Jump to content
Perry

Yianni/Zain Ruling

Recommended Posts

40 minutes ago, IronChef said:

I wonder if Zain is involved in any way in the process. I assume not, since it’s Yianni challenging a USA Wrestling decision.

The first flo mention of this stated that the arbitrator was one that both sides could agree on, so this suggests the Zain side is at least somewhat involved. There is also one other issue. In Koll's interview with Dernlan he made comments regarding what the Zain side, NLWC, must have believed during the final sequence. If that made its way into his reportedly 18 page letter then I think this brings NLWC into play to offer up their own commentary about their state of mind, something Koll can't truly know. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really all they need to know about their state of mind with the brick throw was what they were requesting a review for, which I’m sure is in a statement from Sammy and also available by watching what Tucci and Stecklein started to review.  That’s more solid than what they, or anyone in same scenario, would say in a heading. 

Share this post


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

Per Flo it looks like a decision will be made one week from today on how this situation will be moving forward

Is their going to be a decision on the same day of the hearing? A lot of times in arbitration that’s not the case (not speaking specific to wrestling)

Edited by Lurker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The first flo mention of this stated that the arbitrator was one that both sides could agree on, so this suggests the Zain side is at least somewhat involved.

This is my question. I don't think Zain is one of the parties to the arbitration. It's Yianni vs USA Wrestling, so I don't see how Zain would be involved. Perhaps his coaches would be if their testimony is required.

Share this post


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


This is my question. I don't think Zain is one of the parties to the arbitration. It's Yianni vs USA Wrestling, so I don't see how Zain would be involved. Perhaps his coaches would be if their testimony is required.

 

August 17th is coming up fast.  :)

They have to be in peak condition at that point.  That part is unfortunate.  The fortunate part is an exciting day of wrestling, the proper and fair selection of our reps(speaking only about 65, obviously 79 is all about one dude only) and an opportunity to review rules.

Share this post


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

Only in the US where the victim card is played.

yes, the russians with guns weren't playing victim. they were taking matters into their own hands.\

or perhaps the columbian soccer player who was killed...

you are such an idiot.

Edited by GockeS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, TBar1977 said:

The first flo mention of this stated that the arbitrator was one that both sides could agree on, so this suggests the Zain side is at least somewhat involved. There is also one other issue. In Koll's interview with Dernlan he made comments regarding what the Zain side, NLWC, must have believed during the final sequence. If that made its way into his reportedly 18 page letter then I think this brings NLWC into play to offer up their own commentary about their state of mind, something Koll can't truly know. 

The other "side" is USA Wrestling. If the Lindland arbitration/litigation is any indication, Team Retherford/NLWC is not a party to the arbitration and has no "right" to intervene even though USAW is, in effect, defending their interests. Sieracki learned this the hard way. NLWC wouldn't have any role in choosing the arbitrator unless USAW wanted to run names by them. Team Yianni speculating on the decisionmaking of Zain's corner in its brief wouldn't get NLWC "in play" because that's just not how litigation works. It would be up to USAW to decide how to present its case and respond to any suggestions about NLWC's challenge, though it could certainly encourage USAW to bring someone from the corner to the hearing as a witness or to get affidavits from them explaining their actions and intentions.

I don't think anyone knows when the ruling will come out, only that the hearing is on the 29th and everyone assumes a quick decision because of the compressed timeline for any potential rewrestling that would have to happen before Worlds.

Edited by ugarte

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would Zain be able to get involved in some capacity equivalent to an intervenor or friend of the court in an arbitration?

In the Smith-Lewis and Lindland-Sieracki controversies USAW pretty much told Smith and Sieracki to not worry about it and they were not involved at all.  After it was over they were stuck with what was decided.  Sieracki tried to demand his own arbitration with found in his favor, but then that was later tossed because it was seen as a re-arbitration of the first one which he wasn't a party too. It would seem to be in Zain's best interest to try and involve himself in this to whatever extent he can.

Edited by Fishbane

Share this post


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

Would Zain be able to get involved in some capacity equivalent to an intervenor or friend of the court in an arbitration?

In the Smith-Lewis and Lindland-Sieracki controversies USAW pretty much told Smith and Sieracki to not worry about it and they were not involved at all.  After it was over they were stuck with what was decided.  Sieracki tried to demand his own arbitration with found in his favor, but then that was later tossed because it was seen as a re-arbitration of the first one which he wasn't a party too. It would seem to be in Zain's best interest to try and involve himself in this to whatever extent he can.

he's a third-party beneficiary but i don't know if he can intervene as of right. arbitration is weird. it's the kind of weird that if he submitted a brief i doubt the arbitrator would ignore it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm just going to be real interested to see the 180 responses from the Penn State homers who stand by the "he got his hand raised and that means Zain deserves the win" argument if the match gets flipped.

On topic, I wonder if they will determine that match 2 would need to be re-wrestled or if they would go right to match 3 claiming they are 1-1 (or I suppose maybe they could just say they were 1-1 by the book after Final X and the Dogu match counted as match 3 and Zain is just out. I do not think and certainly hope this would ever happen)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Perry said:

I'm just going to be real interested to see the 180 responses from the Penn State homers who stand by the "he got his hand raised and that means Zain deserves the win" argument if the match gets flipped.

On topic, I wonder if they will determine that match 2 would need to be re-wrestled or if they would go right to match 3 claiming they are 1-1 (or I suppose maybe they could just say they were 1-1 by the book after Final X and the Dogu match counted as match 3 and Zain is just out. I do not think and certainly hope this would ever happen)

Predictions on numbers of PSU fan posts that will occur if/when PSU or NLWC wrestlers occasionally lose have been mostly way over blown. That will probably be the case in this instance as well should the Zain win be over turned. More likely you'd see some posts, but nowhere near the amount you cite. Then PSU/NLWC/Zain fans would move on to the next matches. 

Share this post


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

The first flo mention of this stated that the arbitrator was one that both sides could agree on, so this suggests the Zain side is at least somewhat involved. There is also one other issue. In Koll's interview with Dernlan he made comments regarding what the Zain side, NLWC, must have believed during the final sequence. If that made its way into his reportedly 18 page letter then I think this brings NLWC into play to offer up their own commentary about their state of mind, something Koll can't truly know. 

Regarding the state of mind of the NLWC corner during the final seconds... I believe a video has been circulated of the corner where they are audibly discussing whether or not to challenge.  I have not seen the video, so I cannot comment other than it purportedly shows them verbalizing their thoughts in the final seconds.  Such a thing could be damning, or not mean anything in the long run. 

Share this post


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

Regarding the state of mind of the NLWC corner during the final seconds... I believe a video has been circulated of the corner where they are audibly discussing whether or not to challenge.  I have not seen the video, so I cannot comment other than it purportedly shows them verbalizing their thoughts in the final seconds.  Such a thing could be damning, or not mean anything in the long run. 

I am pretty sure they challenged the scoring for the entire last 50 seconds. There is audio out there that leads to that conclusion.

Share this post


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

I am pretty sure they challenged the scoring for the entire last 50 seconds. There is audio out there that leads to that conclusion.

Again, I didn't listen... but Koll made it seem as if that audio backed up their side of the story.  Regardless, my point is that it shows the state of mind of Zain's corner.

Edited by AHamilton

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, AHamilton said:

Again, I didn't listen... but Koll made it seem as if that audio backed up their side of the story.  Regardless, my point is that it shows the state of mind of Zain's corner.

Koll also made it out like the head official was a hung over sleep deprived incompetent. Not sure how much stock I would put in his version of events. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

NLWC challenged the last sequence. There’s a video out there that you can hear Cody say this and the review team (Tucci and Stecklein) immediately went to the last sequence. You can see this clearly on the review monitor. Tucci then decides to review the previous sequence (which by rule should have been a conference between the three and not review) at which point I believe Stecklein says “that’s bull****”. 

This is the only way I can see them overturning match 2 to Yanni. Because under that scenario, with the failed challenge of the last sequence there would be a point awarded to Yianni making the final 7-6. But I don’t think it will go that way. In fact I don’t think it’ll go Yiannis way in any form. I believe Zain is going. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My guess in order of most to least likely
1. No change
2. Re-wrestle match 2
3. Overturn match 2 result

I would hope that there is a presumption that the position of the governing body is correct and the challenger has a high burden of proof to overturn the authority of the USOC-appointed organization.

I don't know if that's the case, so it's hard for me to make a confident prediction, but I do believe the first two options are much more likely than the third. I'm prepared for anything, though.

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...