Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Cooch1

Dive termination

Recommended Posts

I find it exciting also, provided the wrestler tries to move through the position to score.  My biggest problem with it is that we penalize a wrestler every other time he is prolonged back exposure, but this position we allow them stick in this jui-jitsu ankle-lock for a stalemate?  Between this stalemate tactic and related one of diving backwards against your own knee joint to force a potentially dangerous we probably lose 25% of scoring on singles and who knows how much in hesitation to get into a drawn out scramble for a stalemate, as armspin mentioned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This proposal is only a thought experiment and should be tested to see how wrestlers react.

 

Based on experience (reality) wrestlers don't intentionally shoot themselves in the foot. As a last resort, which is what this situation is, wrestlers will dive rather than give up a td. I don't think anyone initially uses this as an offensive maneuver. No one presents their leg for an opponent to snatch a single leg in order to set up the dive. It's a secondary defensive reaction... with back exposure. If the diver can get a td, then it's icing on the cake; but if not (which is most often the case) it's a great way to burn up the clock. The diver is in a win-win situation, but lose-lose for fans/sport and for the aggressor who wants to keep the action going and has his opponent toward his back.

 

We've expanded the out of bounds rule to develop more scoring and pins to reward the aggressor. We've increased bonus for the aggressor. We have the flash TD to reward the aggressor. The dive rewards defensiveness, encourages delay and may even discourage leg shots. After 20 years (according to OBJoeB) no defense has surfaced; however, Ben Askren has a solution involving stiffening and straightening the tangled leg that hasn't caught on for some strange reason. Maybe only a funk master can do it.

 

The few naysayers can only point Jesse Delgado as their hero-in-support. Meanwhile the rest of the NCAA can just grin and bear it as the sport slowly dies by a thousand cuts...budget cuts, Title 9, complex rules, inactivity and double standard scoring.

 

I can only reemphasize the dive situation: It is unique in that the aggressor has his opponent thrashing around on his back and the official is prevented by the rules from calling a td because "control" has not been established by definition. Remember Jordan Oliver was denied a third NCAA title by definition: his head wasn't cleared after taking Steiber down to his butt. Now by redefinition that situation is a td. So what did 10% of Oliver's body being covered up have to do with the 100% of his opponent that was under control? And what does your having hold of my little ankle have to do with negating the fact that you've self inflictedly gone to your back while I hold you there after I initiated the situation to begin with?

 

Redefining td control in this situation will very likely stop all diving. Wrestlers will use a variety of single leg counters rather than risk a td and possible near fall. In short, they'll have to stop relying on a favorable loophole. They'll have to progress; they'll have to wrestle.

 

Please don't insult NCAA referees as being 'clueless'. You have no idea how fast they can learn to judge a situation that's well-defined.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys, the leg pass puts the defender in a VERY vulnerable position. If you cant catch and stick that diver on his back or side then thats YOUR fault.

 

See how many guys passed the leg on T Ramos? Very few. The best wrestler in the country almost got pinned trying a leg pass on him. Point: learn how to stuff it! Ramos would just lick his chops waiting for guys to pass the leg.

 

Get better at defending against it. If you cant then its ur own dam fault for getting caught up in it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate the leg pass/dive. It causes the offensive wrestler to be far more tentative after having his leg attacks end up stalemates... definitely not fan friendly.

 

Not sure if rule changes are needed though... I'd need to give it more thought.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Haha. 

 

Ankle pass has been around for a long time (it wasn't new back when I was in high school and that was 20+ years ago).  Learn to defend it.  Then there won't be so many complaints about it.

 

As for calling it a waste of time & frustrating for the spectators, I can think of a few worse things.  At least the guy doing the ankle pass is doing something, beats the heck out of the staring contests that make up 1/2 or more of some matches.  Sure beats the high spiral ride that is nowhere near getting anything resembling a turn and is just "wasting time" and is not spectator friendly (unless it is your guy racking up the riding time, I guess), at least the ankle passing guy is doing something that could score a takedown.

 

 

I do believe it can contribute to matches turning into one of those stare fests.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can appreciate a good leg pass (see Franklin Gomez in BT finals vs Reece Humphrey) but there definitely needs to be a call that goes both ways.  If Nate Tomasello hits a shot on Joey Dance, and Dance passes the leg and gets stuck on his back with Tomasello's knee in his chest, it needs to be a TD and a count.  

 

Love OBJoeB's mention of the Spiral to nowhere.  That's as much a stall as legs.  I have no problem with good riding but I have a huge problem with matches where top man is allowed to do nothing but hang on (see Mark Martin vs Lehigh) as opposed to working to turn.  If bottom's in danger, let the wrestling continue.  If not, let's either call stall or just put them back on feet.

 

By the way, nothing personal against the wrestlers I mentioned.  They are operating within the rules.  And I've rooted for plenty of guys who did too little.  I'd like to see more action period.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldnt be opposed to a 3 count once the back is exposed ie. the example above when Dance is on his back bridging with his head. No wrestler should be able to expose his back to the mat for more than a couple seconds when they have no control. In this situation a 3 count would make him either let go of the leg or work up and score...not just hang there waiting for the stalemate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand why using a leg pass makes guys more tentative to attack the legs. that is wrestling. you have to execute your moves against a guy trying to stop your move and perform his own.

 

seems like the masses in the wrestling community enjoy high school because more points are score. we aren't very good at appreciating technique if it doesn't score points.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ironically, this actually happened to Dance in the match against Conaway.  He tried an ankle pass in the 2nd period and got stuck on his back for a takedown and 2 count.  This combined with the fact that he forgot the score in the 3rd period lost him that match.  I don't think I've seen him attempt another one the rest of the year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Changing the rules that fundamentally define a TD just to address one specific move is a slippery slope. I'm against the original poster's idea.

 

However, I do think anyone who dives and does not work for a TD, opting to just hang out under the leg hoping for a stalemate, is stalling. This is no different than riding to burn the clock (instead of working for the fall) or backing up constantly to avoid contact to burn the clock.

 

If refs called stalling in these leg pass situations where the "diver" is only attempting to get a stalemate, there would be a lot less of the scrambles that don't end in a TD. Delgado, to use his leg pass in the NCAA finals last year as an example (I have nothing against him personally), would get one "free" leg pass (stalling caution) before he starts getting dinged for stalling points.

Edited by wrestlingnerd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys, if you're truly a fan of the sport of wrestling, then you embrace both the exciting and the boring parts of the sport.  By attempting to change the rules to eliminate certain defensive tactics, holds, and strategy, you are effectively trying to eliminate a part of wrestling itself.  This is fine, but you're really not a fan of the sport and its intricacies, you're just another jabroni with a short attention span.    

 

The original poster isn't a fan of wrestling; he's a fan of action.  He's the same type of person that watches NASCAR hoping for car wrecks, the type of person that watches basketball for the alley oops, and the kind of person that watches football for the hail marys.  You might as well just switch over to watching the UFC, where elite talent (Ben Askren) is ignored simply because his style of fighting doesn't sell tickets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You don't have to make it a td; a stalling call would be fine too. Any thing that discourages de facto stalling is fine with me. As I've said many times before, the problem with public acceptance isn't the dual or tourney format, it's the lack of action.

 

Two cats on a fence will always be two cats on a fence regardless of venue or structure. We're trying to pull in a larger audience with the cart-venue before the action of the horses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lack of action?  How about we only reward high amplitude body locks and suplays?  Why stop there?  Let's have scantily clad women walk around the mat between each period.  Wait, I know what's better, instead of a wrestling mat, let's have them compete in a ring with ropes and turnbuckles so they can jump on each other from the corners.  How about fancy costumes, masks, and ridiculous story line as well?  

 

If you want more action, go watch the WWE or the UFC like the rest of America.  Stop trying to change the sport with silly rules. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lack of action?  How about we only reward high amplitude body locks and suplays?  Why stop there?  Let's have scantily clad women walk around the mat between each period.  Wait, I know what's better, instead of a wrestling mat, let's have them compete in a ring with ropes and turnbuckles so they can jump on each other from the corners.  How about fancy costumes, masks, and ridiculous story line as well?  

 

If you want more action, go watch the WWE or the UFC like the rest of America.  Stop trying to change the sport with silly rules. 

Rule changes are part of the sport, if we didnt constantly adapt and change our sport would die off and it almost did a couple years ago. So what did we do to fix that? We changed some rules around.

 

And btw, this proposal would encourage more action in scramble situations. If you dont like the idea of growing our sport then YOU can go watch WWE where theyve been doing the same thing for 40 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lack of action?  How about we only reward high amplitude body locks and suplays?  Why stop there?  Let's have scantily clad women walk around the mat between each period.  Wait, I know what's better, instead of a wrestling mat, let's have them compete in a ring with ropes and turnbuckles so they can jump on each other from the corners.  How about fancy costumes, masks, and ridiculous story line as well?  

 

If you want more action, go watch the WWE or the UFC like the rest of America.  Stop trying to change the sport with silly rules. 

 

I'd say yes to the scantily clad women idea. that's a good one.

 

Ring-Card-Girls-Star-Boxing1.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rule changes are part of the sport, if we didnt constantly adapt and change our sport would die off and it almost did a couple years ago. So what did we do to fix that? We changed some rules around.

 

And btw, this proposal would encourage more action in scramble situations. If you dont like the idea of growing our sport then YOU can go watch WWE where theyve been doing the same thing for 40 years.

 

Do you remember why the sport almost died off?  Because of the rule tampering that FILA did in the years prior attempting to "adapt and change" the sport.  You didn't change some rules around, you switched them back to resemble more closely how they originally were.  You were fixing what you broke.  

  

This proposal doesn't encourage more action.  It rewards wrestlers who can't figure out how to stop a counter.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lack of action?  How about we only reward high amplitude body locks and suplays? 

 

 

We could start by allowing and rewarding them, but that is another thread entirely.  While I agree that you can't force wrestlers to be exciting with rule changes, and that trying that is a bad road to follow, this is more about keeping all situations in line with the 'goals and objectives' of the sport (i.e. staying off your back)

 

How can you explain to someone why a wrestler is allowed to hang out on their back, even when they are being held there with their opponents leg on top of them, without being penalized? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We could start by allowing and rewarding them, but that is another thread entirely.  While I agree that you can't force wrestlers to be exciting with rule changes, and that trying that is a bad road to follow, this is more about keeping all situations in line with the 'goals and objectives' of the sport (i.e. staying off your back)

 

How can you explain to someone why a wrestler is allowed to hang out on their back, even when they are being held there with their opponents leg on top of them, without being penalized? 

 

Wrestlers aren't hanging out on their back.  The situation you are referring to is being called correctly and always has been.  See Herbert Askren NCAA finals.

 

Here, I'll do the leg work for you: 

 

That sequence of events can only be interpreted as action.  

 

Let's create anti-granby rules as well, as the situation isn't in line with the "goals and objectives." 

 

In folkstyle wrestling, if you aren't being held on your back for 2 or more seconds, your opponent doesn't deserve anything.  Not a stalling call, not a takedown, not nearfall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please don't insult NCAA referees as being 'clueless'. You have no idea how fast they can learn to judge a situation that's well-defined.

 

They sure as heck aren't able to judge STALLING!

I just asked you in a different post, but what is STALLING to you?

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...