Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
vhsalum

GOT TAMMIT FILA!

Recommended Posts

The program of event of the 125th IOC Session in Buenos Aires. Look at Saturday 8.

9:00 h (local time) Presentation by Candidate Sports.

Next:: Report by the IOC Olympic Programme Commission.

Next: Vote on the 25 core sports (I hope it will be denied)

Next: Vote on the possible inclusion of a new sport

http://www.olympic.org/Documents/IOC_Executive_Boards_and_Sessions/IOC_Sessions/125_Session_Buenos_Aires_2013/Programme_of_Events-125th_IOC_Session.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Littlepun, think the old rules when a guy had the leg clinch. If he sat him to his butt that was scored 1. Same position with Pico only now it's scored 2.

 

FANTASTIC! Lets carry-over a rule that was the bane of wrestling's existence for the last 7 years!

 

*Face-palm*

 

Once again, NUANCES! And one that isn't EVEN A TAKEDOWN!

 

*Slams Head Against Wall*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reason #3412 why we might need to start questioning more and believing less from our "leadership", and I use that term very loosely.

 

http://articles.mcall.com/2004-05-25/sp ... -community

 

Dziedzic likes new rules changes for freestyle wrestling

May 25, 2004

By Paul Reinhard Of The Morning Call

 

Cleaning out the notebook while moving across town from the U.S. Olympic Wrestling Trials to the Indianapolis 500:

 

Freestyle wrestling is going to have a different look following the 2004 Athens Olympic Games, and while the changes are sure to be a cause for temporary anxiety among the purists of the sport, they may be just what it needs to attract more spectator interest.

 

Stan Dziedzic, an Allen High graduate and president of USA Wrestling, took time out to discuss the state of the sport, and part of that has to do with how wrestling is perceived in the international sports community and among potential fans in the U.S.

 

A dwindling number of weight classes at the Olympic Games, a shrinking number of wrestling teams at major colleges to produce future Olympians, Title IX issues and the introduction of women to international competition are among the things that keep Dziedzic occupied on the "hobby" side when he's not busy on the executive side with Lehman Bros. in Atlanta.

 

The proposed rules changes will have people looking at international wrestling in a different way. The most radical change will be in how a bout is scored, and the new format is taken from sports like tennis.

 

Each period will be an entity unto itself. A wrestler might win the first period 5-0, then lose the second 1-0. Under the current format, he would be a 5-1 winner. Under the new setup, the two wrestlers will be tied at one period each, with the winner of the third period winning the bout.

 

"It eliminates the situation where a guy makes one move for five points and the match is basically over," Dziedzic said. "Now it's not over. Every period has a climax. This should add excitement."

 

A pin, of course, ends the bout at any time; and Dziedzic said that scoring a designated number of points in a period also will be a special consideration.

 

On the surface, I love it. I'm sure lots of loopholes will have to be closed before the final version is released, but it seems like a positive step.

 

Another change will deal with freestyle's clinch. A clinch forces the two wrestlers to lock arms around one another's upper body and then muscle each other for points.

 

That system will remain for Greco-Roman wrestlers, who are not permitted to use their legs. Dziedzic said that freestyle, however, will go to a single-leg lock, which is more in line with that style.

 

It makes perfect sense to differentiate one style of wrestling from another. Dziedzic's two-year tenure as USA Wrestling president ends this year, but he figures to serve another two. He hopes to leave the sport better off than when he took office.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would like to know - What is the longest FILA went without any major rule changes ?

I have no problem with change or trying new things. Back when this article was written, Stan and crew made some radical changes and they had to put a positive spin on the rules. I get it.

My problem with Stan and crew is that the rules stayed in place for way to long. There was down right outrage against the rules outlined in the article. EVERYONE except maybe Stan and crew liked the rules. There were a few journalists and some from USA wrestling that also put on a grin and bear it attitude. No sense in complaining, adapt and win.....

Try new things and sh!t can them when they do not work. The rule set with the 3 periods was a complete failure and drove people away instead of bring them in, ticked many off and just plain sucked.

I don't know what rules the rest of the world wants but it is pretty clear what the US fans want. FILA needs to find a good set and then quit tinkering for awhile. Spend the time training the officials first, then maybe put up some video's on Youtube.

Here's the thing many have been trying to express to Stan and crew. If you need to put video's up on Youtube to explain the rules, than you're doing it wrong! I have been in the sport for awhile. You can just tell me the rules and should easily explain to casual fans that express interest. Hopefully they will say " Wow, cool. I can't wait to see ( insert favorite wrestler here) again.

The origonal rules of our sport were simple.

Keep it simple, Stupid !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

even more disheartening when you get a fila board member addressing questions on the rules and he won't(can't) even tell us how certain situations should be scored according to the book (see my back and forth with stan about the gilman 1pt pass behind when he attacked a hi-c on his way behind). then they put out a half-a..ed rules video before taking it down. do they have guys who truly know how the situations should be scored calling these matches? i would be interested to hear from the coaches and athletes that have competed in fila cadets and fila juniors. what kind of rules briefing did they get, and were the matches called according to the briefing they got?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with most of you but the bottom line is this. Fans are the #1 asset to all professional, business-minded sports. We (FILA) don't care about fans. Until rules are simplified so the casual fan can be engaged, we are going in circles.

 

These new rules aren't any better than what we started with. It's just the last iteration (see my post above) was so f'ing off-base and radical, that these by comparison seem great. All FILA has done is given us 90% of what the original, pre-2005, rules entailed. And we're praising them for it. Go figure.

 

And to the article above, for all those who tire of Stan's rants that talk down to fans as if we just started watching wrestling, shows that he had no clue then, just like he doesn't have one now. The phrase used has been "out of touch", and that's being nice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Following the IOC's decision and the subsequent removal of FILA's President in February, an opportunity to broaden the changes to reflect the removal of constraints placed by FILA's previous leader was opened.

 

What specifically were the constraints that came from the previous leader?

 

 

 

"The rules makers seized the opportunity to re-solicit the ideas of the worldwide wrestling community. As these new rules are put to practice adjustments are being made. Hopefully following Budapest the final touches can be put in place for the remainder of the quadrennial."

 

Seems like purposeful experimenting, which, under the circumstances, should be very useful. BTW, which factions pushed for the 7 point TF? And their rationale?

 

 

 

 

"But the 1st "Athletes Questionnaire" was 1st posted on FILA's website roughly a yr ago."

 

Media and fans....?

 

 

 

"Major sports are not facing a looming decision regarding its future in a matter of weeks.......understand the personal @ FILA's hdqtrs priority of ensuring the wrestlers whose native language is Farsi, Azeri, Turkish, Georgian, Japanese, Bulgarian or Russian understand the adjustments before the wrestling fans. Don't you think if the National Federations felt it necessary to inform the fan base, they'd have better access?"

 

The current crisis certainly tests (or exposes) the capabilities of the leadership corps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've got a couple of points to make regarding the rules, and I think they are probably no unique.

 

The takedown vs. pass-behind thing I'm ambivalent on, as far as are they the same or different. If the majority of the world differentiates these two ways to "take control of your opponent", so be it. My issue is, if an official couldn't parse the difference, it didn't affect the match. Now they are expected to differentiate between something they never have before and there are and will be more consequences.

 

I think this creates many situations reasonable officials will disagree on the outcome - even after slow-mo review. There will be "no right answer" types of scoring calls. I understand we can't eliminate all of these, but to synthetically introduce them is foolish. For the greater good and a little simplification of the rules systems (and less burden on officials), let's go with a 2-point "pass behind".

 

My next issue is with instant replay. I may be an old curmudgeon, but I think wrestlers should wrestle, coaches should coach, and officials should officiate. FILA wants the coaches and wrestlers to help officiate the match now. I know ever other sport is also changing the paradigm between athletes, coaches, and officials, but I don't have to like it. I'm all for holding officials accountable, but I think a better option would be an independent officials review committee that is elected and has term limits. There would be blown calls in matches without recourse, but that is the case now even with review. Replay gives us the false sense of hope that all wrongs can be righted.

 

I say, get ride of replay and use the extra time to do a full repechage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The takedown vs. pass-behind thing I'm ambivalent on, as far as are they the same or different. If the majority of the world differentiates these two ways to "take control of your opponent", so be it. My issue is, if an official couldn't parse the difference, it didn't affect the match. Now they are expected to differentiate between something they never have before and there are and will be more consequences.

 

I think this creates many situations reasonable officials will disagree on the outcome - even after slow-mo review. There will be "no right answer" types of scoring calls. I understand we can't eliminate all of these, but to synthetically introduce them is foolish. For the greater good and a little simplification of the rules systems (and less burden on officials), let's go with a 2-point "pass behind".

Very well said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The takedown vs. pass-behind thing I'm ambivalent on, as far as are they the same or different. If the majority of the world differentiates these two ways to "take control of your opponent", so be it. My issue is, if an official couldn't parse the difference, it didn't affect the match. Now they are expected to differentiate between something they never have before and there are and will be more consequences.

 

I think this creates many situations reasonable officials will disagree on the outcome - even after slow-mo review. There will be "no right answer" types of scoring calls. I understand we can't eliminate all of these, but to synthetically introduce them is foolish. For the greater good and a little simplification of the rules systems (and less burden on officials), let's go with a 2-point "pass behind".

Very well said.

 

You mean in summary simpler, more objective, easily understandable rules are better? Novel idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The takedown vs. pass-behind thing I'm ambivalent on, as far as are they the same or different. If the majority of the world differentiates these two ways to "take control of your opponent", so be it.

 

The only reason the majority of the world differentiates between these two ways is because FILA makes the distinction, and the majority of the world follows FILA's rules. If common sense and simplicity were applied to the rules, there'd be no distinction.

 

FILA claims they're simplifying things, but from my perspective, it's all smoke and mirrors. For every "simplification" added (combining periods, no more ball grab), they added more complexity (throws end matches but only if you're winning, 2 pt takedowns except if it's a pass behind, etc.).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's something to consider:

 

Some of the best countries in the world are trained to come out and score a lot of points right away in the first period and then protect their lead, only giving up points when they are threatened (usually late in the match). They would build their lead and defend but give up seemingly no fight when their opponent got to their legs. Or they would just dive in on shots and hold on to the leg to kill the clock and/or let the guy "pass behind."

 

In important matches, Soviets (& Soviet blocs) and Iranians would try and come out and score 5-6 points right away (Iranians maybe 3-4) and would have no problem winning by a point (8-7, 5-4, 4-3, etc.)

 

With the distinction between what is a "takedown" and a"pass behind" and assessing a different scoring values to each, I believe it actually favors those countries who like to come out and build an early lead.

 

What I mean is, if a wrestler comes out and builds a 4 or 5 point lead all they now need to do if they feel threatened is just take bad shots and hope to hold on to a leg to kill the clock or simply let the guy "pass behind" to only give up 1 point instead of blocking a guy and warding off a 2 point takedown.

 

I personally have no problem with this as it shows technical superiority for the most part, but during the 80s many people started to complain about guys scoring and protecting leads as they felt a wrestler only worked for the first half the match and stalled the second half and matches became dull to watch. This was a big reason why they changed the format to a one-5 minute period following the 1988 Olympic Games (which later actually proved to promote less scoring and resulted in some of the most boring matches of that era -- especially when they implemented the "3 point must rule" following Barcelona '92).

 

I believe with this rule change you will see even more of the score and protect mentality due to the 1 point "pass behind." Eventually matches will once again become boring and sloppy.

 

Say what you want, but FILA knows what they are doing. And I don't mean that in a good way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If anybody has access to old FILA rulebooks, I'd be interested in taking a look.

 

FILA has an old rulebook posted in their library.

 

http://www.fila-official.com/images/FIL ... 2/FA02.pdf

 

I can't tell what year it is, but Milan Ercegan was president, so it was sometime from 1972 - 2002. Judging by the sneakers in the photos (one guy's wearing Ultraflex's), I think it's from the 80s. At the time, there were 12-point tech falls.

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...