Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
2td3nf

NCAA refs, please enforce stalling rule

Recommended Posts

Just watched the HWT match between Lehigh and VIrginia live on Flo. The ref must of let these guys walk straight off the mat at least 15 times, without even one warning or stall call. Just incredible. No wonder we don't have the fan base that this great sport should have.

 

This is not a troll post, I'm absolutely serious on this issue. Here's the rules that so many NCAA refs are not calling:

 

 

5.9 Stalling

5.9.1. Action is to be maintained by all contestants STAYING NEAR THE CENTER OF THE MAT and wrestling aggressively in all positions. Stalling is defined as one or both wrestlers attempting to avoid wrestling action as an offensive or defensive strategy.

 

5.9.2. Neutral position stalling. Each wrestler MUST ATTEMPT TO WORK TOWARD THE CENTER OF THE MAT and continue wrestling in an attempt to secure a takedown, regardless of the time or score of the match. Stalling in the neutral position is defined as follows:

 

5.9.2.1 Continually backing away from the opponent without creating offensive action.

 

5.9.2.2 NEAR THE EDGE OF THE WRESTLING AREA, A WRESTLER SHALL NOT LEAVE THE WRESTLING AREA unless it is a sprawl from an opponent's takedown attempt or when interlocked in wrestling.

 

So what's the problem? I think a big reason is that a lot of these refs worked long and hard to get NCAA matches (lot of politics too), and they just don't want to upset coaches and lose future gigs. Tell me I'm wrong.

 

And I respectfully challenge any NCAA ref on the proper enforcement of the above rules. (C'mon guys, you can make the sport so much more exciting by enforcing these rules. The college wrestlers and coaches aren't stupid, they'll adapt right away if you make these "simple" calls.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The premise that calling more stalling will make this sport more "exciting" is a fallacy that's constantly repeated on this forum.

 

It will only serve to water the sport down as wrestlers will take sloppy/fake shot attempts to avoid said stalling calls.

 

No match is made more exciting or generated more fan interest after the referee influenced artificial action by the threat of stall calls.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Then implement the pushout/stepout rule.

 

The wrestlers should be penalized when they step off the wrestling area. Each and every time. The NCAA refs aren't even coming close to the spirit of these rules.

 

Or how about we let them wrestle and call stalling only for the most blatant occurrences of actual stalling, and not because the fans are bored and are booing or because the ref wants to throw his authority around/placate the booing fans so he calls stalling to make somebody do something, anything, no matter how sloppy.

 

Anything less than 100% offense is not stalling. Especially at HWTs. You can't expect those guys to constantly be taking shots with all that mass (cue legions of naysayers who will vehemently disagree and scream HWTs should be reffed exactly the same as lightweights...good luck with that).

 

You know what happens almost every time a ref tries to create action by the threat of stalling? One guy takes a bad shot he would otherwise not take and his opponent spins around for a takedown. How exciting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, that Lehigh Virginia HWT match was the deciding match of the dual.

 

And pretty much the whole match was "lot of nothing wrestling" to the edge, out of bounds, start all over. And again, and again, and again. Is this really what we want?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if the goal is to force action without involving the ref, nothing makes more sense to me than initiating a pushout or stepout rule. it works in all the other scoring systems. i guess its not "perfect" but its better than all the non scoring stoppage and fleeing the mat that we all agree is bad wrestling.

 

or you could wrestle in a cage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think it works in international wrestling and I think it would ruin folkstyle. When you see people winning 2-1 or 1-0 and all points were push outs, how is that good wrestling? It's not.

 

Yes too many flee the mat now or work the edge and then run out but fleeing the mat should be called more often.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

5.9.2.2 NEAR THE EDGE OF THE WRESTLING AREA, A WRESTLER SHALL NOT LEAVE THE WRESTLING AREA unless it is a sprawl from an opponent's takedown attempt or when interlocked in wrestling.

 

What does the bolded section mean? I get the part about "sprawiling from an opponent's takedown attempt," but not the "when interlocked in wrestling" part.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The bolded section means that way too many NCAA refs are letting wrestlers just walk off the mat at will, get a little break, and start fresh. Not even a thought about a penalty.

 

It happens all the time - I just got fed up with it while watching the Lehigh-Virginia HWT match. Nothing against the wrestlers, just upsetting and very boring the way those situations are officiated.

 

And I don't mean to pick on that ref, many of the NCAA refs officiate this situation the same way. IMO, they're hurting the sport by not keeping the wrestlers inbounds and making them wrestle as much as possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't think it works in international wrestling and I think it would ruin folkstyle. When you see people winning 2-1 or 1-0 and all points were push outs, how is that good wrestling? It's not.

 

Yes too many flee the mat now or work the edge and then run out but fleeing the mat should be called more often.

 

you hardly ever see matches like that, but even if you did, removing the step out rule isnt going to make them any better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't mind to see some form of pushout called, but not like on the international level. For instance, If a kid has a single leg and backs someone out of bounds I would be ok with that being called a pushout. I don't think a pushout should be awarded if a wrestler backs up to the edge of the circle and circles in and then pushes the other person out of bounds. I think the idea is to reward the offensive guy not the kid who is wrestling on the edge of the mat.

 

Another thing to consider is the passivity rule that has been implemented at the international level. Get rid of stalling in neutral and if a kid is called for passivity then he must score a takedown in the next 30 seconds or he gives up a point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

5.9.2.2 NEAR THE EDGE OF THE WRESTLING AREA, A WRESTLER SHALL NOT LEAVE THE WRESTLING AREA unless it is a sprawl from an opponent's takedown attempt or when interlocked in wrestling.

 

What does the bolded section mean? I get the part about "sprawiling from an opponent's takedown attempt," but not the "when interlocked in wrestling" part.

 

I still don't understand what "interlocked in wrestling" means. That term seems to describe "wrestling" in general.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Instead of complaining about heavy weights all of the time, try understanding the difficulty of HWT. It just isn't the same when you are standing up to a guy that is 6'5" and cutting to make 285 and you weigh 240. You wrestle hard but one mistake and the match is over. You can not come from behind often at Hwt. So is baking away the stall, or is the guy pushing stalling. To me the guy who is pushing is making nothing happen and so is stalling. Ref has to decide.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Granby - interlocked in wrestling is another way to describe an honest scramble that takes the wrestlers out of bounds. Ok in NCAA.

 

Teach - I'm not picking on the heavyweights. I just happened to tune into Flo when that HWT match started. (BTW, that match disgusted me so much, I turned off Flo and went back to college football.)

 

Teach, I'm a big fan of the heavyweights. I've posted several times that I would love to see a 300+ unlimited weight class in international wrestling.

 

My beef is with the NCAA refs that don't penalize wrestlers who back straight off the wrestling area out of bounds. This is way too prevalent in ALL weight classes, not just the big guys.

 

The NCAA refs need a crash course on Rule 5.9.2.2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One more thing. When I say that HWT match disgusted me, I don't mean the wrestlers. I have nothing against the kids. Just the amount of times the ref let them go out of bounds and get their little breaks.

 

Probably most wrestlers would take advantage if stalling's not being called.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Granby - interlocked in wrestling is another way to describe an honest scramble that takes the wrestlers out of bounds. Ok in NCAA.

 

 

Thanks for the clarification of the interpretation. I don't like that language; it seems that "interlocked in wrestling" could mean any facet of wrestling, and that the term doesn't serve much purpose. I know what you mean by "an honest scramble that takes the wrestlers out of bounds," but the language of the rule doesn't differentiate that (IMO) from "attempting" a granby just to get out of bounds.

 

 

My beef is with the NCAA refs that don't penalize wrestlers who back straight off the wrestling area out of bounds. This is way too prevalent in ALL weight classes, not just the big guys.

 

The NCAA refs need a crash course on Rule 5.9.2.2.

 

Not trolling- PUSHOUT. If you go out of bounds on bottom, you restart on your feet with no escape point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My beef is with the NCAA refs that don't penalize wrestlers who back straight off the wrestling area out of bounds. This is way too prevalent in ALL weight classes, not just the big guys.

 

The NCAA refs need a crash course on Rule 5.9.2.2.

 

Not trolling- PUSHOUT. If you go out of bounds on bottom, you restart on your feet with no escape point.

 

after watching the howe perry match at the NWCA all star meet, i thought about how howe was at one point being rewarded for stalling on top. i may have the exact timing and points off but it was something like 20 seconds left in the match and howe was up by 1 point. he was on top and needed 15 seconds of more riding time to collect RT and already had one stall warning. so he stalls for 20 seconds, gives up one point, gets the RT and wins by one point. had he let up perry he would have given up the escape point and not gotten the RT, so then they go into overtime. assuming howe could have managed to not pick up 2 stalling calls in 20 seconds, the correct strategy for him in that instance is to collect the stall.

 

anyway, long winded way of saying i like the concept of that rule. i would also say if you are on top and get a stall call the guy on bottom should get the option of a neutral restart with no escape point. i would also go as far as to say anytime there is a stoppage of time on the mat, the bottom wrestlers get the option of neutral restart with no escape point, so stalemate, out of bounds or potentially dangerous (provided the bottom wrestler wasn't engaging in potentially dangerous move). i think you need to give the bottom guy the option since he may want to try for the points.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

5.9.2.2 NEAR THE EDGE OF THE WRESTLING AREA, A WRESTLER SHALL NOT LEAVE THE WRESTLING AREA unless it is a sprawl from an opponent's takedown attempt or when interlocked in wrestling.

 

What does the bolded section mean? I get the part about "sprawiling from an opponent's takedown attempt," but not the "when interlocked in wrestling" part.

 

I still don't understand what "interlocked in wrestling" means. That term seems to describe "wrestling" in general.

 

The wording in the rules is interlocked but it is more commonly interpreted as in contact or not in contact which may be a little clearer.

 

This was the interpretation from the last rules cycle when it went into effect.

 

http://www.nwcaonline.com/nwcaonline/vi ... rules.aspx

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...