Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
pennsyrules

PSU vs Minnesota Big 10 today at 2

Recommended Posts

Nope. Beitz did not have a stalling warning. He called a "T" for fleeing.

 

If this is true then you're correct.

 

He's not right. I just rewatched it.

 

I suggest you watch it again, and take notice of two things:

 

1). Beitz did not have a stall call to that point in the match

2). Ref clearly makes a "T" call with his hands and rewards a fleeing point to Dardanes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dude I just re watched it. You obviously didn't. The stall wasn't obvious because the ref wasn't on the video when he called it, but the BTN announcers said it. On the relevant call, the ref originally said technical, then after they challenged it, the ref said stall, one point. This is what happened, not my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dude I just re watched it. You obviously didn't. The stall wasn't obvious because the ref wasn't on the video when he called it, but the BTN announcers said it. Then after they challenged it, the ref said stall, one point. This is what happened, not my opinion.

 

Again, Beitz did NOT have a stall warning up to that point. Ref clearly makes a "T" and awards the point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dude I just re watched it. You obviously didn't. The stall wasn't obvious because the ref wasn't on the video when he called it, but the BTN announcers said it. Then after they challenged it, the ref said stall, one point. This is what happened, not my opinion.

 

Again, Beitz did NOT have a stall warning up to that point. Ref clearly makes a "T" and awards the point.

 

Alright man, not going to argue about facts on here. And I was never arguing about what the ref initially signaled. Watch what he signaled after the review.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dude I just re watched it. You obviously didn't. The stall wasn't obvious because the ref wasn't on the video when he called it, but the BTN announcers said it. Then after they challenged it, the ref said stall, one point. This is what happened, not my opinion.

 

Again, Beitz did NOT have a stall warning up to that point. Ref clearly makes a "T" and awards the point.

I checked the official scorebook at the half...it was definitely a technical violation, and there was no stall warning at that point...written in ink, by the official scorer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That would only be valid IF Beitz had an earlier stall warning. Based on what you are saying (I believe you), he initially called a tech and awarded a point. After review, based on what you are saying, he said it was a stall. If it was a stall, it should have been a warning and not a point. I will rewatch to clarify after the 285. If I'm wrong, I will apologize.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dude I just re watched it. You obviously didn't. The stall wasn't obvious because the ref wasn't on the video when he called it, but the BTN announcers said it. Then after they challenged it, the ref said stall, one point. This is what happened, not my opinion.

 

Again, Beitz did NOT have a stall warning up to that point. Ref clearly makes a "T" and awards the point.

I checked the official scorebook at the half...it was definitely a technical violation, and there was no stall warning at that point...written in ink, by the official scorer.

 

Thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dude I just re watched it. You obviously didn't. The stall wasn't obvious because the ref wasn't on the video when he called it, but the BTN announcers said it. Then after they challenged it, the ref said stall, one point. This is what happened, not my opinion.

 

Again, Beitz did NOT have a stall warning up to that point. Ref clearly makes a "T" and awards the point.

I checked the official scorebook at the half...it was definitely a technical violation, and there was no stall warning at that point...written in ink, by the official scorer.

 

OK I have to admit I was going on the initial stall call by memory, but I'm 100% sure that after the review the ref said stall and signaled stall and awarded the point. I'll rewatch to see if I remembered the stall correctly (but obviously you seeing the scorebook is better evidence than what the announcers say).

 

MVA, I agree, if there was no stall something screwy is happening, but ref clearly signaled stall after the review.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cornell - thanks. I thought there was a bad injustice here but I trust you are right. Particularly since there was a review and the Penn State coaches let it be.

 

It was fleeing. He turned and went perpendicular oob. If in center he would have gone straighter IMHO.

 

What a dual! Amazing victories by lower ranked guys.

 

Morgan M. simply looked much better than Shiller. Storley seems to have much better hip awareness than Brown. Surprised me by winning the scrambles like that.

 

Bietz (sp?) is the real deal. Gotta be stressful for the coaches in making the call for this weight at Penn State.

 

Surprised Taylor didn't do a TD and let up clinic earlier on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Match Summary MINN PEST

125 Nicholas Megaludis (Penn State) won by major decision over Jordan Kingsley (Minnesota) 19-5. 0 4.00

133 David Thorn (Minnesota) won by decision over James Gulibon (Penn State) 2-0. 3.00 0

141 Zain Retherford (Penn State) won by decision over Christopher Dardanes (Minnesota) 4-0. 0 3.00

149 Nick Dardanes (Minnesota) won in sudden victory 2 over Zachary Beitz (Penn State) 6-4. 3.00 0

157 Dylan Ness (Minnesota) won by pin over Dylan Alton (Penn State) 5:23. 6.00 0

165 David Taylor (Penn State) won by major decision over Daniel Zilverberg (Minnesota) 13-3. 0 4.00

174 Logan Storley (Minnesota) won by decision over Mathew Brown (Penn State) 8-3. 3.00 0

184 Edward Ruth (Penn State) won by decision over Kevin Steinhaus (Minnesota) 7-1. 0 3.00

197 Morgan McIntosh (Penn State) won by decision over Scott Schiller (Minnesota) 8-4. 0 3.00

285 Anthony Nelson (Minnesota) won by decision over Jonathan Gingrich (Penn State) 6-0. 3.00 0

Dual Meet Score 18.0 17.0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just re-watched. Beitz did NOT have a warning. Ref made a 'T' and announced "Technical violation, fleeing the mat, one point red."

 

After review he says "No change....stall" and gives the stalling fist signal.

 

If fleeing is indeed no longer in the rulebook, as it appears it isn't, a point shouldn't have been awarded.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just re-watched. Beitz did NOT have a warning. Ref made a 'T' and announced "Technical violation, fleeing the mat, one point red."

 

After review he says "No change....stall" and gives the stalling fist signal.

 

If fleeing is indeed no longer in the rulebook, as it appears it isn't, a point shouldn't have been awarded.

 

If true, how the hell could this have happened? How can the two refs and the scoring table all get this wrong? Pretty messed up. Impacts the match and the dual. What about the psu coaches?

 

I'm hoping there is a better explanation. Travesty otherwise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Second half:

 

Taylor started a little slow (I'm waiting for some insider to say he was sick or something) and then Minnesota stalled on the bottom to keep the score as low as he could. Good strategy. Taylor needed to get after it more to make it clear that the Minnesota guy was doing nothing. It is almost like a little downside of his terrific ability to just hang and float on top until he feels the opening.

 

Browne was a little unlucky, but he got outwrestled, give Minnesota credit here. Good match.

 

Ruth in a tough spot having to get bonus vs a good opponent; thought he'd nail that cradle but it didn't happen. PSU is going to find out today what happens when you benefit all season from guaranteed falls and techs from Taylor and Ruth. Somebody else needs to step up.

 

Great match by Mac -- that was stepping up against the #1 guy in the country. Ruth needed more of that attitude.

 

2 point lead not enough to take into the h'weight match. Went about as you'd expect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That would only be valid IF Beitz had an earlier stall warning. Based on what you are saying (I believe you), he initially called a tech and awarded a point. After review, based on what you are saying, he said it was a stall. If it was a stall, it should have been a warning and not a point. I will rewatch to clarify after the 285. If I'm wrong, I will apologize.

I rewatched and didn't hear the announcers say stall - that must have been another match. Pretty clear what the refs said after review (stall --> point), but obviously a point should not have been awarded without a previous stalling call. Sorry for assuming I was right that a stall was previously called. That was a gift.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just re-watched. Beitz did NOT have a warning. Ref made a 'T' and announced "Technical violation, fleeing the mat, one point red."

 

After review he says "No change....stall" and gives the stalling fist signal.

 

If fleeing is indeed no longer in the rulebook, as it appears it isn't, a point shouldn't have been awarded.

 

If true, how the hell could this have happened? How can the two refs and the scoring table all get this wrong? Pretty messed up. Impacts the match and the dual. What about the psu coaches?

 

I'm hoping there is a better explanation. Travesty otherwise.

 

nom - I'm with you, I don't see how the final call can be wrong with time for a review and all those guys with something at stake to make sure it is correct.

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...