sequence and modifying the result.  Below is the chapter 10 article 54, "the protest," from the UWW rule book in its entirety.  

Quote

 

No protest after the end of a match or any appeal before CAS or any other jurisdiction against a decision made by the refereeing body may be lodged. Under no circumstances may the result of a match be modified after victory has been declared on the mat.

If the UWW President or the responsible person for refereeing notes that the refereeing body have abused their power to modify a match result, they can examine the video and, with the agreement of the UWW Bureau, sanction those responsible as laid down in the provisions of the Regulations for International Refereeing Body.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Fishbane said:

Yeah I don't know that Koll is so much making it personal or just trying to address his grievance in the only way possible by UWW rules.  I thought he said sanctioned not "thrown out of the sport."  Now of course USAW rules and the USOC rules apply which might give them other options, but under the UWW they do not allow the match result to be overturned or modified by protest, however they can sanction the official if he abused his power in reviewing that sequence and modifying the result.  Below is the chapter 10 article 54, "the protest," from the UWW rule book in its entirety.  

 

Rich Bender said that this rule does not apply to "closed" competition (that is, USA only) like Final X.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, brewland said:

Zain's near exposure after the craziness  was reviewed based on the red brick and unfounded.  Why?  ...and why no 1pt blue? What's crazier is that it was reviewed before they rewound 50 seconds. Procedural missteps aside, it gives the look, that an outcome for red was desired by somebody. I don't understand how you get a free pass to look for missed pts on an exposure in a package deal with 1/3 of the rest of the period. If they'd just gone back to the 50 seconds left without looking for Zain's 2, I might bite on some of this rule book procedural rhetoric.  The fact they looked for the 2 first is shady AF, especially bc blue had a near exposure afterwards as well. 

You can hear in the one video Zain's corner clearly saying the 2-2 then something inaudible then "the first one" after throwing the brick.  It clear they wanted the 2-2 reviewed, but not clear they wanted the near exposure at the end reviewed.  The thing with asking for a review is that you don't have full control over what they look at they can watch and re-score the whole sequence either to your benefit or detriment.  They could have also looked at Yianni's near turn with about 0:25 seconds left and decided that should have been scored 2b even though it was Zain's brick.  Maybe it would have been more evenhanded if they did, but perhaps they felt they had a good look at that and didn't need to review it because it was scored correctly.  Or maybe the panel thought they were challenging the near exposure at the end because of its temporal proximity to the brick until they were informed otherwise.  I don't know.  The only call they ended up modifying was one that was scored incorrectly by procedure and opinion are divided on the scoring.  It's hard to say the scoring was wrong no matter how the judgement went (within 2 or 3 options) so long as that decision came about the right way.

Share this post


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

Yeah I don't know that Koll is so much making it personal or just trying to address his grievance in the only way possible by UWW rules.  I thought he said sanctioned not "thrown out of the sport."  Now of course USAW rules and the USOC rules apply which might give them other options, but under the UWW they do not allow the match result to be overturned or modified by protest, however they can sanction the official if he abused his power in reviewing that sequence and modifying the result.  Below is the chapter 10 article 54, "the protest," from the UWW rule book in its entirety.  

 

Fishbane, in addition to Koll implying Tucci was in the gym asleep and hung over from a night out with his buddies, and in addition to Koll saying that since Tucci isn't actually on the mat refereeing so he shouldn't be the sport's top official, here is a direct quote from Rob Koll that I think indicates what I commented on above. This occurs at about the 2:40 mark of the Dernlan interview: 

I listened to this about 15 times to make sure I heard it correctly.

"Rick Tucci completely blew everything and, uh, you know hopefully he'll be sanctioned and he won't be reffing and have a chance to do this to other people in the future" 

Here's the link so this can be confirmed. 

https://therudis.com/rudis-wrestling-podcast-65-interview-rob-koll/

 

EDIT: I am going to add one other thing Koll said in that interview. On top of the whole buddies night out nonsense, the whole he isn't refereeing on the mat so therefore he shouldn't be the top official, and on top of his "hopefully he'll be sanctioned and won't be reffing" nonsense, he also adds this  in what are essentially his closing remarks at the 27 minute to finishing minute mark of the interview:

"It's just, I've had problems with, uh, I have had the same situation with, not the same situation but a situation where I completely disagreed with this one individual, also again, so it's like here we go again. Why didn't we get this fixed the last time?"

AND

"he(they?)(inaudible) took it upon themselves to impose their personality and their presence into the event which is really unfortunate and we need to make sure that doesn't happen again"

 

My comments/questions here:

What does Koll mean in that first part above? That disagreement with Koll requires fixing? That when Koll disagreed with Tucci before it required fixing? That Tucci's ongoing responsibilities as a head official constitutes a problem that was not sufficiently fixed previously when Koll had a disagreement with him one time before?  

The second bolded part is really bold. Koll seems to be suggesting that either Tucci by himself or Tucci and one other person took it upon themselves to make this about themselves and not about the wrestlers and that their doing so requires action to ensure this doesn't happen again. That is a really strong accusation. 

Edited by TBar1977

Share this post


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

Fishbane, in addition to Koll implying Tucci was in the gym asleep and hung over from a night out with his buddies, and in addition to Koll saying that since Tucci isn't actually on the mat refereeing so he shouldn't be the sport's top official, here is a direct quote from Rob Koll that I think indicates what I commented on above. This occurs at about the 2:40 mark of the Dernlan interview: 

I listened to this about 15 times to make sure I heard it correctly.

"Rick Tucci completely blew everything and, uh, you know hopefully he'll be sanctioned and he won't be reffing and have a chance to do this to other people in the future" 

Here's the link so this can be confirmed. 

https://therudis.com/rudis-wrestling-podcast-65-interview-rob-koll/

At least the slandering  liar walked back his original accusation that the brick was thrown after the match.  One of his little sheep must of told him there was video proving he lied.

Share this post


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

Here's the link so this can be confirmed. 

https://therudis.com/rudis-wrestling-podcast-65-interview-rob-koll/

LOL at Koll for thinking Zain "is from right down the road in Benton, New York" (at 1:02 in the interview)....no wonder he wasn't successful recruiting him, he was looking in the wrong state (wrong Benton).

Edited by gromit

Share this post


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

At least the slandering  liar walked back his original accusation that the brick was thrown after the match.  One of his little sheep must of told him there was video proving he lied.

Even though that statement from Koll was technically inaccurate, I think he was discussing the timing of the brick throw to differentiate between the brick being thrown at 0:50 or at the end of the match. In this case two seconds before the end of the match or precisely at 0:00 is essentially the same thing.

If he tried to make it sound like it was 10 seconds after then that would be wrong, but I hope this wasn't the case. 

Share this post


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

"Rick Tucci completely blew everything and, uh, you know hopefully he'll be sanctioned and he won't be reffing and have a chance to do this to other people in the future" 

Here's the link so this can be confirmed. 

https://therudis.com/rudis-wrestling-podcast-65-interview-rob-koll/

 

I hadn't heard that podcast.  Seems like he is out of line with some of this comments.  Maybe he will regret them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, GockeS said:

maybe he said something to tucci earlier and is now regretting that?

referees have long memories

referees are human

humans hold grudges

ask tbert

Didn't Tucci allow Burroughs to turn Dake's face to mush in the 2017 WTTs? 

Share this post


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

Didn't Tucci allow Burroughs to turn Dake's face to mush in the 2017 WTTs? 

It just occurred to me that the Burroughs win over Dake, that 2nd period of Match 2, t is probably the prior match that Koll disagreed with Tucci. The one that needed to be "fixed". The one his mind probably went to at the conclusion of Zain Yianni.

Funny, in that match Burroughs side challenged and won. In this match Zain's side challenged and won. So Koll seems pretty obviously to not like Tucci doing his matches and is somewhat pre disposed to think the worst. Doesn't seem to matter how it plays out either. Challenge, no challenge, delayed challenge, counter challenge (his for Dake vs Burroughs) ......... if his guy that he thinks is too good to lose in fact loses, then something better be fixed!

Share this post


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

It just occurred to me that the Burroughs win over Dake, that 2nd period of Match 2, t is probably the prior match that Koll disagreed with Tucci. The one that needed to be "fixed". The one his mind probably went to at the conclusion of Zain Yianni.

Funny, in that match Burroughs side challenged and won. In this match Zain's side challenged and won. So Koll seems pretty obviously to not like Tucci doing his matches and is somewhat pre disposed to think the worst. Doesn't seem to matter how it plays out either. Challenge, no challenge, delayed challenge, counter challenge (his for Dake vs Burroughs) ......... if his guy that he thinks is too good to lose in fact loses, then something better be fixed!

Took Manning 10 seconds to throw the brick....   should of protested that too.

Share this post


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

At least the slandering  liar walked back his original accusation that the brick was thrown after the match.  One of his little sheep must of told him there was video proving he lied.

Do you wake up every morning with the intention of finding something Koll-related to be outraged about?  Or is it Cornell?

Who else is on your **** list?  Just wondering for whom you save your vitriol.

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...