Jump to content
NJDan

Professor Matthew Mitten

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Lurker said:

It actually is not the very definition, it is your interpretation of the word, which we can agree to disagree on. The very definition is available on the dictionary.

give it a rest my dude

Share this post


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

It actually is not the very definition, it is your interpretation of the word, which we can agree to disagree on. The very definition is available on the dictionary.

in·com·pe·tence
/inˈkämpədəns/
noun
 
  1. inability to do something successfully; ineptitude.
     
     
    that is exactly what happened... without question... as evidenced by the match being thrown out...
     
    (this is kinda coming back to your role you have no idea about)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, LJB said:
in·com·pe·tence
/inˈkämpədəns/
noun
 
  1. inability to do something successfully; ineptitude.
     
     
    that is exactly what happened... without question... as evidenced by the match being thrown out...
     
    (this is kinda coming back to your role you have no idea about)

Thank you for posting.  That is exactly my point from posts back.  They've shown over and over again they have the ability to officiate successfully, they blew this one.  A two minute segment where mistakes were made does not erase one's ability to do the job. Nor does having other instances of mistakes over their very good careers.  It means they are not perfect within their ability to do a good job.  

There's nothing more to be said on that.  Moving on.....what exactly is my role again?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, LJB said:
in·com·pe·tence
/inˈkämpədəns/
noun
 
  1. inability to do something successfully; ineptitude.
     
     
    that is exactly what happened... without question... as evidenced by the match being thrown out...
     
    (this is kinda coming back to your role you have no idea about)

you knock it off too. if there's a dictionary forum, you can both go nuts.

Share this post


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

The arbitrator points out that nobody submitted an affidavit from the UWW on its own interpretation of the rule.

Retherford's side submitted video of 17 UWW matches where the 5 second rule was not literally applied. Yianni's side objected to the evidence but the objection was overruled. However, none of those accepted bricks were end-of-match challenges which changed the final score after time expired. It is not clear from the decision whether "more than 5" here meant 9 seconds or 29. As I said, he didn't answer the question because he ruled on different grounds.

Thanks ugarte, you dont seem like you are a "greasy" lawyer.

Share this post


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

Retired refs and coaches can become qualified to be arbitrators, and then seek to join the AAAs pool of arbitrators.

Then they can hope to be picked for a wrestling arbitration, which seem to happen once every 5-10 years.

However, I am not aware that any such arbitrators exist.

I am saying that I did not know  and am surprised that the process calls for an arbitration of this formality. Had I been more knowledgeable, I would have been less surprised. To me, all that one needed to decide this appeal was a copy of the rulebook and a video of the match. It seems they had expert witnesses on the "law" on both sides. Even in formal trials, expert witnesses on matter of law are normally not allowed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Lurker said:

Different topic, where were you getting the info about the ruling?

from the decision. i requested a copy because I've written for deadspin and other places and may pitch something on this. i assume it'll be public soon. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/16/2019 at 11:04 AM, LJB said:

your forum parlor tricks don't work on me... 

the chairman started the debacle by putting up  a score that is not allowed by the rules... he has a history of suspect officiating... and as being the one in "charge" of all 3 mat officials, it falls on him... he was incapable of doing his  "job"... and not some obscure hardly used aspect of his job... the very first responsibility of his "job"... he is clearly incompetent and should not be allowed near a match of this magnitude ever again... whether or not that happens, who can say, but, i can say it would not surprise me if he continues to be...

i have been around USA officials for years... friends with many... not friends with many... even started officiating this past season because of pressure from the my states head official... was assigned a regional officiatting position after 3 weekends... upgraded unanimously after that weekend... have been in officials meetings attended by UWW officials... the one thing i can tell you for sure is that USA officials love being officials and use that shirt to wield "authority" an embarrassingly amount of time... i have seen breaks in protocol because of ego and a lack of understanding of the rules they are supposed to follow... it has made me really question if i want to continue to be associated with them as a whole... and some of the worst offenders are those that have been around for a long time and have "earned" the right to officiate matches poorly and taint outcomes they should not...

but hey, go on playing your forum role...

Didnt really agree with alot with your assessment of the USAW officials,  after watching the Dake/Dieringer  it appears there may be some merit to this.   Not certain on which rules they care to enforce extremely poor, borderline bias. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/16/2019 at 11:31 AM, LJB said:

this has absolutely no effect on wrestling at all... no one cares outside of a few to begin with... and of those, the vast majority view it through a tainted lense based on the color of a singlet used in a style that rewards not wrestling...

the majority of this forum had no clue about lindland and lewis and their similar paths before this summer... after a few years, the majority wont know or remember about yanni's case...

wrestling did and will continue to go on just as it has... regardless of the mewling of some "fans"

As one poster pointed out, "the whole court case Lindland debacle was something that was brought up when they tried to boot wrestling from the Olympics."  For that reason, I really hope that the IOC forgets about the Zain/Yianni situation (I'm assuming they have or will catch wind of it)...

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...