Jump to content
AnklePicker

Is flo offering bonuses?

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, 1032004 said:

So yeah that seems to make it arbitrary to me...

Isn’t it possible that no one is being passive despite no score?

Yep and yet they have to call someone. 
 

Here’s how it’s worded in the UWW rule book:

 

 If after 2:00 minutes into the first period neither wrestler has scored any point (score 0-0), the referees must mandatory designate one of the wrestler as inactive (the same procedure described above is administered).

Edited by AnklePicker

Share this post


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

Yep and yet they have to call someone. 
 

Here’s how it’s worded in the UWW rule book:

 

 If after 2:00 minutes into the first period neither wrestler has scored any point (score 0-0), the referees must mandatory designate one of the wrestler as inactive (the same procedure described above is administered).

Come on guys. LjB doesn't have time for this today. And that has nothing to do with him being shown to be inaccurate several times on this topic. Mr. LjB is a very busy man. He cannot be disturbed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, 1032004 said:

So yeah that seems to make it arbitrary to me...

Isn’t it possible that no one is being passive despite no score?

Passivity IS the lack of scoring. Stalling is the lack of trying to score. There's a difference.

 

Share this post


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

Passivity IS the lack of scoring. Stalling is the lack of trying to score. There's a difference.

 

Disagree. UWW clearly considers passivity inactivity, interlocking fingers, blocking, thwarting your opponents and generally avoiding wrestling, that’s the way it’s defined in the UWW rulebook. That’s not just not scoring. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, AnklePicker said:

Disagree. UWW clearly considers passivity inactivity, interlocking fingers, blocking, thwarting your opponents and generally avoiding wrestling, that’s the way it’s defined in the UWW rulebook. That’s not just not scoring. 

Correct- if it results in a lack of scoring. That's what I'm trying to emphasize. It's been a long time since I was on the mats but I don't believe this part of the officiating philosophy has changed much. The nuance I was going for was that if you score enough there's no need to call it as opposed to folkstyle where it's more like what have you done for me lately. And understand, these tactics are different than fleeing the hold type situations which could get called anyway.

Share this post


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

Correct- if it results in a lack of scoring. That's what I'm trying to emphasize. It's been a long time since I was on the mats but I don't believe this part of the officiating philosophy has changed much. The nuance I was going for was that if you score enough there's no need to call it as opposed to folkstyle where it's more like what have you done for me lately. And understand, these tactics are different than fleeing the hold type situations which could get called anyway.

Guys get called for passivity all the time after points are already on the board. 

Edited by AnklePicker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, AnklePicker said:

Yep and yet they have to call someone. 
 

Here’s how it’s worded in the UWW rule book:

 

 If after 2:00 minutes into the first period neither wrestler has scored any point (score 0-0), the referees must mandatory designate one of the wrestler as inactive (the same procedure described above is administered).

to be 100% honest, yesterday i was working under the guise of being put on the shot clock... that was the angle i was coming from and i was clearly wrong in what i was attempting and failing to get at...

passivity is still different than stalling... it is less arbitrary than stalling is in folk...

it just is...

the clearest example is the token stall call with 7 seconds left up by one that is called in entirely too many folk matches...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, gimpeltf said:

Correct- if it results in a lack of scoring. That's what I'm trying to emphasize. It's been a long time since I was on the mats but I don't believe this part of the officiating philosophy has changed much. The nuance I was going for was that if you score enough there's no need to call it as opposed to folkstyle where it's more like what have you done for me lately. And understand, these tactics are different than fleeing the hold type situations which could get called anyway.

^this...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, LJB said:

to be 100% honest, yesterday i was working under the guise of being put on the shot clock... that was the angle i was coming from and i was clearly wrong in what i was attempting and failing to get at...

passivity is still different than stalling... it is less arbitrary than stalling is in folk...

it just is...

the clearest example is the token stall call with 7 seconds left up by one that is called in entirely too many folk matches...

“It just is.”  Great argument. Actually it just isn’t. Do you watch much freestyle?  I’m guessing you don’t since you clearly don’t even know the rules. When one guy has to be put on the shot clock I’m not sure how you can argue that that’s less arbitrary. In fact for awhile it seemed like they would put the less passive guy on the clock first in case the match ended 1-1 at least the less passive guy scored the 2nd shot clock point and would therefore win. That’s seems to have subsided a bit but I still scratch my head quite often on who was selected for passivity and why.  
 

I agree the late folk stall call on the guy who has been scoring the entire match is dumb but it’s not arbitrary. The guy running at the end is stalling regardless when it happens in a match. 
 

Listen, I realize the entire time you thought passivity was based on mat control so maybe go back and watch some matches with a fresh set of eyes and understanding of exactly how the rules work and perhaps you’ll come up with the right answer.  

Share this post


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

“It just is.”  Great argument. Actually it just isn’t. Do you watch much freestyle?  I’m guessing you don’t since you clearly don’t even know the rules. When one guy has to be put on the shot clock I’m not sure how you can argue that that’s less arbitrary. In fact for awhile it seemed like they would put the less passive guy on the clock first in case the match ended 1-1 at least the less passive guy scored the 2nd shot clock point and would therefore win. That’s seems to have subsided a bit but I still scratch my head quite often on who was selected for passivity and why.  
 

I agree the late folk stall call on the guy who has been scoring the entire match is dumb but it’s not arbitrary. The guy running at the end is stalling regardless when it happens in a match. 
 

Listen, I realize the entire time you thought passivity was based on mat control so maybe go back and watch some matches with a fresh set of eyes and understanding of exactly how the rules work and perhaps you’ll come up with the right answer.  

ugh... it is based on mat control... you put your butt to the center and wrestle then you are not being passive

in 2019 UWW went to pushing a negative wrestling theme particularly in greco...

point remains the same, you keep your butt to the center of the mat and engage, you will not be called for passivity...

that is just the way it is called...

clearly, i watch the international styles... i got conned into reffing the international styles by my states USAW head ref and was then asked the ref regional age level and then they tried to get me to fargo... there was a reason for that... 

but, whatever... that won't matter to you... your agenda is clear...

Share this post


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

point remains the same, you keep your butt to the center of the mat and engage, you will not be called for passivity...

But again, couldn't both guys be doing that and yet still not score?  In which case someone still apparently needs to be called for passivity

Share this post


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

ugh... it is based on mat control... you put your butt to the center and wrestle then you are not being passive

in 2019 UWW went to pushing a negative wrestling theme particularly in greco...

point remains the same, you keep your butt to the center of the mat and engage, you will not be called for passivity...

that is just the way it is called...

clearly, i watch the international styles... i got conned into reffing the international styles by my states USAW head ref and was then asked the ref regional age level and then they tried to get me to fargo... there was a reason for that... 

but, whatever... that won't matter to you... your agenda is clear...

Wrong again. Please go to the actual UWW rule book and clarify for me where it mentions one thing about mat control. I’ll save you some time, it doesn’t. What it does clearly state is: “One of the roles of the refereeing body should be to evaluate and distinguish what is real action versus a feigned attempt to waste time.”

You can be dead center of the mat and get called for passivity for interlocking fingers or blocking out a guy.  It’s ok to be wrong bud and that’s been proven repeatedly so I’m moving on. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, 1032004 said:

But again, couldn't both guys be doing that and yet still not score?  In which case someone still apparently needs to be called for passivity

well, only one guy can have his butt to the center...

and yes, both can be wrestling and still one is gonna get an attention...

but, i have enver in free seen a match where both were wrestling in the first and one gets forced on the shot clock...

in fact, the only match where i can think of that someone was put on the shot clock egregiously was dake v JB in 2017 when an otherwise quality ref put dake on the shot clock twice in the second period... i know that ref personally... and i know why he did it... he let his emotions run away with himself because dake can be a whiner...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, AnklePicker said:

Wrong again. Please go to the actual UWW rule book and clarify for me where it mentions one thing about mat control. I’ll save you some time, it doesn’t. What it does clearly state is: “One of the roles of the refereeing body should be to evaluate and distinguish what is real action versus a feigned attempt to waste time.”

You can be dead center of the mat and get called for passivity for interlocking fingers or blocking out a guy.  It’s ok to be wrong bud and that’s been proven repeatedly so I’m moving on. 

i talking about it is called and viewed by the actual officials...

as in when officials get together before every major tournament and talk about how they are going to call the matches... they go over scenarios and how they should be called... there is a really solid power point presentation put together by a guy i know...

again, whatever... your agenda is clear...

 

Share this post


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

well, only one guy can have his butt to the center...

and yes, both can be wrestling and still one is gonna get an attention...

but, i have enver in free seen a match where both were wrestling in the first and one gets forced on the shot clock...

in fact, the only match where i can think of that someone was put on the shot clock egregiously was dake v JB in 2017 when an otherwise quality ref put dake on the shot clock twice in the second period... i know that ref personally... and i know why he did it... he let his emotions run away with himself because dake can be a whiner...

Was Dake not wrestling in the first period vs Chamizo?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, AnklePicker said:

Was Dake not wrestling in the first period vs Chamizo?

i only watched that match live... anything i say on it other than the obvious would be suspect at best...

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...