Rule change wishlist for 2025/6

[Callthestall]

Interesting topic. The two year cycle for the current Rules and Interpretations ends with the 2025 NCAA Wrestling Championships, so a new two year cycle (2025-26 through 2026-27) begins with a publication of a new rulebook sometime in August, 2025 or so. It was said several times in this thread that changes should not make the referee's job any more difficult that it is, so rules that are way subjective should never see the pages of a rulebook, imo.

Frankly, I can't think of a single significant change to make. Last cycle had the 3-point takedown, and the 3-point nearfall added, and a whole bunch of less-significant changes. Whatever is done (other than for wrestler safety or administrative in nature) should be done with the intent of making wresting more exciting.

EDIT: I looked for minutes to meetings that might give some clue as to what the NCAA Wrestling Committee is considering. Other than clearing up some of the wrestler decent language, there was no mention of possible future changes could be found. I believe there is an April 2025 meeting, and we could hear something out of that meeting.

Change the Challenge brick to injury time rule. If challenge brick is thrown and call not changed
Choice of position for opponent.
It was quite evedent that the brick was thrown 2 or 3 times for lung/coaching time on Saturday night. It's not basketball.
At bare minimum the wrestlers should be in middle with no coaches .

 

[poorwrestler]

This has already been said but double boots in on top should be a 5 count to a stall call just like hanging onto a leg.

Also, I hate ride outs in OT. There’s way too many ways to game the system to last the :30 in riding time, and the way stalling is called in those periods is too subjective imo. I feel like there are definitely times where a guy wins on riding time in ride outs and the more deserving wrestler loses. Idk what the best option is for OT, but I feel confident riding time in ride outs is not it.

 

[doubleboots]

This has already been said but double boots in on top should be a 5 count to a stall call just like hanging onto a leg.

Also, I hate ride outs in OT. There’s way too many ways to game the system to last the :30 in riding time, and the way stalling is called in those periods is too subjective imo. I feel like there are definitely times where a guy wins on riding time in ride outs and the more deserving wrestler loses. Idk what the best option is for OT, but I feel confident riding time in ride outs is not it.

 

[Random4598375]

3 count is fair. If there is a hard snap, loss of balance and getting up in some scenarios is very understandable for defensive reasons while getting back to your feet.

You don't need a 3 count, just reaction time. If you get snapped down and go to a knee to get your balance and come right back up, no problem. If you go to a knee and stay there, stalling.

 

[CJFisJoePaII]

You don't need a 3 count, just reaction time. If you get snapped down and go to a knee to get your balance and come right back up, no problem. If you go to a knee and stay there, stalling.

I have a much bigger problem with wrestlers who wrestle the edge often with both feet OB while engaged or just circling the edge. Far worse than going to a knee. Folk is ridiculous that they allow this bullshit as a legal strategy - take a look at how often we saw it at NCAA's this past week. Used by wrestlers over and over again with zero calls (then in the Finals, Carter who had not been wrestling the edge at all, gets pushed to the edge while engaged with Keckeisen late in 3rd Period - he immediately circled back in and Ref calls stalling???).

The other one that is far worse than wrestling from a knee is wrestlers who make zero shots in Neutral and "stalemate" shot after shot by their opponent via an ankle-grabs, crotch-lock or waist-lock. There needs to be a rule that if a wrestler is the non-shooting wrestler and Stalemates 3 consecutive opponent shots, it should be a point for the shooting wrestler (that or the defensive wrestler should be put on a shoot clock [20 second] after the second consecutive Stalemate... which would have the same effect if their opponent shots again and they Stalemate a 3rd consecutive time.).

Folk probably needs to create a shot clock rule that must be applied to one of the wrestler's if there is no scoring after 60 seconds of Neutral wrestling.

 

[Nitlion1986]

I have a much bigger problem with wrestlers who wrestle the edge often with both feet OB while engaged or just circling the edge. Far worse than going to a knee. Folk is ridiculous that they allow this bullshit as a legal strategy - take a look at how often we saw it at NCAA's this past week. Used by wrestlers over and over again with zero calls (then in the Finals, Carter who had not been wrestling the edge at all, gets pushed to the edge while engaged with Keckeisen late in 3rd Period - he immediately circled back in and Ref calls stalling???).

The other one that is far worse than wrestling from a knee is wrestlers who make zero shots in Neutral and "stalemate" shot after shot by their opponent via an ankle-grabs, crotch-lock or waist-lock. There needs to be a rule that if a wrestler is the non-shooting wrestler and Stalemates 3 consecutive opponent shots, it should be a point for the shooting wrestler (that or the defensive wrestler should be put on a shoot clock [20 second] after the second consecutive Stalemate... which would have the same effect if their opponent shots again and they Stalemate a 3rd consecutive time.).

Folk probably needs to create a shot clock rule that must be applied to one of the wrestler's if there is no scoring after 60 seconds of Neutral wrestling.

Instead of a shot clock. If not scoring after 60 seconds of wrestling in the neutral position somebody must be called for stalling.
If you slide back to the edge without taking a shot you get called for stalling. Heck if they had this rule Ayala gets stalled out against Bryd.

 

[PSUranger]

Add a circle (maybe 1/2 way) and when a wrestlers backs up past that circle the ref warns him. If he keeps backing to the edge hit him with stalling.

Every wrestler brings 2 head gear to the mat

Fix the rideout.. BORING

 

[Sleepylion]

1. I also think a 3 count is too much for knee wrestling. If you watch a match now, there are not too many times that a wrestler stays on a knee unengaged for 3 seconds. That is without a rule forcing them up.
Try counting yourself while watching some matches.

2. If you chose neutral (after the 1st period) you need to shoot. If a shot does not end in points (for you or your opponent) automatic stalling every 40 seconds.
You can choose neutral in the first period after your opponent's injury time with out a penalty.

3. Extra headgear at matside ready to be used. Not having an extra should be a match and team point penalty and opponent's choice of position on restart.

4. I would go back to the 2 point TD. The 3 points allows a lead of 4-1 in the 3rd period (or worse 4-0 half way through the 2nd) to be minimally influenced by stalling calls. Or get the refs to call stalling like it is the only way they will get paid.

5. If a challenge is made and lost stall warning is issued and opponent's choice of position on restart.

Not that my opinions will mater to the rules committee.

 

[a_mshaffer]

got to be careful of adding interpretation rules... what constitutes a shot? I simply would like stalling categorized more clearly... for example if a wrestler is habitually backing up, kneeling on one knee, then they're going to get hit for it - at least eventually. Also, backing up in the 1st period should be called the same regardless of where you are in the match. Too often stalling seems slanted to the 3rd period and the person who is winning.
And, again, if you got a 3 point TD then a reversal should be 3 as well.
There could be a better interpretation made on what control is. So, when the bottom wrestler has a leg and standing, the top wrestler stops getting riding time and 1 is rewarded and can be changed from the escape to a td/reversal if action proceeds and dictates (but not both)

 

[jack66]

The Mesenbrink final should be shown to every ref as an example of how not to ref.

The shots were 9-2 with Caliendo retreating in the 1st two periods ... no stall calls. Then, when Caliendo finally got active for 15-20 seconds in the 3rd, Mitch defended without retreating. He even tried to counter.

The stall call on MM, after nothing in the 1st two periods, was one of the more egregious injustices I can remember.