Author Topic: heres another one  (Read 7344 times)

Offline royboy

  • LXP
  • I Need More Hobbies
  • *****
  • Posts: 4379
  • you gotta be tough if your gonna be stupid
    • View Profile
heres another one
« on: July 22, 2009, 07:46:56 PM »
a stalling inquiry...
When the bottom man makes it to his feet and the top man is locked from behind...
how long does it take you to ding the top man with stalling?
should the parrallel hip riding rule coming into play?
how many times does it take for you to call fleeing the mat if this is repeated and they go right out of bounds everytime?
"Really? Well please tell your father-in-law that he is a freaking idiot."

Offline AKIN

  • LXP
  • Get a Job
  • *
  • Posts: 16561
    • View Profile
Re: heres another one
« Reply #1 on: July 23, 2009, 05:46:17 PM »
When they come to their feet, if the offensive man is making an honest attempt to bring the Def man back to the mat, I will let it go.

Fleeing the mat should be called every time they actually flee, from the first time.
Imagine the good that could be done, if people were less worried about their differences, and more worried about doing good for everyone.

Offline royboy

  • LXP
  • I Need More Hobbies
  • *****
  • Posts: 4379
  • you gotta be tough if your gonna be stupid
    • View Profile
Re: heres another one
« Reply #2 on: July 25, 2009, 01:22:25 PM »
Quote from: "AKIN"
When they come to their feet, if the offensive man is making an honest attempt to bring the Def man back to the mat, I will let it go.

Fleeing the mat should be called every time they actually flee, from the first time.
so if it gets to a stalemate or potentially dangerous situation would the top man be called for stalling. First Time, Multiple Times.

an example would be the bottom man squaring his stance and blocking the knees off the top man so he can not turn the corner or return him.

another one would be top man dropping to an ankle and the bottom wrestler sitting on his shoulder and tying him up.

and one more the top Man throws in the legs while the bottom man is in a tripod. The bottom man stands up and stands up taking his hands off the mat and PT stops the action.


I see a couple different calls in these kind of situations. Do you see these situatuions coming up? What types of call would you make for each of these situations?

Thanks.
"Really? Well please tell your father-in-law that he is a freaking idiot."

Offline AKIN

  • LXP
  • Get a Job
  • *
  • Posts: 16561
    • View Profile
Re: heres another one
« Reply #3 on: July 27, 2009, 05:52:52 PM »
1. So if it gets to a stalemate or potentially dangerous situation would the top man be called for stalling. First Time, Multiple Times.

Is someone causing the stalemates to occur, or is it occuring from normal action from both wrestlers? If one wrestler is purposely causing stalemates to get fresh starts, then yes he is stalling.

2. An example would be the bottom man squaring his stance and blocking the knees off the top man so he can not turn the corner or return him

Would have to see this to get a read on the situation, but sounds like bottom man is not working to get away, so I would be inclined to call stalling on him.

3. Another one would be top man dropping to an ankle and the bottom wrestler sitting on his shoulder and tying him up.

Drop to the ankle and not try to improve, first time stalemate, after that stalling each time.

4. And one more the top Man throws in the legs while the bottom man is in a tripod. The bottom man stands up and stands up taking his hands off the mat and PT stops the action


Another one that you would have to be there to call. Either man could be called for stalling on this one. Is the top man throwing the leg in as the bottom man is standing up? Most likely going to get a stall call if he does it more than once.

These are all just my personal opinions, and you will see different officials making different calls, as these are very judgemental calls.
Imagine the good that could be done, if people were less worried about their differences, and more worried about doing good for everyone.

Offline royboy

  • LXP
  • I Need More Hobbies
  • *****
  • Posts: 4379
  • you gotta be tough if your gonna be stupid
    • View Profile
Re: heres another one
« Reply #4 on: July 28, 2009, 09:46:37 PM »
situation #2
I've talked with a bunch of refs and they normally call stalling on the top man. Their reason is that the bottom man must make it to his feet and if he does and the top man has control it is duty to return the bottom man to the mat. I almost got an unsportsmanlike conduct once b/c I argued the no call when the bottom man was standing for 45 seconds, not an exageration the match ended, and the ref got really heated. The head ref took my side and we got 20 seconds of bad time.
situation #3
Thats pretty standard. Our league refs really cracked down on it b/c for about two years that was the craze in the area to drop on the ankle and get a stalemate.
situation #4
as its been explained to me a few times the top man almost always is gets dinged. The bottom mans job is to get to his feet.
I have told a few kids to just stand up after they got a PT call like that and it worked to their advantage...
on a side note if the kid can stand up with your legs in he probably wouldn't get turned anyways so continually throwing them in is kinda stalling.

Thanks for your response. Hopefully you never hear me from my corning yelling "TOP MAN IS RIDING PARALELL!" lol
"Really? Well please tell your father-in-law that he is a freaking idiot."

Offline woolnojg

  • Novice
  • Posts: 26
    • View Profile
Re: heres another one
« Reply #5 on: July 29, 2009, 08:10:33 PM »
The Head official has absolutely ZERO authority to change a call.
If bottom forces a stand-up, top man has the responsibility to ATTEMPT to return him to the mat, not return him to the mat.
« Last Edit: July 30, 2009, 06:06:10 PM by woolnojg »

Offline matref0

  • Redshirt
  • **
  • Posts: 384
    • View Profile
Re: heres another one
« Reply #6 on: July 29, 2009, 08:45:00 PM »
Here are some interpretations using the NFHS case manual for some of the scenarios above:

Quote
7.6 SITUATION: While down on the mat, Wrestler A, who is in control, applies
a grapevine to Wrestler B’s leg and, at that time, B, stands, bearing all the weight
of A. The referee stops the match immediately because this is a potentially dangerous
situation and, accordingly, must be stopped. What is the call to be made
by the referee? RULING: The first time this situation occurs, it would be potentially
dangerous and the match is simply restarted at the center of the mat. If it
occurs a second time, the referee will call potentially dangerous and consider
stalling on Wrestler B. The third time it occurs, there is no question that it would
be considered stalling on Wrestler B.

Quote
7.6.1 SITUATION A: Wrestler B, the defensive wrestler, is able to stand and,
Wrestler A, throws in legs where all of A’s weight is supported by the defensive
wrestler. At this time the referee stops the match and categorizes this as potentially
dangerous. What happens if this occurs a second time? RULING: If it occurs
a second time, the referee will call potentially dangerous and consider stalling on
Wrestler A. The third time it occurs there is no question it would be considered
stalling on Wrestler A.

Quote
7.6.6 SITUATION: Should stalling be called in the following situations? (a) In
the neutral position, Wrestler A attempts a takedown and is stopped by Wrestler
B who applies a legal front headlock. Wrestler B does not use the headlock to
attempt to score a takedown but maintains the headlock. The referee stops the
match indicating a stalemate and restarts the wrestlers. (b) Wrestler A, in the top
position, puts in a leg and is aggressively attempting to turn Wrestler B to score
a near fall. Wrestler B, in the bottom position, grabs and holds Wrestler A’s wrist
and arm. Wrestler B continues to hold the wrist/arm of Wrestler A, but does not
use the situation to attempt to break Wrestler A’s hold or to secure an escape or
reversal. A stalemate is called when Wrestler A fails to turn Wrestler B and
Wrestler B fails to escape or gain a reversal. (c) In the neutral position Wrestler
A applies a legal front headlock and aggressively and legally uses the hold to
attempt to secure a takedown. Wrestler B grabs and holds Wrestler A’s elbow/arm
to prevent Wrestler A from using the headlock to secure a takedown. Wrestler B
simply holds on to the elbow/arm and does not use it to attempt to break the hold
or to secure a takedown. A stalemate is called and wrestling re-started. RULING:
In all three situations (a), (b) and (c), Wrestler B has created a stalemate situation
to avoid being scored upon. Repeating the same action to create a stalemate
situation without using it in an attempt to score would be stalling on Wrestler B.
When warranted, a warning or penalty for stalling may be issued at the same time
a stalemate is called. In all three situations Wrestler A has initiated action in an
attempt to score and been stopped in their effort by Wrestler B’s creation of a
stalemate situation; Wrestler A would not be called for stalling in any of these situations.
(5-25-6c)

Quote
Stalling Furthered Defined (New 5-25-6c; New 7-6-6c): This addition to the
definition of stalling calls attention to an often used stalling technique. Referees
now have rules support for a stalling call against a wrestler who repeatedly creates
a stalemate situation to simply prevent his/her opponent from scoring and
not from his/her own attempt to score. Wrestlers are discouraged from repeatedly
creating stalemate situations in an effort to burn time or avoid being scored
upon much like they are discouraged from playing the edge of the mat, avoiding
contact with an opponent or repeatedly grasping or interlocking around one leg
of the opponent to prevent scoring. SITUATION 20: See 7.6.6

Offline matref0

  • Redshirt
  • **
  • Posts: 384
    • View Profile
Re: heres another one
« Reply #7 on: July 29, 2009, 08:56:39 PM »
I officiated in one state for awhile and they had this state interp for some of the above:

Offensive wrestler has legs in on the mat
1st stop - Stalemate - awarded
2nd stop - Stalemate - warning
3rd stop - Stalemate - penalized

Offensive wrestler has legs in and bottom man stands
1st stop - Potentially dangerous (PD) - awarded
2nd stop -Potentially dangerous - warning
3rd stop - Potentially dangerous - penalized

Bottom man stands 1st & top man puts legs in
1st stop - PD - warning
2nd stop -PD - penalized

I would also announce "stalemate or PD caused by "Red or Green"  They then knew if they did it again a warning or penalty was coming next.  Seemed to work OK, some coaches didn't like it but it was consistent throughout the state.

Offline royboy

  • LXP
  • I Need More Hobbies
  • *****
  • Posts: 4379
  • you gotta be tough if your gonna be stupid
    • View Profile
Re: heres another one
« Reply #8 on: July 30, 2009, 06:54:57 AM »
lol. i wrote PT. hahaha.
"Really? Well please tell your father-in-law that he is a freaking idiot."

Offline woolnojg

  • Novice
  • Posts: 26
    • View Profile
Re: heres another one
« Reply #9 on: July 30, 2009, 06:17:50 PM »
Legs in down on the mat would be stalling.

Offline matref0

  • Redshirt
  • **
  • Posts: 384
    • View Profile
Re: heres another one
« Reply #10 on: July 30, 2009, 06:44:17 PM »
I figured the "PT" was a typo at least I was hoping so.  I'm an anal referee and retired Army guy.  I believe words mean something and in wrestling they are often confused or not used correctly.

Class in session (Wool, you can't participate).

What is the difference between an illegal move and a technical violation?  Both carry the same value using the penalty table.  

For example:
Locked Hands is a Technical Violation:

Infraction 1:  Penalty 1 Point
Infraction 2:  Penalty 1 Point
Infraction 3:  Penalty 2 Points
Infraction 4:  Penalty DQ

A Full Nelson is an Illegal Move/Hold

Infraction 1:  Penalty 1 Point
Infraction 2:  Penalty 1 Point
Infraction 3:  Penalty 2 Points
Infraction 4:  Penalty DQ

What is the difference between the two? (they are often misused)

Offline woolnojg

  • Novice
  • Posts: 26
    • View Profile
Re: heres another one
« Reply #11 on: July 31, 2009, 09:29:41 AM »
I know...,   I know...

Come on guys, someone surely can figure this one out.

Offline ER Coach

  • Most Pins
  • **
  • Posts: 335
    • View Profile
Re: heres another one
« Reply #12 on: July 31, 2009, 12:17:06 PM »
Tech violations are not necessarily illegal by application.  Illegal moves are.

That's the general "KISS" version I give my wrestlers.  The exception being when a defensive wrestler causes the move or hold to become illegal, it's then a PD (the first time) and a UC if repeated as a method to remove himself from whatever situation he may be in.
When you feel it's time to bury your guns.......It's time to dig them up.

Offline woolnojg

  • Novice
  • Posts: 26
    • View Profile
Re: heres another one
« Reply #13 on: July 31, 2009, 02:33:32 PM »
Not close enough.
Tech vioations and Illegal holds will be penalized and are cumulative on the penalty chart.
 1st TV or Illegal Hold - 1 pt; 2nd TV or Illegal Hold 1 pt; 3rd TV or Illegal Hold 2 pts; 4th TV or Illegal Hold DQ
The offender can no longer score when you commit either one.

Is a coach going to be the only one brave enough to step ?

Offline matref0

  • Redshirt
  • **
  • Posts: 384
    • View Profile
Re: heres another one
« Reply #14 on: July 31, 2009, 08:38:29 PM »
Quote
Tech violations are not necessarily illegal by application. Illegal moves are.

Locking hands is a violation when it occurs (application); same as a full nelson (application).

ER Coach is getting warm though.