Jump to content
1032004

Extra Match Shenanigans

Recommended Posts

I agree with everyone that these fake matches to reach match count thresholds are very bad and should stop immediately (duh). But once prominent coaches flagrantly fixed matches in 2019 with zero punishment, it was only a matter of time before other coaches decided they also wanted to enjoy the benefits of fake matches that their peers did.

rather than selectively punish current coaches or retroactively punish coaches for misdeeds from 2019, i'd rather the fake matches from this season get stricken from the record and punishments for future transgression be made explicit. I don't see the point in getting outraged now when the practice was at the very least tacitly condoned. sure there were people who said it was bad in 2019, but not enough people did or not the right people did (or both), and so we have the mess we have now.

Maybe some lawyers can weigh in on how such things are handled in similar instances.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Jaroslav Hasek said:

 

Maybe some lawyers can weigh in on how such things are handled in similar instances.

Not a lawyer but don’t have to be. A cop can see someone driving 10 MPH one day and not pull them over and see someone an hour later doing the same and pull them over and give them a ticket. I promise you the ticket is still valid even though the cop didn’t give everyone they ever saw speed a ticket.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's not pretend that anonymous forum posters or not-so-anonymous tweeters have the authority to fire a coach.

These fixed results should definitely be thrown out. Is there a process to make a formal complaint to the NCAA, or are we all just screaming into our echo chamber about it?

Otherwise, I'd honestly feel ok with having the coaches step on a lego and write the rule against their own shenanigans. 

Share this post


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

It gave McGonagle 15 bouts for the year, which I believe qualifies him for RPI. His (now) 7-8 record doesn’t meet the 0.700 threshold for Win Pct.

 

If you are going to suggest Pat Santoro has no integrity, you may the first person to do so. Note he was willing to have McGonagle take the loss in the pre-arranged result w Zeke.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatal

 

1 hour ago, lu_alum said:

It gave McGonagle 15 bouts for the year, which I believe qualifies him for RPI. His (now) 7-8 record doesn’t meet the 0.700 threshold for Win Pct.

 

If you are going to suggest Pat Santoro has no integrity, you may the first person to do so. Note he was willing to have McGonagle take the loss in the pre-arranged result w Zeke.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Looks like Hines needed it to get to 15 also.

Edited by 1032004

Share this post


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

I agree with everyone that these fake matches to reach match count thresholds are very bad and should stop immediately (duh). But once prominent coaches flagrantly fixed matches in 2019 with zero punishment, it was only a matter of time before other coaches decided they also wanted to enjoy the benefits of fake matches that their peers did.

rather than selectively punish current coaches or retroactively punish coaches for misdeeds from 2019, i'd rather the fake matches from this season get stricken from the record and punishments for future transgression be made explicit. I don't see the point in getting outraged now when the practice was at the very least tacitly condoned. sure there were people who said it was bad in 2019, but not enough people did or not the right people did (or both), and so we have the mess we have now.

Maybe some lawyers can weigh in on how such things are handled in similar instances.

It was actually 2020 where this happened. Pretty sure the punishment was that they cancelled the entire NCAA Tournament, although I suppose that also could have happened for a different reason.

In the Lehigh/Arizona State example, at least (a) it was a nonconference dual, and (b) the wrestler who needed the matches took the loss. I'm more bothered by Kent State/SIUE, where the wrestlers are basically being handed wins for the winning percentage, one each wrestler, and it literally has no downside for either coach, especially as it's a conference dual.

My solution for the RPI scenario is to allow wrestlers to "assume losses" to get to 15, and have them count only in factor one to avoid their opponents being negatively affected. As far as the winning percentage scenario, I give up...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, wrestlingphish said:

Did anyone make the claim that they had such authority or were they just offering their opinion?

Nope! I'm just reading into the range of sentiment. Particularly, the opinions that suggest specific punishments. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know I have zero ability to effect any official policy change regarding this blatant cheating by certain coaches. What I can, and will, do is mercilessly heckle them from the stands if I ever get the opportunity, right up to the line of getting kicked out. The teacher in me wants to assign them a book review of John McCain’s autobiography and examine how his definition of moral courage applies to their lives. This is so reprehensible and contrary to everything amateur sports are supposed to teach young adults, it sickens me. 
 

edit: I did reach out to the one head coach I have a personal relationship with to see if he has any ideas about what we as fans can do to apply pressure to the right people to make this stop. If he has any insight, I’ll pass it along. 

Edited by tigerfan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I don’t get, is why not just wrestle the match? You can send out a backup and even if he’s overmatched, it can be an understanding in the name of sportsmanship that the better wrestler won’t try to humiliate (e.g. take down, let up repeatedly, then dance over his exhausted body) or injure him. Just hit some roll through tilts or lock up a farside cradle. The worse wrestler can fight for as long as he can and try to go the distance. What’s wrong with that?
 

You see it all the time where a far superior wrestler will just get on and then off the mat quickly, while the overmatched athlete gets teched or pinned. 

Edited by Billyhoyle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Billyhoyle said:

What I don’t get, is why not just wrestle the match?

Best case scenario: they envision themselves a catalyst for change. I mean, they must know that this is not simply a trend that they want to promote. 

Otherwise, I fully agree with your assessment: Just wrestle. I thought that's what wrestlers do best. 

Share this post


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

Best case scenario: they envision themselves a catalyst for change. I mean, they must know that this is not simply a trend that they want to promote. 

Otherwise, I fully agree with your assessment: Just wrestle. I thought that's what wrestlers do best. 

Worst case scenario…SIUE and/or Kent State get their programs cut?

Share this post


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

Worst case scenario…SIUE and/or Kent State get their programs cut?

Yikes! 

"That had not occurred to us, Dude"

I sure hope not! More likely, I think the worse case scenario is that it doesn't get addressed and continues into something commonplace, at which point we will get some unwanted attention: an interpretation that we're a joke of a sport. A bunch of images of tough guys in singlets, but the guys don't actually do the tough stuff, just agree to strategically lose to one another to create an illusion that they're qualified to contest their toughness someday. That's the path a few coaches put us on.

Share this post


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

Yikes! 

"That had not occurred to us, Dude"

I sure hope not! More likely, I think the worse case scenario is that it doesn't get addressed and continues into something commonplace, at which point we will get some unwanted attention: an interpretation that we're a joke of a sport. A bunch of images of tough guys in singlets, but the guys don't actually do the tough stuff, just agree to strategically lose to one another to create an illusion that they're qualified to contest their toughness someday. That's the path a few coaches put us on.

I don’t think the programs would get cut, but I think of the Fresno State situation and it seems like the AD was looking for a reason to cut the team.  I know nothing about the AD/status of the teams at Kent State/SIUE other than they’re not exactly the most talked about programs…

Share this post


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

I don’t think the programs would get cut, but I think of the Fresno State situation and it seems like the AD was looking for a reason to cut the team.  I know nothing about the AD/status of the teams at Kent State/SIUE other than they’re not exactly the most talked about programs…

An ethics violation is as good of reason as any to overreact...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/19/2022 at 10:16 PM, 1032004 said:

 

 

Yes.  NCAA should be on the phone with athletic directors reading them the riot act.  And deny any coaches who participated credentials for the tournament floor during the NCAA.  Sportsmanship is much more than handshakes at the end of a match.  Unsportsmanlike Conduct is left a bit vague to handle situations just like this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Plasmodium said:

The Stanford / CSUB exhibition last year is the most egregious.

These people are beyond shameful.

The results from 1/24/2021 don't look suspicious. What happened?

Results:
125 Jackson DiSario (STAN) dec. Eddie Flores (CSUB) 8-6 (SV)
133 Jason Miranda (STAN) fall Chance Rich (CSUB) F6:01
141 Angelo Martinoni (CSUB) maj. dec. Luciano Arroyo (STAN) 12-0
149 #15 Jaden Abas (STAN) dec. Kalani Tonge (CSUB) 13-6
157 Requir van der Merwe (STAN) maj. dec. Brock Rogers (CSUB) 13-5
165 #18 Tyler Eischens (STAN) tech. fall Braden Smelser (CSUB) 15-0 (5:02)
174 #3 Shane Griffith (STAN) maj. dec. Albert Urias (CSUB) 15-5
184 Dominic Ducharme (CSUB) dec. Jared Hill (STAN) 4-0
197 Nick Stemmet (STAN) maj. dec. Adrian Chavez (CSUB) 16-5
285 Jacob Sieder (CSUB) fall Seamus O'Malley (STAN) F2:46

Extra Matches:
133 Logan Ashton (STAN) dec. Alex Hernandez (CSUB) 5-4
149 Dawson Sihavong (STAN) tech. fall Jacob Peralta (CSUB) 15-0 (4:44)
157 Charlie Darracott (STAN) maj. dec. Josh McMillon (CSUB) 8-0
174 #18 Tyler Eischens (STAN) fall Hunter LaRue (CSUB) F2:00
285 Peter Ming (STAN) dec. Jarrod Snyder (CSUB) 9-2
285 Jacob Sieder (CSUB) tech. fall Peter Ming (STAN) 16-0 (3:56)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, denger said:

The results from 1/24/2021 don't look suspicious. What happened?

Results:
125 Jackson DiSario (STAN) dec. Eddie Flores (CSUB) 8-6 (SV)
133 Jason Miranda (STAN) fall Chance Rich (CSUB) F6:01
141 Angelo Martinoni (CSUB) maj. dec. Luciano Arroyo (STAN) 12-0
149 #15 Jaden Abas (STAN) dec. Kalani Tonge (CSUB) 13-6
157 Requir van der Merwe (STAN) maj. dec. Brock Rogers (CSUB) 13-5
165 #18 Tyler Eischens (STAN) tech. fall Braden Smelser (CSUB) 15-0 (5:02)
174 #3 Shane Griffith (STAN) maj. dec. Albert Urias (CSUB) 15-5
184 Dominic Ducharme (CSUB) dec. Jared Hill (STAN) 4-0
197 Nick Stemmet (STAN) maj. dec. Adrian Chavez (CSUB) 16-5
285 Jacob Sieder (CSUB) fall Seamus O'Malley (STAN) F2:46

Extra Matches:
133 Logan Ashton (STAN) dec. Alex Hernandez (CSUB) 5-4
149 Dawson Sihavong (STAN) tech. fall Jacob Peralta (CSUB) 15-0 (4:44)
157 Charlie Darracott (STAN) maj. dec. Josh McMillon (CSUB) 8-0
174 #18 Tyler Eischens (STAN) fall Hunter LaRue (CSUB) F2:00
285 Peter Ming (STAN) dec. Jarrod Snyder (CSUB) 9-2
285 Jacob Sieder (CSUB) tech. fall Peter Ming (STAN) 16-0 (3:56)

I just refreshed my memory.  They had Woods and Rich each wrestle the same guy twice, AFTER the conference tourney.   That was bad too, but I don’t think that’s worse than doing the 1 second injury defaults.

 

Share this post


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

I just refreshed my memory.  They had Woods and Rich each wrestle the same guy twice, AFTER the conference tourney.   That was bad too, but I don’t think that’s worse than doing the 1 second injury defaults.

 

I appreciate the context that thread added in regards to who all has been gaming the system in what ways and in reaction to which rules. Thanks, Plasmodium and 10032004 for bringing that up. 

Stupid rules will get stupid outcomes, and my takeaway from the Woods situation was that the stupid rule was that he only needed the 4-match minimum to take an AQ spot if he didn't win the conference - If the conference champ could go without a 4-match minimum, then why couldn't anyone else who had secured a pre-determined AQ out of a given conference? There was a logical fallacy there, and I understand why they challenged it. Both Woods and Rich lost in the blood round, so it's not like they weren't good enough to be there, but still... The whole thing tolerated bad ethics, perhaps with some modicum of justification being its place the most restricted season ever. 

I think there's a hard line with coaches agreeing to exchange 1 second injury defaults, though. It's completely indefensible to pad a wrestler's record with matches predetermined not to be wrestled. There is no justifying that. What are these non-contested extra matches if they're not fixed matches? And, as SHP pointed out, it's especially egregious when two coaches in the same conference conspire to manipulate the numbers for the benefit of their conference's allocations over those of other conferences. It doesn't just smell like cheating, it's plainly that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These coaches are a joke. All involved should be fired and banned for life from the NCAA. It’s clearly match fixing. This becoming widespread will be the nail in the coffin for NCAA wrestling.

It’s already against the rules & potentially against the law. People can, and will, financially benefit because of it. Especially since athletes can be paid for their likeness now. Free transportation & lodging to national tournament.. can make more money from camps and nli deals as “ncaa qualifier” vs “varsity athlete”… coaches could have contract bonuses triggered by amount of NCAA qualifiers… get better job security off the perception of better records/more qualifiers, etc etc etc

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...