Can someone please explain why that was a takedown against Shak?

[Ranger Dan]

I was in a bar with buddies watching wrestling and basketball this afternoon and no volume on the wrestling broadcast. The scramble at the end of Shakur Rasheed’s match looked to me like neither had control. I’m trying not to succumb to homerism here... Was this controversial or a good call?

 

[nerfstate]

It’s the danger rule, Danger, ranger.

If your back is exposed in neutral for a 3 count, a TD is awarded. Also known as the Heil (at the expense of Gullibon) rule.

The coaches challenged it, but I think it was a hail mary for Shak’s season.

 

[nitlion6]

It’s the danger rule, Danger, ranger.

If your back is exposed in neutral for a 3 count, a TD is awarded. Also known as the Heil (at the expense of Gullibon) rule.

The coaches challenged it, but I think it was a hail mary for Shak’s season.

Yeah, it was a Hail Mary throw from our own endzone by a QB with the weakest arm. Rasheed's back was exposed for a 5-count minimum.

 

[Ranger Dan]

I remember Heil on his back with Gulibon on top of him, and exasperated about Jimmy not getting points. In that situation I believe Heil was on his back for less time, but Jimmy was in more control. Shakur was in his position for a while, but it was pure scramble to me. Alas, if that’s the rule, then so be it...

 

[Cowbell Man]

I remember Heil on his back with Gulibon on top of him, and exasperated about Jimmy not getting points. In that situation I believe Heil was on his back for less time, but Jimmy was in more control. Shakur was in his position for a while, but it was pure scramble to me. Alas, if that’s the rule, then so be it...

Which time for JG v Heil? It only happened like 5 times. -____-

 

[Callthestall]

Which time for JG v Heil? It only happened like 5 times. -____-

I remember the match but forget if that situation for Gulibon was from neutral. If it was, Jimmy would get 2 with new rule.

 

[psualt]

Which time for JG v Heil? It only happened like 5 times. -____-

The time he nearly pinned him...

 

[Gray52]

I’m not sure I get it. They want to open up wrestling to create more action, yet they’ve added a rule that will start making guys less interested in getting into a scramble. Like they took the concept of the Heil rule and suddenly expanded it. Someone is always going to be in slightly more control than the other. Awarding a guy back points because he has 51% of the control isn’t how I think this was supposed to go. Am I way off here?

 

[Chickenman Testa]

Which time for JG v Heil? It only happened like 5 times. -____-

And for like 20 seconds one time. Jimmy would have had a riding time point if all that time had counted as riding

 

[nerfstate]

I’m not sure I get it. They want to open up wrestling to create more action, yet they’ve added a rule that will start making guys less interested in getting into a scramble. Like they took the concept of the Heil rule and suddenly expanded it. Someone is always going to be in slightly more control than the other. Awarding a guy back points because he has 51% of the control isn’t how I think this was supposed to go. Am I way off here?

There’s scrambling to score, and then there’s scrambling ala Heil or Delgado to effectively stall your way to victory. The rule isn’t expanded—but as written it doesn’t totally discern one from the other. Remember this is the same rule that created a 6 point opportunity for the Winn-Dixie too—the year before the rule Nolf was getting 0 points out of that move.

It is possible Shak couldn’t belly out in his quarter, but it looked to me like he was just lacking situational awareness. Everybody makes mistakes. I hope he gets one more dance. He’s a lot of fun to watch when he’s healthy.

 

[Cowbell Man]

I’m not sure I get it. They want to open up wrestling to create more action, yet they’ve added a rule that will start making guys less interested in getting into a scramble. Like they took the concept of the Heil rule and suddenly expanded it. Someone is always going to be in slightly more control than the other. Awarding a guy back points because he has 51% of the control isn’t how I think this was supposed to go. Am I way off here?

It’s also not back points. It’s a TD, then back points can be counted if the wrestler doesn’t belly out, which is what happened to Shak. The ref clearly announces he’s swiping for a Danger TD and announces the award. At that point most wrestlers release and belly to restart and avoid NF points.

The rule works. Our guy was unfortunately gassed and unaware of the match situation or he would have won. Shak used to be an aggressive wrestler on his feet. Via injuries or what I’m not sure but he has morphed into allowing guys to his ankles then he dives for theirs. It doesn’t work out so well with the better wrestlers.

 

[Gray52]

My apologies. I know this is a Shak thread, but I wasn’t talking specifically, nor griping specifically, about him. I watched it so many times this weekend, and some of them left me scratching my head. It seems to have progressed since they started calling it, to where it now seems like the ref sees one guy has slightly more control, and the other guys is on his back, so he needs to start swipes.

 

[Cowbell Man]

My apologies. I know this is a Shak thread, but I wasn’t talking specifically, nor griping specifically, about him. I watched it so many times this weekend, and some of them left me scratching my head. It seems to have progressed since they started calling it, to where it now seems like the ref sees one guy has slightly more control, and the other guys is on his back, so he needs to start swipes.

The rule does not ask who has more control. It simply discourages a wrestler from tying up and holding on with his back exposed. Whichever wrestler is in that situation is the one that will get called.

 

[NoVa Lion]

My apologies. I know this is a Shak thread, but I wasn’t talking specifically, nor griping specifically, about him. I watched it so many times this weekend, and some of them left me scratching my head. It seems to have progressed since they started calling it, to where it now seems like the ref sees one guy has slightly more control, and the other guys is on his back, so he Art. 3. Neutral Danger Zone Takedown. When in the neutral position, the referee shall announce a neutral danger signal (NDS) anytime a wrestler exposes their shoulders to the mat at any angle less than 90 degrees (neutral danger zone). The danger zone utilizes near fall criteria outlined in Rule 4.5.1, but replaces 45 degrees with any angle less than 90 degrees. The NDS announcement shall occur anytime a wrestler is voluntarily or involuntarily in the neutral danger zone, beyond reaction time, and will continue until the wrestler is out of the danger zone or a takedown is awarded. Art. 4. Neutral Danger Signal. The NDS is a verbal announcement of the word "danger," followed by a verbal three count. If the referee reaches the third count and the wrestler is still in the danger zone, the opposing wrestler is awarded a takedown. Section 3. Escape A defensive wrestler is awarded an escape when the offensive wrestler losesneeds to start swipes.

 

[nerfstate]

Yeah, there is no gradation of control. It’s all (a traditional TD) or none. The danger rule is a completely separate means of securing a td.

 

[KCLion]

I remember the match but forget if that situation for Gulibon was from neutral. If it was, Jimmy would get 2 with new rule.

6 with the new rule