To clarify--your initial statement was that DT was on a lower tier than those guys--not that he was 4th best. Maybe splitting hairs to your, but tier indicates a significant separation, which is demonstrably false. Have you seen anyone else on the senior level cradle up JB? Twice in the same match?
The jackals are surrounding the carrion.Its natural to not like something when it affects one of your favorites, in this case ours. Discussion about it is fine. Opinions naturally differ. However, most of the negativity is from guys who "only" care about USA wrestling, and yet are obviously here because they want to rub it in when something bothers the PSU faithful (hard to do that in March). A bit of sour grapes mixed in with their opinion.
Accept the legitimate comments, but ignore the ones that obviously are provocative, don't respond, and the "USA" posters will eventually get tired of trying to provoke. Go USA!
For those taking this line, it's really important to understand that this decision had NOTHING to do with the scoring of the exchange. It was a procedural complaint. Cael and co. should not have been allowed to challenge the call. The procedural rules of wrestling were not followed. That's why this match was overturned. We aren't going to see things go to arbitration because people don't like a takedown call. This was over an officiating decision outside of the actual wrestling.
Actually, if you follow the logic of this case, the court would only rule that they shouldn't have even reviewed it in the first place because OKST was out of challenges. This ruling had nothing to do with "calls." It was only about the procedures not being followed correctly.Maybe Fix should hire a cornell lawyer about the NS headgear grab. Kid could change alot and New Jersey might have to remove Nicky-Pushups from the history books
I'm open to being proven otherwise but the difference between "procedural rules of wrestling" and things like referee calls on scoring, passivity, etc seem like pretty fine hairs (my phrase of the day) to split. Probably that term has special import somewhere in some rule book that I don't understand, but it is NOT obvious to me.
True story. In 1969, Pish’s girlfriend farted during their love making. He hasn’t had sex since, by choice.
I think it's pretty obvious. Let's use ncaa rules for an example:
I guess that just doesn't move me. I'll go back to other sports--whether a football game is won on a bad PI no call or on a reversed challenge when the coaches were out of challenges, the result of the game is never remotely considered to be reversable or redoable. Why here?
We have rules for a reason. Cael and co. waited to throw their brick. That's on them. They probably thought Zain might be able to score from that position after the exchange and since reviews are so unpredictable and the exchange was really close, chose to take their chances there. However, after it became clear Zain wasn't going to score as the clock ran down to the final seconds, they threw the YOLO brick. They made a tactical decision, it was the wrong one, and it bit them (or should have at the time). That's what sports is all about.
Well, to start, this isn't football, so who cares how they do it?
I can't rule it out, but considering he doesn't have a wrestling background and the call is split 50/50 between those that actually do, I doubt it, nor would he be qualified to make that determination if he did. But if it helps you sleep at night, you can believe it.
Not a fan of your dismisal of the football reference--I could use virtually any sport (that enjoys a moderately good track record with regard to corruption) as an alternate scenario. What makes wrestling so special (other than a long documented history with corruption)?
I'm always saying that, if you're ever wondering.
Personally I think that is always the right advice for you...
I was around here for all the World Team matches. I am always around here, for years now. I didn't come here all of a sudden for "schadenfreude". (That word is fun to say btw)
The best post on this thread. Rather than complaining, Zain is looking ahead. Let the best man win!!
If the equivalent situation occurs in football (not sure it ever has), and they don't overturn it, I don't care because I believe they SHOULD overturn it. Why tie our rules to a different sport that handles the situation poorly?
Because in fixing that mistake, you're creating more by setting an ugly precedent with potentially far-reaching consequences, not to mention damaging team USA's medal chances at 65kg (both guys are already off schedule, will be only more so), etc, and unintended but still real--Zain probably wouldn't have been hurt to begin with if this affair had been put to rest before Dogu. Let's quote Spock: Needs of the many, outweigh the needs of the few.
If you thought Zain would have won match 3 back then it seems odd that you don't think he would be able to win 1/2 now. Odd, and maybe telling ...
You mean, "we insiders know that ..."word on the street is that zain loves this sport
I think he came out with a great gameplan that day, but Yianni made great adjustments at Dogu and I just think he's the better wrestler (slightly). Another big part of that calculation is Zain's injury. Best case scenario he missed valuable mat time. Worst case, he's not healthy for the wrestle off.
I see this argument all the time, but you're ignoring the fact that this has already happened twice, in far more blurry cases, and yet that's all the times it has happened in 40 years, just twice. Whatever precedent this sets, already existed. You're not going to see arbitration cases over takedown calls. The fact that your best argument is "slippery slope" just shows how weak the argument is. You know the only reason he won match 2 was because the rules were not followed properly.
I guess, but I think you're just seeing what you want to at this point.
Agree to disagree?
