Proposed Rules Changes
- Thread starter pawrestlersintn
- Start date
Finally some relief from hands to the face.
What if you poke both eyes while saying nyuk, nyuk, nyuk?
I think Zain Sorrensen started all of this madness
What if you poke both eyes while saying nyuk, nyuk, nyuk?
I think Zain Sorrensen started all of this madness
I’m not sure the rewrite on the hands to the face accomplishes anything. Illegal holds should be prevented rather than called........in my mind it either happened or it didn’t. After the hands have gone to the face how does an official prevent it? To me as an illegal hold you have made it more likely to be called. Like locked hands or an illegal headlock intent doesn’t matter did he do it or not.
I don’t feel like the rewrite is going to give the officials more latitude to warn or not call the action at all. Maybe they fall back on potentially dangerous call for incidental contact with the face or non-threatening contact. Will wait and see the final language and how it gets called practically.
I don’t feel like the rewrite is going to give the officials more latitude to warn or not call the action at all. Maybe they fall back on potentially dangerous call for incidental contact with the face or non-threatening contact. Will wait and see the final language and how it gets called practically.
I like the change to video review, but am disappointed that they are not proposing a third party to conduct the reviews. Stalling points come full circle back to where they were about 10 years ago. The change in hands to the face seems to give the refs more discretion and I'm not sure if that is a good thing or not.
The loss of a challenge being charged as a stall warning is exactly the right outcome. Kudos. We’ll see if the MFF proposal changes much materially in terms of seeding. Obviously it will alter some athletes’s records.
I like the challenge rule especially and if the hands to the face change ensures that matches aren't decided by that penalty point it's worth it.
Perhaps, now, we will see some of the matches that we want to see at tournaments if the medical forfeit proposal is adopted.
We’ll see. Any new equilibrium might take some time to reveal itself. Some decisions will change, and some won’t. Until coaches digest how seeding responds their strategies will evolve. I can’t see anybody but the most elite guys caring about the total losses in their legacy, so that won’t have a direct effect in most cases. If seeding doesn’t move much relative to the current (a “dodge” vs. a loss in a qualifying tourney), not much will change. I think the qualifying tourney strategy will largely stay the same. It’s the in-season tourneys where coaches will need to make big decisions - it will become wrestle the whole thing or nothing for the guys in the range where seeds matter.
Agree on video review idea--hitting the team's wrestler with a stall call is the right disincentive, b/c often enough that's what these challenges are. Doesn't address the hail-mary reviews after the match is over, but that's fine. One step at a time.
Re MFFs, it's interesting that the cited basis doesn't mention what this rule seems really meant to address, i.e., wrestlers backing out of their conference tournaments without harm to their NCAA seeds. But since it would probably accomplish that, I'm on board here as well.
Re stalling point sequence, I'm surprised anyone perceived a need to go from
| -- | 1 | 1 | 1 | DQ |
to
| -- | 1 | 1 | 2 | DQ |
But sure, fine, whatever.
Re hands to the face tweak, I'm good with returning some discretion to the refs on this. The rule, as presently structured, led to two of the most boring matches of the year Fix Suriano I and II, and ruined many others, as coaches fixated on stealing a garbage point via an inadvertent hand to the face. Everyone thinks they want more objectivity until they actually get a taste for it and coaches game it to death.
Re MFFs, it's interesting that the cited basis doesn't mention what this rule seems really meant to address, i.e., wrestlers backing out of their conference tournaments without harm to their NCAA seeds. But since it would probably accomplish that, I'm on board here as well.
Re stalling point sequence, I'm surprised anyone perceived a need to go from
| -- | 1 | 1 | 1 | DQ |
to
| -- | 1 | 1 | 2 | DQ |
But sure, fine, whatever.
Re hands to the face tweak, I'm good with returning some discretion to the refs on this. The rule, as presently structured, led to two of the most boring matches of the year Fix Suriano I and II, and ruined many others, as coaches fixated on stealing a garbage point via an inadvertent hand to the face. Everyone thinks they want more objectivity until they actually get a taste for it and coaches game it to death.
Or do we see fewer participants at events?
Some MFFs are due to events overrunning scheduled time, and the athletes have to drive back home several hours at night after competing.
I don't know what will happen, except the Law of Unintended Consequences has never been repealed.
I tend to think there will be less participants. No one wants those losses on their record. Not sure this is a good rule.
I think that fear is overstated. On the whole, wrestlers are motivated less by fear of losing than the opportunity to win. And seeding doesn't look at losses so much as who you lost to, which scenarios arise, sure, but not so much in the types of tournaments to which you're alluding. I don't doubt you'd be able to find some wrestler who fits your model of avoiding tournaments entirely out of fear of being tagged with an unfair MFF loss, but I doubt they form any sort of critical mass.
This is probably right for fall opens.
Winter opens might be another matter. Injured starters looking to get in matches for an RPI will have to play risk/reward of potentially going below .700 win % vs. re-injury risk of additional matches in 1 day.
The wrestlers might not fear the losses, but it's not entirely their decision.
Don't know that it'll be widespread, just something to monitor.
The only event where the Med FFT is an issue is the national.qualifier. There is no such thing in a dual and if he tourney is an open just withdraw and if it is an invite the coach needs to.think about team points . If you withdraw you lose all points earned it you Med FFT you keep your points
Is that right? Withdrawing is a dual meet thing, and can only happen up to the point a wrestler steps on the mat. Once a wrestler starts a tournament, there is no withdrawing, or so I understand. Not showing up for a bout leads to a forfeit. And the only way that points are taken away is for a Flagrant Misconduct. Others understand it a different way?
