Midlands Brackets & Thread :
- Thread starter Abro1975
- Start date
157 was a good match, but Berger had the TD in the second round of SV.
All kinds of shit: Berger had the takedown clean, even Johnson and Gibbons said so. Also, Kem locked hands, nothing. Also, Kem held the leg for a five count twice before it was called. Also, Kem took Berger down in the second, no call.
Horrific.
Horrific.
That's not an easy call live but can't see how they waived it off on review because the review supported the original call. I wonder how much it played into the refs' heads that Kem had a TD waived off in the second (which I don't think that was TD), and so waiving Berger's OT TD seemed "fair."
That was a fantastic match to watch. I thought both guys put on a great show. Tough calls on each. Future is bright at 157
Probably a non-factor. You don't get to be a college wrestling ref if you're basing a call on what you did or did not do earlier in the match.
FWIW, I thought the refs got it right on both calls.
True, even with questionable officiating it was a great match. Woke me up after the 149 snoozer.
Kemerer's takedown was close and if upon review it had been granted I would not have had a problem with it. It was a continuation of movement and had at least a tiny bit of subjectivity. Berger's TD was a TD with no subjectivity. They were on the mat, Berger was the wrestler in the position of fighting to obtain control and the moment that control was obtained it was 2.
Storniolo when wrestling in high school had the best looking mom of all wrestling moms.
Sorry about that. Was watching the Brands HOF moment and was reminiscing.
Sorry about that. Was watching the Brands HOF moment and was reminiscing.
True. Although i could watch that OT many times over
Of course I thought Walsh had the 2 count.
Walsh's performance makes Vincenzo's Philly win look fairly significant.
Walsh's performance makes Vincenzo's Philly win look fairly significant.
Have no idea how you think the Berger one was not a TD. It was by every definition.
The Kem one could go either way. But Bergers was not even close.
He did. These refs are pathetic. Also IMar carried him out earlier in the bout and wasn't called for stalling. Literally no consistency other than being horrid
Just a singular whine.
I really wish we were wrestling in the Scuffle!
I really wish we were wrestling in the Scuffle!
Just a singular whine.
I really wish we were wrestling in the Scuffle!
Yes, I'm going through Penn State wrestling withdrawals.
Not meaning to impugn any ref's integrity but subconscious bias and "game management" type calls (like the one I suggested perhaps occurred) take place at the highest levels. A book called Scorecasting gets into this, showing via statistical analysis how, for example, umps' strike zones widen or shrink depending on the situation.
I don't know what the ref really did, but tikk wins the board for the day with use of the word "impugn".
Question for the board.
If the top man drops below the waist a 5 count is automatically and audibly initiated. If the count reaches 5 and the top man has not released his below the waist ride he is by rule called for stalling.
Also, when the bottom wrestler gets to his feet, the top man has 5 seconds to at least attempt to return the bottom man to the mat. Without the attempt the top man is stalling.
So with those two very specific definitions in place, anybody know why
1. If the two wrestlers (top and bottom wrestlers defined) end up scrambling around and they end up in a head-to-ankle position, why is always called a stalemate instead of top stall?
2. Top man is hanging onto an ankle with 5 count being audibly counted and bottom man climbs to his feet and top wrestler comes to his feet also lifting the leg he had been hanging onto and now that both wrestlers are standing with top man continuing to hang onto leg the 5 count is discontinued?
3. Once both wrestlers are up and top is still hanging onto the leg, after another 5 seconds there doesn't seem to be any urgency to recognize the appropriate stall call?
If the top man drops below the waist a 5 count is automatically and audibly initiated. If the count reaches 5 and the top man has not released his below the waist ride he is by rule called for stalling.
Also, when the bottom wrestler gets to his feet, the top man has 5 seconds to at least attempt to return the bottom man to the mat. Without the attempt the top man is stalling.
So with those two very specific definitions in place, anybody know why
1. If the two wrestlers (top and bottom wrestlers defined) end up scrambling around and they end up in a head-to-ankle position, why is always called a stalemate instead of top stall?
2. Top man is hanging onto an ankle with 5 count being audibly counted and bottom man climbs to his feet and top wrestler comes to his feet also lifting the leg he had been hanging onto and now that both wrestlers are standing with top man continuing to hang onto leg the 5 count is discontinued?
3. Once both wrestlers are up and top is still hanging onto the leg, after another 5 seconds there doesn't seem to be any urgency to recognize the appropriate stall call?
The situation always plays a role.
It used to irritate me to no end to watch a District/Regional tournament where fathers were officiating and sons wrestling. No way in the world the thought (whether conscious or subconscious) of making a close call that goes against one of those sons and then having to sit with the father afterwards doesn't have an impact.
I agree, Tom, and I said the same to those with whom I was watching. I thought, to at least be consistent, that Berger's TD should be overturned, and it was.
Boy, there was a lot of jawing back and forth in that match. Terry Brands has a knack for getting it going.
I'm thinking Terry & Tom both flipped a lot of board games while growing up.
LOL I had a nephew that we used to call SoreLoserMan, because he used to flip any board game, that he started to get behind in.
Tom and Terry didn't play with board games. Come on now.
That was after ISU and Kemdawg looked bad in that match...barely holding on to a guy that he would usually be close to majoring or teching. Even my wife was like, "he is so tired and his face is so red...he needs more cardio." I was like, "it doesn't happen that often...think its the first time for him" and she gave me an odd look. Anyways, think he had an adrenaline dump...same thing happened with Sorensen his first match real match in Carver against ISU. In the Purdue dual, he had a tough time with Griffin but easily majored him this time around. When Iowa fans support our guys...we are delusional homers. When we call it like it is, it is "bi polar, silly shit."
But hey...ours wasn't the only board wondering...here is a whole thread on Kemerer sucking.
https://bwi.forums.rivals.com/threads/iowa-vs-iowa-st-tonight-on-btn-plus.160190/
Thought Kem had a TD which they overturned...it would have made the one in OT moot maybe. Personally, I thought he caught a break but then it looked like his foot slid right out and Berger didn't have total control. I think you give these things to the aggressor instead of this 100% proof positive video review crap. Overall, the Midlands was reffed and ran very poorly this year which is kind of surprising. Multiple bad calls, bad scoring by the table, and unnecessary stops in action due to the table and getting shit right. I think a Sam Brooks match still wasn't scored right. I have seen less problems at high school tourneys. Usually the Midlands is a well oiled machine.
The kid was (still is) undefeated and there was a thread "what is wrong with Kem?" Maybe it is just me, but yeah I would think people could wait until he at least lost his first match before they dedicate a thread to what's wrong with our undefeated freshman.
My post said the staff probably trained the snot out of them all week because there is no need to worry about the Cyclones anymore.
I also posted I do not believe Kemerer is going to be able to keep pace with Nolf.
His performance against ISU, nor his Midlands performace (which was outstanding) has had any impact on my perception of Kemerer's ability to stick with Jason.
So why bother calling me out. All I have done is speak positively about the kid.
