Challenge? Good Coaching or Dishonest?

[Truitt16]

Listening to the FRL yesterday, their was a discussion on the Miller/Realbuto debacle. They also discussed another scenario which I thought was interesting. In the second round of wrestlebacks, Jake Smith- West Virginia was wrestling Zach Nye- Virginia. According to Christian and Willie Zach Nye is very tough on top and had Smith broken flat with a leg in. Looking on trackwrestling, Smith won 3-3 TB-3. If I understand correctly the match was tied and if Nye were to ride out, he would have won on riding time. Nearing the end of the match, West Virginia coach Sam Hensen, challenged that Nye locked his hands on top knowing that Nye didn't lock his hand to give his wrestler a breather and a restart. Smith got away and won the match. Is this a good coaching move or dishonest and unethical?

 

[DonHawkeye]

Originally posted by Truitt16:
Is this a good coaching move or dishonest and unethical?

Yes

 

[theIowaHawk]

Dishonest and unethical. But it appears to be within the rules.

I'd prefer to do away with challenges altogether. Refs make mistake, kids get screwed, its sports. Kids get screwed by these "time outs" anyway.

See Ramos vs. Streebler. Shouldn't have challenged.

 

[Lsanders20]

If it's in the rules then it's just great coaching.

 

[theIowaHawk]

Originally posted by Lsanders20:
If it's in the rules then it's just great coaching.

Why?

Is encouraging a wrestler (or football player, or bball player) to "dive" and fake an injury "good coaching" as well?

I would guess its one of the reasons that challenges are limited. In the end, it was still up to the wrestler to win, he didn't.

 

[LutherAce]

guess i can't wrap my head around why the ref would stop the match to review something. Usually, there has to be a break in the action before the review is looked at. Ref won't stop the whistle just because someone is getting ridden...

so, either the referee blew a stalemate, which would've resulted in a restart anyways...or the referee stopped the match in the middle of the overtime...

if it's the latter...probably the same ref that had Realbuto/Miller...

 

[theIowaHawk]

Luther:

I was presuming that there was a stalemate at which time the coach, by requesting review, allowed his tired wrestler to regain breath.

 

[Truitt16]

Here is a link to the FRL discssion. The scenario discussed begins around the 25:00 mark. Christian and Willie say that Henson challenged and got a re-start. They don't talk at all about a stalemate. From their discussion it was a calculated move on Henson's part to get a re-start.

FRL Ep. 22 - Miller-Realbuto Scoring Debacle

 

[artradley]

Originally posted by LutherAce:
guess i can't wrap my head around why the ref would stop the match to review something. Usually, there has to be a break in the action before the review is looked at. Ref won't stop the whistle just because someone is getting ridden...

so, either the referee blew a stalemate, which would've resulted in a restart anyways...or the referee stopped the match in the middle of the overtime...

if it's the latter...probably the same ref that had Realbuto/Miller...

It doesn't have to be a stop in the action, just "when there is no significant action taking place." I don't know the specifics of the situation, but I could see if one guy has a leg in but he isn't turning the other guy. Pretty shady strategy, but on the other hand having a leg in doesn't mean anything significant is happening.

 

[Lsanders20]

Anytime you have an athlete that is gassed late in a game or a match and you can get them a quick breather within the rules you do it. A big congrats to Henson for getting a finalist and having a solid tournament.

 

[HoundedHawk]

It was within the rules to call an injury TO a few years back when there was no injury. However, it was called unethical in the rules to do so.

This is also unethical.

 

[SetonHallPirate]

Originally posted by LutherAce:
guess i can't wrap my head around why the ref would stop the match to review something. Usually, there has to be a break in the action before the review is looked at. Ref won't stop the whistle just because someone is getting ridden...

so, either the referee blew a stalemate, which would've resulted in a restart anyways...or the referee stopped the match in the middle of the overtime...

if it's the latter...probably the same ref that had Realbuto/Miller...

That's checkable, and it wasn't.

Official 6 (Mike Chase...probably best known for Penn State/Michigan last year on BTN) did the Smith/Nye match, whereas Official 17 (Nathan Chapman) did the Miller/Realbuto match.

 

[WEH8ST8HAWK]

Originally posted by Lsanders20:
Anytime you have an athlete that is gassed late in a game or a match and you can get them a quick breather within the rules you do it. A big congrats to Henson for getting a finalist and having a solid tournament.

The word I would use to describe it would be chickenshit! Totally unethical.

This post was edited on 3/25 10:48 PM by WEH8ST8HAWK

 

[Huck]

I love Sammie but unethical if true. Unethical to give a guy a lung timeout or strategic restart....plain and simple in my opinion.

 

[winwithdignity]

Henson was mentored by Joe Seay if that answers your question on whether Henson has any ethics.

 

[Lsanders20]

Some might call Bill Belichek unethical. Others see him as the best coach to ever walk the sidelines. Let me ask anyone who says it's unethical or chicken sh!t are you a coach? Or have you ever coached any competitive sports? Not talking little league or junior high. I'm talking competitive sports. Until you have walked in those shoes, had that kind of expectations and pressure on you to see how you react you don't have a leg to stand on. If the rules allow for stupid things to happen and the coach takes advantage of the idiots that make the rules then good for him and his/her athletes.

 

[Jaybird319]

+1. Never heard of a wrestler being unethical for wrestling on the edge. All is fair when rules are left to open to interpretation. Knowing the rules and situational awareness is a must by all coaches. Just ask Miller

This post was edited on 3/26 8:54 AM by Jaybird319

 

[butchinmi]

I was watching that match and it struck me really odd. Sammy the bull challenged a call it they stopped the match with something like 7 seconds left and yes, Nye was on top and it didn't look like Smith was going anywhere in 7 seconds. After a break, a review and a restart, Smith escaped and it did completely change the match.

It seems to me that Sammy's challenge was fine, but the refs should have waited for the final 7 seconds and then looked at the challenge. If it needed to be a change, which in this case they didn't, they can go back to the 7 seconds or whatever time the infraction happened and start from there. I really felt bad for Nye, because he did nothing wrong back lost the match after Nye was allowed to restart in a much more advantageous position and it paid off for him. I don't know what the rules say as to when the refs need to stop to review the challenge.

 

[artradley]

Originally posted by butchinmi:
I was watching that match and it struck me really odd. Sammy the bull challenged a call it they stopped the match with something like 7 seconds left and yes, Nye was on top and it didn't look like Smith was going anywhere in 7 seconds. After a break, a review and a restart, Smith escaped and it did completely change the match.

It seems to me that Sammy's challenge was fine, but the refs should have waited for the final 7 seconds and then looked at the challenge. If it needed to be a change, which in this case they didn't, they can go back to the 7 seconds or whatever time the infraction happened and start from there. I really felt bad for Nye, because he did nothing wrong back lost the match after Nye was allowed to restart in a much more advantageous position and it paid off for him. I don't know what the rules say as to when the refs need to stop to review the challenge.[/I]

The rules state that he should stop it when there is no significant action taking place.

Of course, this does tend to give an advantage to a bottom guy who has been broken down flat and isn't going anywhere.

 

[theIowaHawk]

Originally posted by Jaybird319:
+1. Never heard of a wrestler being unethical for wrestling on the edge. All is fair when rules are left to open to interpretation. Knowing the rules and situational awareness is a must by all coaches. Just ask Miller

This post was edited on 3/26 8:54 AM by Jaybird319

LSanders: Some might call Bill Belichek unethical. Others see him
as the best coach to ever walk the sidelines. Let me ask anyone who says
it's unethical or chicken sh!t are you a coach? Or have you ever
coached any competitive sports? Not talking little league or junior
high. I'm talking competitive sports. Until you have walked in those
shoes, had that kind of expectations and pressure on you to see how you
react you don't have a leg to stand on. If the rules allow for stupid
things to happen and the coach takes advantage of the idiots that make
the rules then good for him and his/her athletes.

I'm combining these two posts to respond to because they are similar in their misconception of the situation and the term "unethical".

Jaybird - I fail to see how you compare "wrestling on the edge", which is completely allowed for and isn't even stalling (without leaving the mat), to calling a challenge over something that a) did not occur and b) you know did not occur.

Unethical - not morally correct. Morality - is the differentiation of intentions, decisions, and
actions between those that are good or right and those that are bad or
wrong.

Sanders, you seem to think that anything that is, even at the stretching of technically, within the rules = fair game and almost a necessity. So, then you probably believe that Bielema kicking, and rekicking until time ran out a handful of years ago was "genius". He found a rule, and exploited it to the extent that it changed the purpose of the rule altogether...depriving the other team of the opportunity that they should have had, but for his actions.

Sure, "right and wrong" and "morality" can not be clearly defined, but most people have similar definitions. A challenge is, in my definition (feel free to post your own), a statement to the referees that you saw something take place that should have been awarded, but it wasn't. By making a statement that you don't believe to be true, you are lying.

At what point in human history was lying "ethical"? When it gained your side an advantage? Wait, isn't that what all lies are for?

Mostly, LSanders, what I glean from your post is that, yes, sure this is unethical, but they should do it, because they are coaches (and have so much pressure). Great belief, exactly what we want in society is the teachers of impressionable young men to be lying to further their own agenda. Great things we are passing down.

Believing it was ethical, and believing it was "smart", or advantageous, are very different things.

 

[Huck]

Originally posted by Lsanders20:
Some might call Bill Belichek unethical. Others see him as the best coach to ever walk the sidelines. Let me ask anyone who says it's unethical or chicken sh!t are you a coach? Or have you ever coached any competitive sports? Not talking little league or junior high. I'm talking competitive sports. Until you have walked in those shoes, had that kind of expectations and pressure on you to see how you react you don't have a leg to stand on. If the rules allow for stupid things to happen and the coach takes advantage of the idiots that make the rules then good for him and his/her athletes.

I called it unethical and I've coached close to 20 years. Not at a D1 power college with the pressure that those guys do. Just your "normal" high school. I've coached hs football state championship games and many hs state champions and lucky enough to be in contention for a few state wrestling titles. That being said, I've never coached a kid or team to purposely take a "lung" timeout or strategically "use" an inhaler (common in hs). I realize some will disagree but to me that is no doubt cheating in my eyes. I mean isn't this exactly the reason the injury time out rule was changed a few years ago? To get away from the unethical behavior of taking a timeout when you weren't really injured? There appears to be a loophole in the challenge system that could be used without penalty but it's the exact same scenario they changed the injury time rule...because that was considered unethical.
I didn't see the match in question and honestly if Sammie wants to coach that way and it's within the rules then more power to him if he wants to do that. The question becomes, did he intentionally ask for the challenge simply for the chance at the "new start"? If so, I think it's unethical even if it was within the rules. If he really thought there was a reason for the challenge then it's fair game and not unethical. To me it sounds like the right thing should have been for the period to expire and look at it after the period had expired.

 

[Jaybird319]

My reply about Henson basically calling a timeout (challenge) to get his wrestler a fresh start is the same as some who consistently wrestles on the edge. The proximity of out bounds allows for a fresh restart when said wrestler is in trouble. Ahem, please install push out rule!! Sounds as this challenge was about positioning vs being gassed. As I stated I never heard a wrestler called unethical because of this style, even in the lovely confines of Carver. This is no different then football coaches calling timeouts to slow other team, ice the kicker, challenge a call, etc etc.

Until NCAA closes these course of actions with some sort of penalty, we might see more of this in next few years. As with every installation of new rules there are unintended consequences that can only be learned by time. Do I like Sammie actions probably not, but since I didn't witness the event, it's hard for me to pass judgement. Especially from listening to unbiased Flow guys. Is there a video that captures this "knowing" not locked hands challenge. So I say good coaching as Smith moved on, that's all that matter, ask Cornell Let's just agree to disagree my argumental fellow poster

 

[Lsanders20]

I didn't see the match so I'm just going by the description above but it is hard to believe that the ref stopped the match with 7 seconds left due to a locked hands challenge? Usually they wait until there is a whistle to review a locked hands. Like they did in the Brown finals match. Either way Henson was doing everything he could to help his athlete and in this situation it sounds like it paid off.

Yes, when Bielema pulled that genius move off to counter the clowns that changed the kick off rule it was awesome. Even though I am not a Wisky fan it was very creative and calculated. Most of all though it worked. Just like the TD that the Patriots scored last year with the OL scoring a TD will be a 5 yard penalty next year. Once again they had to change the rule because an intelligent coach found a way to exploit the rule that the sanctioning body put into place. I have to respect someone like that.

 

[steelermc]

Originally posted by Lsanders20:
Some might call Bill Belichek unethical. Others see him as the best coach to ever walk the sidelines. Let me ask anyone who says it's unethical or chicken sh!t are you a coach? Or have you ever coached any competitive sports? Not talking little league or junior high. I'm talking competitive sports. Until you have walked in those shoes, had that kind of expectations and pressure on you to see how you react you don't have a leg to stand on. If the rules allow for stupid things to happen and the coach takes advantage of the idiots that make the rules then good for him and his/her athletes.

Evidently you have walked in those shoes?

 

[Jaybird319]

Evidently people have not witness the level of craziness at pee-wee/youth tournaments the past few years. See all kinds of shadinesses, from "coached up" kids and lowly coaches

 

[theIowaHawk]

Originally posted by Jaybird319:
Evidently people have not witness the level of craziness at pee-wee/youth tournaments the past few years. See all kinds of shadinesses, from "coached up" kids and lowly coaches

What relevance does this have to the discussion? If many "coaches" do it, it becomes ethical and honest?

Teaching kids "win at all cost" is having as much of an effect on today's society as the "everybody wins" culture.

And it isn't good.

 

[Jaybird319]

Dang dude your a bitter man. And your morals/unethical/ethical blanket statements and retorts are useful in this discussion? Just rolling as a troll for fun?? Didn't realize every comment on a board has to pertain precisely to the orignal thread statement, lmao. Get a better life.

Guess what, win at all cost as been around since the birth of sports. Since this statement will be dissected, my "coached up" comment is in context of any level of coaching push the boundaries, regardless of Pros, NCAA, HS, MS, youth and finally yes even pee-wee.

 

[HawkTalk3]

From Foley's Friday Mailbag

"The Nye-Smith match is an excellent example of a referee being outmatched by a witty coach. I don't blame Henson for stopping the action. However, the referee is supposed to let the action play out and review locked hands after a stalemate, out of bounds or other natural stop in action. If there had been locked hands the referees can go back and set the time to the moment of the infraction..."

http://intermatwrestle.com/articles/14360

 

[Lsanders20]

Originally posted by HawkTalk3:

From Foley's Friday Mailbag

"The Nye-Smith match is an excellent example of a referee being outmatched by a witty coach. I don't blame Henson for stopping the action. However, the referee is supposed to let the action play out and review locked hands after a stalemate, out of bounds or other natural stop in action. If there had been locked hands the referees can go back and set the time to the moment of the infraction..."

"witty coach" Enough said. Should the ref have blown the whistle then? No, but he did.