The difference (and it is a big one) is that, with current rules, one point stalling dings matter more when the score is 4-2/4-3. They matter much less, and will be happily taken much more often, when the score is 6-2/6-3.
Maybe. But they will only stall for 30 seconds, then they are back on their feet down 2-0. You would have to have at least two takedowns to establish a riding time point. It's better than watching some guy flop on the deck like a fish for 60-90 seconds before the ref gives the first stalling warning. It also limits the amount of riding you can do without getting near fall points.
I don't have too big of an issue with guys not actively engaging the last 30 seconds of a match if they're in the lead. It just means at some point, they did something to earn points during the match. It's similar to kneeling on the ball to end a football game. Why run a play that might cost you.
I agree with the silliness and unsatisfying watching of a leg lace/trapped arm rolling around ending. However, to give some of these refs the liberty to be more subjective coupled with reviewing their own as in freestyle, may not be the answer. "Some" ( I'm looking at you angel) of these refs struggle with calling a folk style match as it currently exists and I can't imagine allowing them more authority in regards takedowns, back exposure, scrambles, continuations etc etc etc
now, for vacation this year, I was thinking bout going to ...................
I know you're joking but actually that not a bad idea.
I would agree with the first paragraph, except that what the guys are doing is clearly stalling. Would be like the officials letting teams kneel using 1 minute of playclock rather than the prescribed 25 or 40 seconds, simply because they had a lead. That lead was earned within the rules, but so should maintaining it be asked to be done within the rules.
Don’t give an escape and turn guys. Mat wrestling has and should always matter in folk
That's kind of where I'm at.
I have no problem with a guy stuck on bottom if the top man is aggressively working. Let him flail. PSU has their own share of guys that don’t attempt a turn but if that means the Zains and Spencer Lee types that are equally good on the mat are neutralized then I think the rule stinks.
I don't care how boring it becomes. None of you young whipper snappers are getting my tickets.
I understand what you are saying there. I wouldn't have a problem if the ref dings the guy running for stalling.
When we get to freestyle in college wrestling, I’m out. I may be the only one, but I just don’t like freestyle scoring.
That's fair.
I probably am as well.
I think the discussion we need to have with refs should be open and direct. Like ok fellas why is it so difficult for you to call stalling. From a human perspective I strongly feel that most refs don't want to determine the outcome of the match with stalling calls. I think refs should be trained on the fact that stalling calls are not the determining factor of a match they are simply a warning or a penalty to a wrestler to become more active and participate in the match the big issue is stalls at the end of a match. Maybe we should have ai do this for us lmfao. Seriously a non biased computer program that determines a wrestler made a certain percentage of backup steps or a pre conceived amount of time with not making an offensive move and if that happens a light goes off and the ref has to call stalling. Of course that light would be on continuously at any Iowa match so maybe use a soft glow light so not to adversely affect any fans. Just saying
Stalling, or inconsistent enforcement of the rules for stalling, is one of my 2 biggest complaints of this great sport. The other is the need to differentiate between earning an escape and being given a release. I don’t believe that awarding 3 points for a take-down addresses this. I am okay with take-downs being awarded 2 points, an earned escape being worth 1 point, and riding 60 seconds being 1 point – as all demonstrate a skill set. But, when given a release on a restart, the bottom wrestler hasn’t demonstrated any skill set and has done nothing worthy of being awarded a point. The exception – where 1 point would be awarded following a release -- would for those instances where the wrestler chooses bottom (such as the start of the 2nd or 3rd period, or following a medical time-out) as this allows for certain strategies to continue to be employed.
That's way too many points for a typical Lewan match.
Ironically, #1 is 100% feelings over facts.
Angel Rivera + shot clock =
After 2 minutes, Angel Rivera gets shot?Angel Rivera + shot clock =
Do I hear 6 point takedowns!!?? 7??!! 8!!??
IMO, it does include the Bow and Arrow-until it reaches criteria. So, once you grab the foot/ankle, you have 5 seconds to put them in criteria, or it is stalling. Too bad they didn't include the ankle trap with the leg also.
the answer to that is to go back to calling stalling on top!
5. works for me and 4. the landmines would make me watch soccer.
Completely agree--though I guess it's been demonstrated that refs don't seem to want to do it.
Close to my thinking, except I’d allow the top guy to maintain the ride past 30 under the premise that he may feel he’s closing in on a turn. So in summary I’d say keep TD2 with no escape point after 30 seconds’ control. Kill riding time and re-purpose that clock to time the 30 seconds of control.
Absolutely. I saw it countless weekends at open tournaments. I BELIEVE (now, I mix up my rules quite a bit, rotating through many age groups/athletes), but I BELIEVE the issue is that the definition of stalling on top (in college) only asks that the top wrestler continues to attempt to break down, not turn.
It should be top wrestler actively looking to break down and turn. Bottom actively trying to escape. Anything else is stalling.
