From Craig Sesker

[GG121AND2]

People are starting to realize that the emperor is naked. Good stuff in this.

A right on rant.

 

[final drive]

Alot of great suggestions and analysis !

 

[MVPFAN]

Amen!

 

[Jackhawk87]

Hopefully somebody is listening.

 

[TNTwrestle]

Couldn't have said it better, except I like the riding time only with back points idea better than the no riding time.

 

[NutZac]

Perfect.
Posted from Rivals Mobile

 

[Schwick]

Good article. I am for the riding time point only if backpoints are scored.

 

[Ihawkd9times]

What year did the riding time point get implemented?

 

[Neo_Hawk]

Excellent piece. Now will the people that make/enforce the rules read it? I hope so, I don't mind good defense, but when combined with constant back petal, that's not D, that's running. It seems to get worse every year and is beginning to feel like the wrestling equivalent of baseballs "Deadball Era".

#DEADMATERA
This post was edited on 3/10 4:44 PM by Neo_Hawk

 

[Old_wrestling_fan]

Originally posted by MVPFAN:
Amen!

Nailed it! After reading that article, I had another thought...when a match goes to OT...first takedown or penalty point wins. 3 minute periods, as long as that does not endanger the health of the athlete. Make the wrestlers wrestle. No more ride outs, RT differential, etc, criteria.

 

[wyldhawk9]

GG, Thank you for sharing! I'm going to post this article on my local HS message boards. Let's share this wherever possible. The rules committee meets on April 15-17 this year. Maybe if enough dust gets kicked up, something will happen.

 

[EvilMonkeyInTheCloset]

Riding time only from a takedown or an offensive point scored?

 

[rossel 33]

Great article. Can't find much to disagree with.

Those 30 sec OT rideouts are ridiculous sometimes.

 

[Gobblin]

An absolute grand slam from Sesker!
Posted from Rivals Mobile

 

[OldFatSlow]

Excellent Article with great ideas!

 

[pumpdog20]

Being a USA Wrestling writer, does this guy have any pull what so ever?

 

[northernboarderhawk]

Absolutely wonderful article, couldn't agree more with all of it. I do have to say that I really like the idea of at least one of the wrestlers having to score 5 points to get a win. I could see that making the wresters more active. Biggest thing is the officials still have to start calling the stalling.

I would hope this is a big wake-up call to the powers that be. Lets get it fixed.

 

[Gobblin]

What if their was no clock and the first wrestler to score, say, 7 points won???
Posted from Rivals Mobile

 

[Jackhawk87]

Originally posted by Gobblin:
What if their was no clock and the first wrestler to score, say, 7 points won???

Posted from Rivals Mobile


Every Tsirtsis match would last 45 minutes or so.

 

[AFHawk86]

Thanks GG. You must have forwarded my suggestions to Craig.

I think we have the momentum to force positive changes from the NCAA.
Posted from Rivals Mobile

 

[Green Moss]

This is spot on.

 

[86_90]

Originally posted by AFHawk86:
Thanks GG. You must have forwarded my suggestions to Craig.

I think we have the momentum to force positive changes from the NCAA.
Posted from Rivals Mobile

Though some hate to admit, this wrestling forum has legs/wings.

I advise everyone that is concerned about the current state of wrestling to start or continue to voice your opinions here. The more topics on stalling the faster the topic is addressed.

 

[goiahawkeyes]

Originally posted by northernboarderhawk:
Absolutely wonderful article, couldn't agree more with all of it. I do have to say that I really like the idea of at least one of the wrestlers having to score 5 points to get a win. I could see that making the wresters more active. Biggest thing is the officials still have to start calling the stalling.

I would hope this is a big wake-up call to the powers that be. Lets get it fixed.

So what happens if they don't score 5 points? Draw? If so, that doesn't solve anything. All other points by Sesker were spot on, just having a tough time with this one.

 

[pablow]

I agree with the article but IMO the officials are subverting every rule change designed to eliminate stalling. As many here have pointed out, we already have many rules prohibiting stalling. If the current rules were strictly enforced we'd be fine.

Every year this comes up and the rules are tweaked. Yet, the stalling problem seems to get worse with every "cure.". The five second count rule enacted last year actually made matters worse. The fleeing the mat rule, similarly, is not enforced. Amazingly the injury timeout rule did work - [Hooray! Blind squirrel finds nut]

The correction cannot be made until the officials become ruthless in enforcing the rules. Rule changes just provide cover for the gutless refs IMO.



This post was edited on 3/11 8:50 AM by pablow

 

[HawkeyeDenny]

I think that OT should be on their feet only until someone gets a Takedown or hit with a stalling point...

 

[Gobblin]

Originally posted by goiahawkeyes:

Originally posted by northernboarderhawk:
Absolutely wonderful article, couldn't agree more with all of it. I do have to say that I really like the idea of at least one of the wrestlers having to score 5 points to get a win. I could see that making the wresters more active. Biggest thing is the officials still have to start calling the stalling.

I would hope this is a big wake-up call to the powers that be. Lets get it fixed.

So what happens if they don't score 5 points?  Draw?  If so, that doesn't solve anything.  All other points by Sesker were spot on, just having a tough time with this one.

Overtime starting from neutral til some scores 5. No rideouts.
Posted from Rivals Mobile

 

[Hawk_82]

I like the rule of only getting a riding point if there is a back exposure (1 count).

Get rid of current overtime and make it start neutral and go 5 min or until someone scores a point or stalling is called.

Enforce current stalling rules better