Jump to content
Perry

Yianni/Zain Ruling

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, FlyinLion said:

TheNice to see you're finally coming around to the fact that the brick being thrown is why it was reviewed after repeating that it was automatic for lack of agreement for multiple posts, which was after you said the procedure that happened was what was "supposed" to happen by the rules.

This is why I stated in my original post in this thread whether the challenge was properly accepted is the key question.

Am I muddying the waters by spelling out the argument each side should make or do you just not like what I am saying?

Here is where you are missing some things. The brick was thrown at the same time the option would existed to huddle to correct the score. What was left was ALL OF: 1. No agreement among three man crew 2. Wrong score 3. Brick Challenge

This is all semantics at this point. Regardless of how you try to spin this, there was both a wrong score and a brick challenge to it. In the absence of a huddle of the three man crew there was going to be a review. In the presence of the brick challenge there was going to be a review. You are stuck on a moot point. 

 

Share this post


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

Here is where you are missing some things. The brick was thrown at the same time the option would existed to huddle to correct the score. What was left was ALL OF: 1. No agreement among three man crew 2. Wrong score 3. Brick Challenge

This is all semantics at this point. Regardless of how you try to spin this, there was both a wrong score and a brick challenge to it. In the absence of a huddle of the three man crew there was going to be a review. In the presence of the brick challenge there was going to be a review. You are stuck on a moot point. 

 

This is what this has become, you repeat back to me a point I made first in response to ConnorsDad as some sort of evidence I am missing something.

Share this post


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

So I guess your answer to the question is  "yes".  Out of the hundreds of athletes trying out, we are left with two Koll coached athletes prolonging the results to a simple process.  Just a coincedence.

Yeah, that's why i started my answer with "yeah" - it is a coincidence because there were no other disputes of note in this qualifying cycle.

And the Dake delay / Spain competition isn't a real dispute. He was *obviously* within his rights to postpone Final X and - we absolutely don't have to rehash the disagreement since we know where everyone stands - knocking the rust of in Spain doesn't seem to be prohibited by any rule.

1 hour ago, nom said:

Ugarte - good post.  I think I disagree with one point.  You mentioned that Cael and crew disagreed with the 2+2 but held the brick to see how it would all play out.  I think you are saying you are ok with that.  

I am not.  I believe the challenge needs to come very soon after the points go up.  If you feel strongly enough that something was wrong - put it in.   The brick should not also provide option value associated with letting things play out and see if my guy is good to go.  This leads to too much gaming in my opinion.

I don't think it's good that the challenge came in 40 seconds later, and would prefer a rule that didn't let it happen, as I explained. HOWEVER, I think Zain's corner was operating in good faith and if the arbitration panel agrees that it was within the rules I can accept that it is within the standard. That's all.

Share this post


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

As if Yianni should walk into the arbitration hearing by himself (or maybe with his mom)

Oh, man. If this forum blows up like this from lawyers getting involved, can you imagine if Yianni's mom gets involved?

Share this post


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

Oh, man. If this forum blows up like this from lawyers getting involved, can you imagine if Yianni's mom gets involved?

Just out of curiosity, with all this talk about "lawyering up" still going on, are we still at the point where the only lawyer involvement we know about is colleagues at the university helping with the initial letter?  Has there been more that we know of? Were there lawyers present at the arbitration hearing?  Just looking for more information.

Edited by Lurker

Share this post


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

Penn State was not involved in this match. This is one of the places that fans really need to change perception. These are FS matches for national/world team. As fans we need to try to shed our own bias.

Let's be real.  He trains in Penn State's room. He's coached by Penn State's coaches.  His RTC is the Nittany Lion Wrestling Club for God's sake. 

Once our world team is decided, sure, let's try to shed our biases.  But it's not unreasonable to have rooting allegiances before we're actually going out there to compete against the world.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, justafan said:

I was told hoping by tomorrow afternoon if not then Monday 

Hopefully soon so we can have a whole new round of threads.  This same ole same ole is getting boring

Share this post


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

Let me ask everybody this. Assuming that you're not allowed to throw the challenge brick 40 seconds later, should Penn State be held to that rule even though the score should have never been changed on the scoreboard to start with?

Do you mean the 2 & 2 that should have been followed with a consultation?

Regardless, as much as I don't think 5s is nearly enough time, and am glad that rule/guideline isn't followed, I think there should be some sort of limit (either time or by the next reset).  I also doubt very much Cael, or anyone else, was familiar enough with the rules to have known that the official couldn't signal 2 & 2 in that situation.

That said, in this case, given the subsequent continuous action, I think I'm okay with NLWC challenging the 2 & 2 (not that it matters, but for the actual scoring, not the scoring procedure), with the following huge caveat.  Changing the 2 & 2 at the end of the match, and thus changing the winner, is what bothered me most about the match.  Depriving Yianni the opportunity to wrestle the final minute or so, knowing he was actually losing, is completely unfair, and the rules need to be re-written to preclude such an outcome.

I don't even think they need to restart from the time of the challenge in any scenario except delayed successful challenges, and especially those at the end of the match.  I'm not sure how to write the actual rule, but both wrestlers have the right to know the correct score at any point in the match, and especially during the final minute.

Unfortunately, Yianni can't challenge that issue, but I'm annoyed it hasn't been mentioned more often, and more emphatically.

Share this post


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

Just out of curiosity, with all this talk about "lawyering up" still going on, are we still at the point where the only lawyer involvement we know about is colleagues at the university helping with the initial letter?  Has there been more that we know of? Were there lawyers present at the arbitration hearing?  Just looking for more information.

Since Yanni said in the Flow interview he was going to let the "Lawyers" decide., I would think he would be in "the  know"on this.

Share this post


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

Since Yanni said in the Flow interview he was going to let the "Lawyers" decide., I would think he would be in "the  know"on this.

I didn't see the interview.  Can you elaborate?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm in the camp that there is not enough clear evidence to justify overturning the ruling on the mat and reject the need for an arbitration hearing in this case. I also think the uncertainty is bad for the athlete that is competing, therefore, bad for Team USA, and bad for our sport. Yianni lost the first match, and lost the second. Done. What next, should McKenna get an arbitration because many people think he beat Yianni in the NCAA finals if it weren't for a bad call by the ref. Yianni is without a doubt one of the best in the world and likely a future World and Olympic champ. This year, and given the circumstances, I think Zain earned the spot.

Share this post


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

Forgive me if this has already been listed, but who were the three officials and how did each score it?  I know the ref did 2 blue, but am unsure which did which otherwise.  

3 of probably our top 5 officials plus top dog tucci on review.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, steamboat_charlie v2 said:

Let's be real.  He trains in Penn State's room. He's coached by Penn State's coaches.  His RTC is the Nittany Lion Wrestling Club for God's sake. 

Once our world team is decided, sure, let's try to shed our biases.  But it's not unreasonable to have rooting allegiances before we're actually going out there to compete against the world.  

Thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, jmachinder said:

Forgive me if this has already been listed, but who were the three officials and how did each score it?  I know the ref did 2 blue, but am unsure which did which otherwise.  

Ref 2 blue

Judge 2 red

Chair 2-2

Review 2 red

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...