Stieber Ramos Angle

[PA-Fan 0]

 

:roll:

 

Please watch the sequence at full speed instead of taking still frames - which are totally useless. From the time he locks the cradle to the time Stieber is belly-down and out of it...all of about 2-3seconds passed. That is the entire sequence. Not that Stieber was on his back for 2-3 seconds mind you....the entire sequence was 2-3 seconds. This wouldn't have even been a fall in freestyle...to argue otherwise is just silly.

 

I bet I can find still frames from hundreds and hundreds of matches that show someone flat like this - and they probably stayed flat for about 1/3 of a second. Ill say it again - still frames are useless. All you have to do is watch the sequence and you can see, very clearly and beyond any doubt, that there was no fall.

 

Argue back points all you want, at least you have some grounds to argue. Pin - no chance.

 

There is a reason that neither Ramos, nor Brands, were arguing for the pin - because it was not a pin.

 

This thread was started based on a still frame. And that's definitely a pin in Freestyle, what are you talking about?

 

But I don't think it was a fall in Folkstyle.

 

The still frame that started the thread was in response to an argument that said Brands was never in front of the camera blocking it's view...if I remember correctly you actually were one of the ones making said argument...he clearly was. - In this case a still frame from said camera is useful...the entire video would be also.

 

The still frame showing Stieber's flat shoulders is taken from a 3 second (max) sequence - and attempting to be used as evidence that he was pinned - when in reality there is no way that should have been called a fall. - in this case a still frame is useless.

 

As for that definitely being a pin in Freestyle, not so much. It would be more likely to be called in freestyle, sure. But I think even for freestyle that would be pushing it. I meant to say "not even be called a pin in freestyle"...but either way the idea is the same.

 

Just watch it - at 6:07 Ramos locks the cradle and Stieber's shoulders break criteria. At 6:10 he is belly-down and out of the cradle. Accounting for the time that he spends being taken to "flat" and the time coming back from flat to belly down...you are talking almost no time being flat at all - unless you take a still frame which is totally misleading to the reality of the situation.

 

 

[Buckeyebison 87]

Remember- nobody that were near them thought it was a pin. Neither do they think it was a pin at all. So, it would mean that it isn't a pin even in Freestyle.

 

Remember in Freestyle, if a person roll across the shoulder, it would be a pin. However, Logan did not roll at all.

 

Thus, it is not a pin in folkstyle OR freestyle.

[VakAttack 4,041]

The still frame that started the thread was in response to an argument that said Brands was never in front of the camera blocking it's view...if I remember correctly you actually were one of the ones making said argument...he clearly was. - In this case a still frame from said camera is useful...the entire video would be also.

 

The still frame showing Stieber's flat shoulders is taken from a 3 second (max) sequence - and attempting to be used as evidence that he was pinned - when in reality there is no way that should have been called a fall. - in this case a still frame is useless.

 

As for that definitely being a pin in Freestyle, not so much. It would be more likely to be called in freestyle, sure. But I think even for freestyle that would be pushing it. I meant to say "not even be called a pin in freestyle"...but either way the idea is the same.

 

Just watch it - at 6:07 Ramos locks the cradle and Stieber's shoulders break criteria. At 6:10 he is belly-down and out of the cradle. Accounting for the time that he spends being taken to "flat" and the time coming back from flat to belly down...you are talking almost no time being flat at all - unless you take a still frame which is totally misleading to the reality of the situation.

 

 

 

Nobody who has watched the video, including me, has ever said that BRands wasn't in front of the camera at all. Just that he was not in front of the camera while Stieber was on his back. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

I posted a similar photo immediately in the aftermath, but here's another one further along in the progression:

 

 

Here you can Stieber is out of exposure/danger and Brands has not yet gotten in front of the camera. By the time Brands gets there, Stieber is off his back.

 

And a pin is a touchfall in Freestyle. IT does not have to "roll across" or anything similar. Both shoulder blades have to be flat, that's it. Clearly they were.

[PA-Fan 0]

As for the "Brands in front of the camera" argument... I dont care either way. I was just illustrating why that still frame was useful...while the one showing Stieber flat was not.

 

As for the freestyle fall...yes that is the rule. But this sequence, as fast as it was, is not a sure-call in freestyle no matter what the rule says. And it is not a call at all in folkstyle, no matter how many still frames show Stieber flat - like I said you can get them from hundreds of matches showing flat shoulder's...doesn't mean they were pinned just because a still frame showing 1/100th of a second shows it.

[TheOhioState 525]

I guess I'm confused. The still that opens this thread shows Brands, or some guy wearing a suit, in the way at 1:19.

 

With Vak's still, he attempts to prove that Brands was not in the way at 1:19.

 

I think it's clear that some guy was in the way.

 

Although it probably cost Iowa the review, it didn't cost them the match.

[VakAttack 4,041]

I guess I'm confused. The still that opens this thread shows Brands, or some guy wearing a suit, in the way at 1:19.

 

With Vak's still, he attempts to prove that Brands was not in the way at 1:19.

 

I think it's clear that some guy was in the way.

 

Although it probably cost Iowa the review, it didn't cost them the match.

 

My point was that Brands was not yet in front of the camera before Logan was off his back.

 

ANd he wasn't.

[OhioSpladle 35]

I guess I'm confused. The still that opens this thread shows Brands, or some guy wearing a suit, in the way at 1:19.

 

With Vak's still, he attempts to prove that Brands was not in the way at 1:19.

 

I think it's clear that some guy was in the way.

 

Although it probably cost Iowa the review, it didn't cost them the match.

 

My point was that Brands was not yet in front of the camera before Logan was off his back.

 

ANd he wasn't.

 

Vak, you could be right, but isnt it also just as likely that he is on his way back to the left after already being in front of the camera?

[TheOhioState 525]

I guess I'm confused. The still that opens this thread shows Brands, or some guy wearing a suit, in the way at 1:19.

 

With Vak's still, he attempts to prove that Brands was not in the way at 1:19.

 

I think it's clear that some guy was in the way.

 

Although it probably cost Iowa the review, it didn't cost them the match.

 

My point was that Brands was not yet in front of the camera before Logan was off his back.

 

ANd he wasn't.

 

Vak, you could be right, but isnt it also just as likely that he is on his way back to the left after already being in front of the camera?

 

Yes, it is, and Vak would be the first person to admit that he was wrong. LOL.

 

Let's get serious here: It was reported that the officials couldn't do a review, because the view was blocked. Brands blocked the view. It cost Iowa the review.

[BobDole 1,229]

Amazing that the same Iowa fans are still crying about this.

[wessegar 0]

all this bickering is irrelevant bc ramos has never and will never beat stieber. the one time stieber makes a mistake and giftwraps a victory ramos couldnt even capitalize..

 

sorry iowa

[VakAttack 4,041]

I guess I'm confused. The still that opens this thread shows Brands, or some guy wearing a suit, in the way at 1:19.

 

With Vak's still, he attempts to prove that Brands was not in the way at 1:19.

 

I think it's clear that some guy was in the way.

 

Although it probably cost Iowa the review, it didn't cost them the match.

 

My point was that Brands was not yet in front of the camera before Logan was off his back.

 

ANd he wasn't.

 

Vak, you could be right, but isnt it also just as likely that he is on his way back to the left after already being in front of the camera?

 

No, it isn't. I took the screenshot from the Youtube video. Brands was still on his way in front of the camera.

 

And the thread was started by an Ohio State fan, former Presidential candidate Dole.

[OhioSpladle 35]

woah woah woah! I'm a Cornell fan sir, :)

[HurricaneWrestling 1,123]

Amazing that the same Iowa fans are still crying about this.

Bwa wa wa! Tony shoulda had back points, Mommy!