Jump to content
Lurker

Anything from arbitration?

Recommended Posts

30 minutes ago, Mphillips said:

Understood.  That is a much unheralded skill. +1

If you need that kind of attention, it's pretty easy to deliberately get people to argue with you. It's much harder to get people to agree with what you're saying.

Share this post


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

Interesting you are so obsessed with it.

Obsessed, not at all. Very interested, absolutely. My main interest in the conclusion is I’d like to see the transcripts to see how it all played out, regardless of the decision. 

Why is that so interesting. 

Share this post


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

I could label this process alot of things, a "good thing"  would not be one of them.

Speaking about the interest, not process. Once a decision is announced, opinions on the “process” will be plentiful. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems to me that the deciders are fearful of deciding. They don't want to upset a result on the mat. But they must see that that result was at least problemmatic. Damned if they do reverse it; damned if they don't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, NJDan said:

It seems to me that the deciders are fearful of deciding. They don't want to upset a result on the mat. But they must see that that result was at least problemmatic. Damned if they do reverse it; damned if they don't.

Never really saw it that way. They have a process for correcting mistakes that occur during matches and a process for when coaches point those mistakes out. Its a video review conducted by the referee delegate and chair, and they performed that review when the action stopped. This should never have gone to the lawyers and arbitrators. It is now officially a mess. 

 

Share this post


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

Never really saw it that way. They have a process for correcting mistakes that occur during matches and a process for when coaches point those mistakes out. Its a video review conducted by the referee delegate and chair, and they performed that review when the action stopped. This should never have gone to the lawyers and arbitrators. It is now officially a mess. 

 

Everybody knows that you didn’t see it that way and, this may sound crazy, but maybe the way you see it is wrong. Maybe the way you see it is right.

Others, myself included, think the process was mishandled. If the rules are followed the way they are written, the process was mishandled. 

The fact that you refuse to acknowledge the late brick for what it was, shows how bias you are. It wasn’t thrown earlier because the coaches wanted to see what the end result was before they threw it. It was gamesmanship. Which I don’t blame them for, at all. It just shouldn’t have been allowed.

We can get into the what if scenarios but the fact remains, the coaches didn’t throw the brick until it was at least 30 seconds after the score was changed. They didn’t challenge the rule about a conference needing to occur. They challenged a subjective scoring sequence. That should not have been allowed that long after it occurred.

Had the brick come in immediately and the officials decided not to review until the end, so be it. That is the officials discretion. It is not up to the coaches to decide when it makes sense to challenge.

Most of the commentary on here has been that the process was mishandled and it was a severe detriment to Yianni. 

There is a process in place to settle this type of perceived injustice. That process is being followed. 

I just don’t see why you can’t admit that there is actually some merit to the arbitration process.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Savage74 said:

Everybody knows that you didn’t see it that way and, this may sound crazy, but maybe the way you see it is wrong. Maybe the way you see it is right.

Others, myself included, think the process was mishandled. If the rules are followed the way they are written, the process was mishandled. 

The fact that you refuse to acknowledge the late brick for what it was, shows how bias you are. It wasn’t thrown earlier because the coaches wanted to see what the end result was before they threw it. It was gamesmanship. Which I don’t blame them for, at all. It just shouldn’t have been allowed.

We can get into the what if scenarios but the fact remains, the coaches didn’t throw the brick until it was at least 30 seconds after the score was changed. They didn’t challenge the rule about a conference needing to occur. They challenged a subjective scoring sequence. That should not have been allowed that long after it occurred.

Had the brick come in immediately and the officials decided not to review until the end, so be it. That is the officials discretion. It is not up to the coaches to decide when it makes sense to challenge.

Most of the commentary on here has been that the process was mishandled and it was a severe detriment to Yianni. 

There is a process in place to settle this type of perceived injustice. That process is being followed. 

I just don’t see why you can’t admit that there is actually some merit to the arbitration process.

*Rerun alert*

Share this post


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

No, it was a mess when they decided to change the score after the match was over.  Because it is a mess, it has gone to arbitration, not the other way around.

they decided to "correct" the score therefore they had to change it. 

Share this post


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

they decided to "correct" the score therefore they had to change it. 

uggggh speaking of re-runs don't want to get in again on the particulars of the last couple minutes....however, "they" didn't correct or change..."he" did.  Out of procedure (and I love the dude, but real is real).  That is the brunt of the issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Obviously, this whole thing has been beaten to death both here and elsewhere. Right now, today, whether it should have gone to arbitration or as TBar asserts not, is a moot point. It did.

More to the point, what happens now?
 
In almost all cases, both parties sign a written agreement to abide by the decision.(Occasionally, even if they'd agreed to abide, they appeal. These appeals rarely succeed.)
 
The arbitrator won't come up with an impossible solution: let's go back in time, etc. It will be something feasible: the decision stands, wrestle again, etc. And that will be that.
 
(PS: I'm not a litigator--just a humble retired teacher and coach-- but my wife is one! :-) She doesn't give a hoot about wrestling, but the above is her take on things.)

Share this post


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

uggggh speaking of re-runs don't want to get in again on the particulars of the last couple minutes....however, "they" didn't correct or change..."he" did.  Out of procedure (and I love the dude, but real is real).  That is the brunt of the issue.

Ok "he" corrected Zach E. mistake in scoring.  ( we think)

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...