Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
MonagFam

? On FS Rules

Recommended Posts

There is a live event in Russia streaming on YouTube as I write this.  I can't provide a timestamp link to the match since it is still streaming so you will have to make due with my poor description.  (I do not remember who was red or blue, but I will just assign a color.)

Match 1: Blue got a takedown and has turned Red a few times (early rounds so there seems to be a lot of these types of matches)

They end up in an awkward position where Red is on his butt mostly seated straight up and Blue is working to push him down or turn him.

Red works his way out of the circle and the ref stops the action.

When they get to the center, the ref orders Red to go on his belly.  Blue quickly turns him on the restart and its over.

 

Match 2: Similar scenario, but blue ends up in a leg lace.  

Red sort of jerks out of the circle (like a bucking bronco in a way).

Ref has a neutral restart in the center.

 

So what was different?  In both cases, Red used the boundary to keep from getting turned.  I am trying to recall seeing a FS wrestler told to go on his stomach.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would have to guess in the first scenario, where you said sitting straight up, if not completely straight up he would have been considered in exposure. Going out of bounds ‘on your back’...ie in exposure....would be the only reason I could see returning in parterre. Although I haven’t seen that in awhile. Don’t know if that’s cuz I haven’t seen a match in a while where that happened or because they took it out. But that’s the only thing I can think of. 

Share this post


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

Would have to guess in the first scenario, where you said sitting straight up, if not completely straight up he would have been considered in exposure. Going out of bounds ‘on your back’...ie in exposure....would be the only reason I could see returning in parterre. Although I haven’t seen that in awhile. Don’t know if that’s cuz I haven’t seen a match in a while where that happened or because they took it out. But that’s the only thing I can think of. 

I think that is what happened.  I found it, but the event is still going on! I am afraid if I time stamp it, it wont jump to the right spot, but wherever that time is from the present.  Once it ends, I will try and find it again.

Share this post


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

Would have to guess in the first scenario, where you said sitting straight up, if not completely straight up he would have been considered in exposure. Going out of bounds ‘on your back’...ie in exposure....would be the only reason I could see returning in parterre. Although I haven’t seen that in awhile. Don’t know if that’s cuz I haven’t seen a match in a while where that happened or because they took it out. But that’s the only thing I can think of. 

Just ended, there was a lot of wrestling!

Here it is (3:48:00 the incident in question happens a minute or two later.

 

Here is the other example I mentioned (just for completionist sake)

 

Edited by MonagFam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, I'll give you the rule, and then an interpretation of what was called.  Your puzzlement was a warranted because the mechanics of the official was a little bizarre.  It is unlikely you would see these mechanics at the open level in the USA.  Not sure if the differences in this case are related to the skill of the official, or just geography.

The key to all of this is that par-terre restarts in freestyle ONLY occur in the event of a foul on the bottom man.  Leaving the mat in danger is not cause to restart action grounded, unless it is the opinion of the officiating crew that the athlete in danger left the wrestling area voluntarily.  I will offer that when a wrestler is on his back it makes it a little easier on the refs to interpret that he wanted to get out.

Thus, the first sequence was called a caution for fleeing and the second was not.

Since we're here, I will dig a little deeper into what made this so hard to parse out. 

In the first sequence, a flee call was certainly warranted.  What was weird was that the whistle did not signal a caution + 2 for the top man to indicate the foul.  Again, no grounded restart without this caution.  I think the most likely explanation is that the whistle did not observe a flee but the judge and chairman called and confirmed the foul off camera.  Or the whistle has terrible mechanics and indicated the flee in Russian or something.

The second sequence is even worse mechanics.  No flee is called even though I think it should have been.  To make it worse, the bottom man is given a stern verbal attention after it goes out, but no penalty, costing the attacking wrestler his advantage.  The attention should have come prior to the athlete leaving the wrestling area with a command of "place", indicating to the bottom man to make every effort to stay in bounds.  This command should also come from the whistle at the head of the athlete, further emphasizing to not go out of bounds with his physical presence.  If the place command is not heeded, again penalize a caution and restart in parterre. I went through some gymnastics to explain and excuse the referee in the first situation, but not this time.  The best I can do is say the no-call here is probably best because of the terrible job the referee did warning the bottom man to keep his defense in bounds.

Edited by JHRoseWrestling
Typo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, JHRoseWrestling said:

Ok, I'll give you the rule, and then an interpretation of what was called.  Your puzzlement was a warranted because the mechanics of the official was a little bizarre.  It is unlikely you would see these mechanics at the open level in the USA.  Not sure if the differences in this case are related to the skill of the official, or just geography.

The key to all of this is that par-terre restarts in freestyle ONLY occur in the event of a foul on the bottom man.  Leaving the mat in danger is not cause to restart action grounded, unless it is the opinion of the officiating crew that the athlete in danger left the wrestling area voluntarily.  I will offer that when a wrestler is on his back it makes it a little easier on the refs to interpret that he wanted to get out.

Thus, the first sequence was called a caution for fleeing and the second was not.

Since we're here, I will dig a little deeper into what made this so hard to parse out. 

In the first sequence, a flee call was certainly warranted.  What was weird was that the whistle did not signal a caution + 2 for the top man to indicate the foul.  Again, no grounded restart without this caution.  I think the most likely explanation is that the whistle did not observe a flee but the judge and chairman called and confirmed the foul off camera.  Or the whistle has terrible mechanics and indicated the flee in Russian or something.

The second sequence is even worse mechanics.  No flee is called even though I think it should have been.  To make it worse, the bottom man is given a stern verbal attention after it goes out, but no penalty, costing the attacking wrestler his advantage.  The attention should have come prior to the athlete leaving the wrestling area with a command of "place", indicating to the bottom man to make every effort to stay in bounds.  This command should also come from the whistle at the head of the athlete, further emphasizing to not go out of bounds with his physical presence.  If the place command is not heeded, again penalize a caution and restart in parterre. I went through some gymnastics to explain and excuse the referee in the first situation, but not this time.  The best I can do is say the no-call here is probably best because of the terrible job the referee did warning the bottom man to keep his defense in bounds.

Thanks so much for the explanation! This is exactly what I was looking for.  I didn't really start watching a lot of wrestling until late 2019, but I couldn't recall par-terre starts in FS prior to that one.  (I have already sent similar inquiries in the GR par-terre when I couldn't tell how one was worse and it seemed like a severe penalty.)

Thanks again!

Edited by MonagFam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/26/2021 at 11:48 PM, JHRoseWrestling said:

Ok, I'll give you the rule, and then an interpretation of what was called.  Your puzzlement was a warranted because the mechanics of the official was a little bizarre.  It is unlikely you would see these mechanics at the open level in the USA.  Not sure if the differences in this case are related to the skill of the official, or just geography.

The key to all of this is that par-terre restarts in freestyle ONLY occur in the event of a foul on the bottom man.  Leaving the mat in danger is not cause to restart action grounded, unless it is the opinion of the officiating crew that the athlete in danger left the wrestling area voluntarily.  I will offer that when a wrestler is on his back it makes it a little easier on the refs to interpret that he wanted to get out.

Thus, the first sequence was called a caution for fleeing and the second was not.

Since we're here, I will dig a little deeper into what made this so hard to parse out. 

In the first sequence, a flee call was certainly warranted.  What was weird was that the whistle did not signal a caution + 2 for the top man to indicate the foul.  Again, no grounded restart without this caution.  I think the most likely explanation is that the whistle did not observe a flee but the judge and chairman called and confirmed the foul off camera.  Or the whistle has terrible mechanics and indicated the flee in Russian or something.

The second sequence is even worse mechanics.  No flee is called even though I think it should have been.  To make it worse, the bottom man is given a stern verbal attention after it goes out, but no penalty, costing the attacking wrestler his advantage.  The attention should have come prior to the athlete leaving the wrestling area with a command of "place", indicating to the bottom man to make every effort to stay in bounds.  This command should also come from the whistle at the head of the athlete, further emphasizing to not go out of bounds with his physical presence.  If the place command is not heeded, again penalize a caution and restart in parterre. I went through some gymnastics to explain and excuse the referee in the first situation, but not this time.  The best I can do is say the no-call here is probably best because of the terrible job the referee did warning the bottom man to keep his defense in bounds.

The second match was also Dagestan vs Dagestan, so perhaps the referee was a little more lenient since it was wrestlers from the same area of the country.

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...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...