YouTube analysis of Nickal elevator

[nitlion6]

I asked a college ref I know about this scenario. He confirmed what I thought was the case. Per the college ref, if tOSU had a challenge remaining, and had thrown the brick, and that the review determined that NF points should have been awarded, then anything that happened after the NF would have been nullified, and the match would have been restarted with Martin on top with 2 NF awarded.

Early this past season, at the Lehigh dual, PSU threw the brick after a PSUer got pinned. (I can't remember if it was 125 or 133.) PSU's challenge was that the Lehigh wrestler had pulled the PSU wrestler's headgear before the Lehigh wrestler got the TD which ultimately resulted in their pinning the PSU wrestler. PSU lost that challenge, but if they had won it the match would have restarted before the Lehigh wrestler's TD, with the PSU wrestler being awarded the 1 point for the headgear grab.

Bo was in a similar situation last year in the Big10 tournament wrestling Dudley. There was a hip to hip situation with continuous action that had Bo touch his hand to the mat briefly before Bo tossed Dudley for a 2 and 4. Nebraska challenged on the premise when Bo's hand touched Dudley was in control for a Td. The call was, in my mind close to 50-50. That would have been a huge match impact.

Just a thought, but addressing this situation before a tremendous screwup occurs makes more sense to me than waiting for the eventual screwup to occur before making a correction.

Tom, thanks for asking and the feedback.

 

[El-Jefe]

Just a thought, but addressing this situation before a tremendous screwup occurs makes more sense to me than waiting for the eventual screwup to occur before making a correction.

Everybody knows this rule is a colossal, Vesuvius sized disaster waiting to happen. Got lucky this past year that an individual and team title weren't lost on an obvious continuation being negated.

(I am mostly confident that Bo could overcome a 4-0 deficit, excepting that Martin would've played keep away for 2 periods.)

The potential disaster for the sport is so obvious, that it not being corrected makes it seem like the NCAA wants the controversy.

 

[nitlion6]

Everybody knows this rule is a colossal, Vesuvius sized disaster waiting to happen. Got lucky this past year that an individual and team title weren't lost on an obvious continuation being negated.

(I am mostly confident that Bo could overcome a 4-0 deficit, excepting that Martin would've played keep away for 2 periods.)

The potential disaster for the sport is so obvious, that it not being corrected makes it seem like the NCAA wants the controversy.

I don't know if the NCAA wants the controversy or not, but typically the NCAA even when presented with blatant foreshadowing is more reactionary than preemptive. Some might infer the NCAA, other than when seeking personal financial gain, is a tad lazy.

 

[GogglesPaizano]

Totally agree it is just a matter of time before a big team dual, conference championship, or God forbid a kids national championship match might be won or lost on one of these reviews.

I feel very strongly in the continuation of action being included in any restart with that model solving the 90% problem while avoiding the 10% outlier.

The 90% being wrestling is very dynamic with situations changing on a dime where a missed call by an official has no direct impact on the 'immediate' continuation of action or influence on wrestler decision making (i.e. a hand touch resulting in a takedown before a reversal and back points, or whether or not Bo should have given up to back points before his elevator).

The 10% situation is where a missed call by an official could could have influenced the continuous action, such as when a wrestler hearing audibly he had earned 2 points, at the end of the match, might immediately stop pressing the action. Most of the time wrestlers can't hear much anyway and are on the fly instinctively reacting to the other wrestler and what they feel in the moment in the middle of a sequence.

I have seen many calls so far that are of 90% variety where one wrestler earned points but was penalised too much for what ultimately is a referee's error.

2 years ago Nolf put a hand down from neutral when the other guy had a standing single Leg. Nolf rolled through, came out on top with the kid turned. Nolf was awarded the takedown and got back points. It was a classic Nolf highlight reel move displaying his unique talent.

The other team threw the brick, and after the review they gave the other kid 2 pts for the takedown at the point of the hand touch, and took Nolf's 4 or 6 pts off the board, and restarted with Nolf on bottom.

Of course Nolf came back and destroyed him so there was no consequence, but clear to any serious observer the solution needs to be, give the kid the takedown and 2 pts at the point of the hand touch, allow thet instantaneous continuation of action, then giving Nolf 2 for the reversal (not the takedown) and the subsequent back points, and only then stop and start the action where the continuous action ceased. In this case it was when the kid got off his back.

The very thought of Bo vs Martin being exposed to the possibility of erasing one of the most dramatic moments in Nation championship history should scare the crap out of everybody, and is a tragedy in the making that is completely avoidable.

 

[El-Jefe]

I don't know if the NCAA wants the controversy or not, but typically the NCAA even when presented with blatant foreshadowing is more reactionary than preemptive. Some might infer the NCAA, other than when seeking personal financial gain, is a tad lazy.

I wouldn't say personal financial gain, rather attention. AND lazy.

 

[aalion]

Not being a wrestler, I would think that the 10% could also be avoided just w clear communications to the wrestlers before the season (or even before the match). Like in boxing "protect yourself at all times"... if a wrestler wrestles knowing that the review process is in place and continuous action is in play, then the scenario of "thinking I got a takedown so I stopped pressing" is on the wrestler (where it should be). If you know it was close, then double down to make sure it isn't close. I remember Cenzo's first takedown vs Imar 2 years ago... it was close (at least to the naked and uneducated eye), just a hand touch. But continuing the action, Cenzo ended up taking Imar to his belly (vs giving up a quick escape after the hand touch). Took care of the "controversy" himself.

 

[nitlion6]

Just another thought.

I find it interesting the NWCA is still twisting themselves into an unrecognizable pretzel attempting to create a duals championship at the expense of practically every other aspect of college wrestling, yet are silent on the continuous action aspect of video review. Something they can have a say in fixing without tossing the baby out with the bath water.

Color me shocked.

 

[Notsofastmyfriend21]

pretty cool - dovetails with BSD analysis

View embedded media

It's really great, but why did I feel like I was at a rave in 1992 with people doing ecstasy, during the opening segment?