Jump to content
nom

Flagrant Misconduct

Recommended Posts

Then should have Waters been ejected for flagrant misconduct for deliberately running into the Iowa wrestler after the match? Running into someone is striking them after all.

 

5.6 Flagrant Misconduct 5.6.1 Prematch, Match or Postmatch Period. During the prematch, match or postmatch period, flagrant misconduct committed by either wrestler, such as intentionally striking an opponent

 

when did the Hawkeyes become such pussies?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lots of discussion and debate about DQ not.  I still haven't heard an explanation for why Gillman got a point in that slam series.

 

Anyone know why the point was awarded according the refs?  Made no sense to me that it was 1 and 1.  The announcers explanation didn't help either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lots of discussion and debate about DQ not.  I still haven't heard an explanation for why Gillman got a point in that slam series.

 

Anyone know why the point was awarded according the refs?  Made no sense to me that it was 1 and 1.  The announcers explanation didn't help either.

 

One theory, which I didn't see happen (read it on Flo's summary), is that Waters taunted the crowd. I saw that happen after the match, but not during the match.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the NWCA write-up (and for obvious reasons they wouldn't come anywhere near to criticizing a call)

 

He immediately reversed Gilman for a 4-1 lead heading into the second half of the tiebreaker period. Gilman and Waters then got into a bit of a tussle, with penalty points exchanged on both sides.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Still trying to figure out the scoring sequence. The announcers and Shane Sparks couldn't explain it in any fashion that made sense.

Happily. Waters was called for an illegal slam right before that that whole issue took place, and the penalty point was given to Gilman. Then, Waters stood up, turned, and started walking back to the center, and that was when Gilman took his shot from behind. Tim Shiels gave an unsportsmanlike conduct penalty (different from a flagrant misconduct), which was the point given to Waters.

 

And TFBJR, Gary Barta sat about three rows in front of me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Happily. Waters was called for an illegal slam right before that that whole issue took place, and the penalty point was given to Gilman. Then, Waters stood up, turned, and started walking back to the center, and that was when Gilman took his shot from behind. Tim Shiels gave an unsportsmanlike conduct penalty (different from a flagrant misconduct), which was the point given to Waters.

 

And TFBJR, Gary Barta sat about three rows in front of me.

 

How was Waters called for the slam?   Waters was off his feet on the back of Gillman.  Gillman initiated the move and the slam! He also did it with the intent of injuring Waters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lots of discussion and debate about DQ not.  I still haven't heard an explanation for why Gillman got a point in that slam series.

 

Anyone know why the point was awarded according the refs?  Made no sense to me that it was 1 and 1.  The announcers explanation didn't help either.

One match penalty point against Iowa for a slam (illegal hold or unecessary roughness)

 

One match penalty point against Mizzo for unsportsmanlike conduct (likely the elbow to the head) after the slam occured.

Edited by Rakkasan91

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Come on guys... Gilman should not lose his postseason because of a heated exchange on both sides like that.

 

its wrestling, let's not pretend it's without risks.

 

He didn't do anything flagrant after the whistle or take a swing at him, knee him in the face, or intentionally slam Waters on his neck.

 

The referee response looked appropriate (except for the point taken away from Waters... I didn't see him do anything that deserved that).

Edited by HuskyHero133

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Happily. Waters was called for an illegal slam right before that that whole issue took place, and the penalty point was given to Gilman. Then, Waters stood up, turned, and started walking back to the center, and that was when Gilman took his shot from behind. Tim Shiels gave an unsportsmanlike conduct penalty (different from a flagrant misconduct), which was the point given to Waters.

 

And TFBJR, Gary Barta sat about three rows in front of me.

So, basically, Gillman was given a gift and then blew it away with his stupidity.

Edited by lu_alum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One match penalty point against Iowa for a slam (illegal hold or unecessary roughness)

 

One match penalty point against Mizzo for unsportsmanlike conduct (likely the elbow to the head) after the slam occured.

 

Thanks.   I'll go back and look at that as I recorded it on DVR.  Didn't see that or hear anything about it but it would certainly explain the scoring.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Happily. Waters was called for an illegal slam right before that that whole issue took place, and the penalty point was given to Gilman. Then, Waters stood up, turned, and started walking back to the center, and that was when Gilman took his shot from behind. Tim Shiels gave an unsportsmanlike conduct penalty (different from a flagrant misconduct), which was the point given to Waters.

 

And TFBJR, Gary Barta sat about three rows in front of me.

Not sure we were watching the same match. Gilman slammed Waters and then Waters took a swing at the back of his head.

 

Cg88NJC.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Until the most recent rulebook came out, an injury that resulted from an illegal hold and the injuree(?) not being able to continue after the 2 minute recovery time was a default. The most recent book (coming in before last season) rewrote to be a dq.

When people scanning brackets see DQs in these situations, it was generally from a misunderstanding of the scorers at the events. For years I had to correct these as almost everyone including referees and rules committee members or state rules interpreters just assumed they were dqs. They were defaults.

In the current HS and the older college rules, the officials had the discretion to call flagrants under the right scenarios. I normally had to go to the officials to ask if that's what they meant. I don't think I ever had one say, oh yes it's flagrant.

This means the 2012 slam referenced was likely not a dq but would have been under current rules. However, that doesn't mean it would be a flagrant. It would be a dq at same level as being stalled out.

Gimp:

 

They did change the wording this rules cycle but it basically means the same thing as previously written.  While it is now a DQ, a wrestler penalized for something like that in the penalty sequence would only DQ that wrestler for that particular match.  They would still be eligible to compete in subsequent matches like another dual meet on the same day or dropping into the consolations.

 

If a wrestler is DQ'd for flagrant misconduct or two unsportsmanlike conducts (before or after the match) then they are disqualified from further competition in that event.  They would have to be removed from the premisis and any team points earned would be erased (tournament).

 

So if I committed four full nelsons, I would be DQ'd from that match on the fourth infraction.  I'm still eligible to compete for the remainder of the event.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Immediately after the illegal slam by Mr. Gilman and the resulting penalty...

Mr. Water's retaliated with a well placed elbow to the back of Mr. Gilman's noggin.

The result was 1 pt for Mr. Gilman  ... with no points for the late takedown attempt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why don't all you guys go back and watch your DVRs. Almost every whistle the whole match the ref had to put hands on Waters to stop his extracurrculars after the whistle. He got plenty of cheap shots in and I think Gilman had enough. That is not an excuse for the slam in any way, but any of you who have been on a mat have probably lost your cool when people cheapshotted you or you got frustrated with the match. Maybe not to that extent, but you've done it. The late leg tackle was in retaliation for the elbow that caused the point and that all of you ignored.

Edited by TNTwrestle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How do we know he did it with the intention to injure?  I am not a fan of Iowa so I am not just defending the home team.  Perhaps he was put in a desperate position and tried a desperate move.  He is a real physical guy and isn't just going to concede because his opponent is in a  better position that is hard to escape from.  Sometimes the line is crossed with that type of physical style.  it was and he got penalized.  

 

So what is the problem?  

 

We are still watching wrestling right?  He didn't throw a punch.  He didn't throw a guy into the stands.  He didn't purposely work a joint out of position.  He didn't bite.  he didn't purposely rake or poke the eyes.  Btw I have seen all of these dirty things happen in wrestling matches over the years.  

 

Gilman got carried away and brought his opponent to the mat with force.  I have seen a lot worse slams watching wrestling.  Heck I have seen legal mat returns with more force.  Some of the posters are acting like he threw a 360 degree wheel kick and decapitated his opponent while showing his genitals to the camera.  He got physical and was penalized.  Business as usual.  

 

He is kind of a punk.  He acted like a punk and he lost and was penalized to boot.  I really don't see what there is to be outraged about.  

 

As for Iowa and the coaches being overly emotional, I think a little personality adds to the sport.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gimp:

 

They did change the wording this rules cycle but it basically means the same thing as previously written.  While it is now a DQ, a wrestler penalized for something like that in the penalty sequence would only DQ that wrestler for that particular match.  They would still be eligible to compete in subsequent matches like another dual meet on the same day or dropping into the consolations.

 

If a wrestler is DQ'd for flagrant misconduct or two unsportsmanlike conducts (before or after the match) then they are disqualified from further competition in that event.  They would have to be removed from the premisis and any team points earned would be erased (tournament).

 

So if I committed four full nelsons, I would be DQ'd from that match on the fourth infraction.  I'm still eligible to compete for the remainder of the event.

 

 I was commenting to explain to whatever poster it was that they seemed to always see dqs in this situation. They always or often saw it because it was incorrectly classified as a dq in the past. Also, that not all DQs are flagrant. This would not be classified as flagrant under the new wording. The only thing that changes with this new wording is what it should be shown as in the results. Same team score, same ability to continue for both wrestlers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Immediately after the illegal slam by Mr. Gilman and the resulting penalty...

Mr. Water's retaliated with a well placed elbow to the back of Mr. Gilman's noggin.

The result was 1 pt for Mr. Gilman  ... with no points for the late takedown attempt.

I watched the replay in slo-mo. It didn't look like an elbow to the back of Gilman's head by Waters. Waters took his left hand and cupped the right side of Gilman's head/chin and pushed it to the left. Gilman reacted by going at Water's legs as he was stepping away. This was all, of course, post-whistle. I'd guess that the Asst. Ref made the call to ding Waters a point since he was in position to see it and then had to break up the resulting action.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it hilarious anyone is trying to defend Gilman.

 

Per the rulebook intentionally trying to injure your opponent like that is flagrant misconduct and includes being held out of the next competition.

 

Is there any chance the NCAA or Big10 will hold Gilman to the standard even though the ref in this match was unwilling to?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Happily. Waters was called for an illegal slam right before that that whole issue took place, and the penalty point was given to Gilman. Then, Waters stood up, turned, and started walking back to the center, and that was when Gilman took his shot from behind. Tim Shiels gave an unsportsmanlike conduct penalty (different from a flagrant misconduct), which was the point given to Waters.

 

And TFBJR, Gary Barta sat about three rows in front of me.

That's what Sparks said on camera. And of course he was wrong.

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...