Keener
- Thread starter a_mshaffer
- Start date
I still think he got screwed. I saw him get pinned and my heart didn't sink because I immediately thought to myself, "They were out of bounds, this will get overturned." I was pretty surprised it wasn't
From the angle of the picture, I don't think it's possible to determine whether or not the elbow is within the cylinder.
If you look at where Keener's head is and how his feet are angled, the elbow is likely farther from the cylinder than the top of his head is. But, this position is only held for less than a second according to the clock.
Nor is it the first frame where he's on his back. Our whole section was screaming he was OOB when it happened real-time, though we had a terrible angle. So far, I've not seen objective evidence either way.
I had an excellent angle from C109 and said to my husband as soon as it was over that they were out of bounds. I have no idea how that call stood.
My memory, as faulty as it can be at times, was he had a foot in-bounds, then it went out, then back in. The elbow was never was what was in. And the view I remember was from the other side. Very clear he went out and should have been called out at that time.
Clearly thought it would be overturned on review and was shocked that it wasn't.
Clearly thought it would be overturned on review and was shocked that it wasn't.
take this and combine with the espn view it surely appears they are out. The sad thing is the other ref was right there as well. Hate to see a career end like that....
At a particular point in time here was no supporting point of either wrestler anywhere near to being in bounds.
I have no idea if the rule is now a three dimensional analysis of all body parts. If so, wow. Another opportunity for ref subjectivity to overrule his brain.
Based upon supporting points of the wrestlers they were OOB and it wasn't even close.
That said, in both matches lost at 133 Keener basically fell down to his back. Unless you are Bo, wrestling from your back is pretty much always a bad idea.
I have no idea if the rule is now a three dimensional analysis of all body parts. If so, wow. Another opportunity for ref subjectivity to overrule his brain.
Based upon supporting points of the wrestlers they were OOB and it wasn't even close.
That said, in both matches lost at 133 Keener basically fell down to his back. Unless you are Bo, wrestling from your back is pretty much always a bad idea.
There is no supporting point rule in college. The circle extends upward like a cylinder. If any part of either body is within that cylinder, action is in bounds.
So a 3D analysis. That is IMO an unnecessary extra burden to place on the ref.
Thanks. I wasn't sure. I notice the farther away from involvement that I get the less I know.
Still, there was no reason for that sequence to end with Keener on his back.
I tend to give the refs a little more room on these. For me replay wasn't designed to look at things frame by frame in stop action. This is a fluid sequence in motion. Super slo-mo replays exaggerate points during motion. Right now it is killing football and to some extent baseball and ice hockey.
I think replay should only be overturning egregious errors.
I think replay should only be overturning egregious errors.
It's not intended to make the refs judge if a fingernail is over the cylinder. And the ref and/or alternate ref is supposed to stand along the boundary.
Saw it posted somewhere (maybe BSD?) that replay cameras were mounted at the scorer's table for each mat. If true, that would make replays less useful and a lot less likely to overturn calls.
Some of the ESPN cameras (for the 8-mat configuration0 were at odd angles. Not too bad for viewing, but probably not real good for replays.
If you're in proper position, and paying attention, it isn't hard to see if there is a body part above a line, even if the line is curved. Particularly when there are two refs at nationals.
I'm guessing the call on the mat stood because there wasn't enough evidence to overturn it. The ref needed a near-perfect camera angle to change the call, and I don't believe he had it. Had he called them OOB, and the call was challenged, it wouldn't have changed either...just a thought.
I do remember several times during reviews that the announcers mentioned that the replay officials don't have access to the ESPN cameras so they have far less camera angles to use on replays. If you are looking at things that could be changed.....that is certainly one to consider. Sadly.....it would also mean that those "Lunger" challenges will become nap times.
that's too bad, as replay should not have been needed, the 2nd ref should have seen it plainly. Perhaps we need to understand that relationship better - in place to let you know when a period runs out! Too bad for Keener.... was going to win that match...
In this instance to be fair, I’m not sure if the 2nd Ref got his view blocked, but if not, another case of when does the 2nd Ref actually ever do anything?
Yes, another issue that needs to be discussed -- we should want more assertive 2nd officials.
For example, in the Desanto/Micic match, the 2nd official was first to see Desanto twisting Micic's arm but only pointed to try and get the primary official's attention. By the time the primary got into position to see it and stop the action, Micic's arm could have been wrecked. The 2nd official needed to be able to jump in and stop the action directly.
You have two kids going and one is headed to their back the attention of ref is definitely going to be on the action so without a second official it has to rather difficult at least relatively speaking.
In the Keener match, to know the second official needed to be standing right there. I do not recall exactly where he was standing so I can not comment on his positioning.
If one wrestler is deliberately trying to injure the other, Ref #2 needs to step in, head vs. alternate referee rules be damned. If he sees it and doesn't break it up, he shouldn't be a ref.
