Ironside comments on stalling

[augiehawk]

During the break when Brooks got the medical forfeit, Ironside was talking about the stalling that is being allowed by the refs. He blames the wrestlers for not creating action, but also the refs for allowing them to get away with it. He was even calling out Evans saying that in the Evans and Storley match, they both should have been disqualified out of the match for stalling. Said that it was an overtime match, in which neither guy made a real attempt to score, and there were zero stall warnings. He just couldn't believe it.

I got completely fed up watching the finals. Tomasello took one shot, scored, and then did nothing the rest of the match. It took Gilman 6 or 7 shots with Tomasello backing to the edge, then half circling back in, to get 1 stall call. Right then I knew he would never get another. Many other finals matches were the same.

I think most refs feel they don't want to decide the match by calling stalling, but they are deciding the match by allowing stalling. If one guy does nothing but back up and they allow it, they are affecting the match.

 

[wyldhawk9]

Originally posted by augiehawk:
During the break when Brooks got the medical forfeit, Ironside was talking about the stalling that is being allowed by the refs. He blames the wrestlers for not creating action, but also the refs for allowing them to get away with it. He was even calling out Evans saying that in the Evans and Storley match, they both should have been disqualified out of the match for stalling. Said that it was an overtime match, in which neither guy made a real attempt to score, and there were zero stall warnings. He just couldn't believe it.

I got completely fed up watching the finals. Tomasello took one shot, scored, and then did nothing the rest of the match. It took Gilman 6 or 7 shots with Tomasello backing to the edge, then half circling back in, to get 1 stall call. Right then I knew he would never get another. Many other finals matches were the same.

I think most refs feel they don't want to decide the match by calling stalling, but they are deciding the match by allowing stalling. If one guy does nothing but back up and they allow it, they are affecting the match.

Totally agree with the point being made. I'm reposting my sentiments below from another thread/similar topic:


Officials have become increasingly reluctant to call stalling - I assume out of a desire not to be the deciding factor - because match scoring is so low. I used to put onus on the wrestlers to make stalling so obvious that it must be called until this weekend. The light bulb for me was that I didn't see a single fleeing the mat call this weekend, and in several instances the fleeing wrestler was gripping the edge of the mat to pull himself out of bounds (and Iowa was guilty of this on at least one occasion). I don't know a more obvious example of fleeing than grabbing a stationary object out of bounds to pull yourself off the mat.

Emphasizing activity and penalizing inactivity will at the very least 1. promote more offense, which will lead to more offense & thus 2. Minimize the official's role in the outcome of the match.

 

[Old_wrestling_fan]

Relying on the refs to call stalling is futile IMO. Yes, there is stalling all over the place, including plenty of examples on our own team. But the sport is doomed if our "answer" is for the refs to make more subjective calls.

I say change the rules, as radically as is necessary, to where the aggressor gets rewarded sufficiently for taking the risk of initiating a takedown.

 

[wyldhawk9]

Originally posted by Old_wrestling_fan:
Relying on the refs to call stalling is futile IMO. Yes, there is stalling all over the place, including plenty of examples on our own team. But the sport is doomed if our "answer" is for the refs to make more subjective calls.

I say change the rules, as radically as is necessary, to where the aggressor gets rewarded sufficiently for taking the risk of initiating a takedown.

Please elaborate. I think we all agree. Penalizing inactivity is already in the rule book and is the easiest step to implement to reward the aggressor/penalize the staller...ergo the current frustration. What objective measures do you suggest?

 

[slicone]

I'm sorry but you are just wrong, all sports have some amount of subjectivity. Wrestling is no different. ask 10 people if they think Hammond was pinned vs Walsh. That affects a match way more then calling stalling. If it gets called, wrestlers will adjust, and as good as these guys are it would be awesome wrestling, and scrambles. In basketball they say a foul could be called every play. The players figure out how they are calling it and adjust. Football, I have heard could be called every play also. Baseball every ump has a different strike zone. Get rid of the officials that don't call stalling, they will call it and we will get our sport back!

 

[Auger]

I live out West where wrestling fans only exist in small pockets. It has been really hard to grow the sport partially due to stalling. Yesterday I was at a bar watching the tourney with two buddies who have partial interest in wrestling and they were both turned away because of the stalling. One friend even stated that he thought wrestlers were tough and didn't understand the cowardly actions of back stepping after having the lead. I couldn't argue with him. When half the match is two guys slapping at each other and the other half is one guy back stepping it doesn't make for great TV sports watching to casual fans. Wrestling has been a very important sport for my family so it is hard to see it viewed so harshly by other sport fans but I can't blame them after watching yesterday's championship.

 

[oldschoolhawk69]

Hard not to agree with Ironside. Refs need to call it when it is present but WE HAVE TO CREATE ACTION. To get the stall calls today is not going to happen without creating offense. A lot of teams have figured out by slowing down the match it creates problems for us. We have always use good defense turning it into offense but when opponents don't or won't shoot that takes away scoring opportunities for us. Guys from the past have found ways to score against opponents that continually go backwards and these current guys need to also. We have to create get opponents to react and better yet, finish shots. Granted Gilman took a ton of shots and Tomasello I think should have been called for more stalling but look at the finals as a whole, ONE really, ONE take down out of 4 matches?? Evans finishing 3rd with no take downs all tournament? The refs have some blame for not keeping the matches offensive by calling stalling. But we have to go back to Gable's and now TNT's words, score points and take the refs out of the match, and you have to finish what you start (have to finish shots).

 

[artradley]

The main areas are stalling on your feet and stalling on top, which I believe are separate issues and should be dealt with separately.

On Feet
Push out rule. I don't like the subjectivity that sometimes comes into play, but the current system is failing and the increased action/scoring would be worth the risk.

On Top
Forget stall warnings, but based on the definitions that are already in the book (parallel, repeatedly dropping to a leg, etc) when the referee identifies that the top wrestler is stalling simply blow it dead, award the bottom wrestler an escape, and stand them up. I think this would make it easier for refs to make that call, and so they would do it more often.

 

[pablow]

IMO the D-1 officials are poorly supervised. Other sports, for example the NFL and NHL, aggressively institute rule changes through officials that professionally trained and supervised. Those leagues make a change and - BAM - it's done.

D-1 wrestling official are easily the worst trained and supervised in all of sports. It's not even debatable.

It's not up to the wrestlers. For example, how can you expect Gilman to be more aggressive going forward when the lesson he learned yesterday was if you give up a takedown to a quality opponent, better just forget it.

It's not a matter of philosophy (let the wrestlers decide the match), the refs are killing the sport. In 1993 I took my brother-in-law [a non-wrestling fan] to the Saturday night finals in Ames. He loved it. Today, I will not take a non-fan to a D-1 wrestling event. I would not inflict that on someone that is not already bought into the sport. That is sad.

 

[centralhawk24]

I hate the audible 5-count for stalling. Too much hanging on and letting go when the ref gets to 4. It's actually added stalling into match strategy from what I've seen.

 

[Auger]

If wrestling is going to grow they need to do something about stalling and make it more watchable on TV for casual fans. There are too many other sports that are on the incline out West that are pulling from the small wrestling pockets. Wrestling out West is a slowly dying sport at all levels.

 

[ih8iast8]

Originally posted by wyldhawk9:

Originally posted by Old_wrestling_fan:
Relying on the refs to call stalling is futile IMO. Yes, there is stalling all over the place, including plenty of examples on our own team. But the sport is doomed if our "answer" is for the refs to make more subjective calls.

I say change the rules, as radically as is necessary, to where the aggressor gets rewarded sufficiently for taking the risk of initiating a takedown.

Please elaborate. I think we all agree. Penalizing inactivity is already in the rule book and is the easiest step to implement to reward the aggressor/penalize the staller...ergo the current frustration. What objective measures do you suggest?

Easy...point for push out, just like FS. & honestly, I don't know that rule would help us but it would penalize the inactive wrestler & force the action. The thing I like about this rule is that it is NOT subjective.

 

[nu2u]

arm the refs with electric cattle prods.

no warnings.

 

[Old_wrestling_fan]

Originally posted by wyldhawk9:

Originally posted by Old_wrestling_fan:
Relying on the refs to call stalling is futile IMO. Yes, there is stalling all over the place, including plenty of examples on our own team. But the sport is doomed if our "answer" is for the refs to make more subjective calls.

I say change the rules, as radically as is necessary, to where the aggressor gets rewarded sufficiently for taking the risk of initiating a takedown.

Please elaborate. I think we all agree. Penalizing inactivity is already in the rule book and is the easiest step to implement to reward the aggressor/penalize the staller...ergo the current frustration. What objective measures do you suggest?

Perhaps my wording did not convey what I was trying to say...the word "more" in what I bolded above is about quantity, not more subjectivity. In other words, if the rules already prohibit stalling, and they do, and the refs already do not call it correctly or often enough, and I think just about everyone would agree with that...then I personally see no reason to be optimistic that something will change in the future that will help this dilemma...assuming we leave the rules as they are now and just hope/expect/obligate that refs will start calling stalling more.

I also would be skeptical that we will all be satisfied with a sport that puts even more "say-so" into the hands of the refs. I would strongly prefer changes that take things out of the hands of the refs and somehow, someway leave it primarily up to the two competitors to determine who is the best wrestler.

An incomplete, off the top of my head, list of things that I would suggest be tried or considered...

1. A push out rule. I think this would deter so much of the backing up to the edge of the mat and THEN circling a little that we see now.
2a. Eliminate riding time, unless there was a takedown that preceded the ride.
2b. After 20 seconds on the mat and no change...both wrestlers to their feet...no escape points.
3. Award 3 points for takedowns. Heck, maybe even 4 or 5 points for takedowns.
4. If the wrestler intentionally releases the bottom man...no escape point is awarded. (This would probably have to be done at a stoppage to ensure that it was really intentional.)

These are merely suggestions for consideration, we would need to be careful that there are not unintended side effects that could slow the action down even more.

Bottom line, if D1 college wrestling is reduced to where 80% of the matches are 0 to 0 in the first period and go to the third tie breaker to see who can get away from who a few seconds quicker, all without any, or many, takedowns and/or back points, then it deserves to die a death. Others may disagree AND even be correct, but IMO, I don't think the answer is to rely on the refs. We need to change other things so the refs do NOT have to get involved.

 

[Sett1997]

Originally posted by artradley:
The main areas are stalling on your feet and stalling on top, which I believe are separate issues and should be dealt with separately.

On Feet
Push out rule. I don't like the subjectivity that sometimes comes into play, but the current system is failing and the increased action/scoring would be worth the risk.

On Top
Forget stall warnings, but based on the definitions that are already in the book (parallel, repeatedly dropping to a leg, etc) when the referee identifies that the top wrestler is stalling simply blow it dead, award the bottom wrestler an escape, and stand them up. I think this would make it easier for refs to make that call, and so they would do it more often.

A good start would be the simple one point push out. Easy to implement.

 

[shobart]

Originally posted by artradley:
The main areas are stalling on your feet and stalling on top, which I believe are separate issues and should be dealt with separately.

On Feet
Push out rule. I don't like the subjectivity that sometimes comes into play, but the current system is failing and the increased action/scoring would be worth the risk.

On Top
Forget stall warnings, but based on the definitions that are already in the book (parallel, repeatedly dropping to a leg, etc) when the referee identifies that the top wrestler is stalling simply blow it dead, award the bottom wrestler an escape, and stand them up. I think this would make it easier for refs to make that call, and so they would do it more often.

I wish they would just flat out get rid of the riding time point. This is just my simple, and humble, opinion, but it seems to me for every wrestler that is actually "working for something" on top, there are at least 20 others doing a stall ride with hopes of just getting to the minute mark for that one point. We see the riding time point play a role in determining a lot of winners these days, particularly when you are looking at two top tier guys who are very evenly matched on their feet. Yes, eliminating the riding time point doesn't prevent stalling on the bottom per se, but I think it would help to a certain degree,.

Part of it is a mind set as well to a certain extent. I think a ref could be more inclined to call stalling for a guy on top who's just going to rid paralell versus the guy who's truly working to score from top, even if the guy who is working to score isn't necessarily "getting anywhere". Right now, I see a lot of stall rides not being treated any differently than a guy who is riding and working to score. Plus, I think shifts a wrestler's focus a bit when they understand that there are no points awarded for riding time.

Only thing about the push out rule that could be an issue (to me anyway) is if a guy is just bulldogging a kid out of bounds, without changing levels and/or really working for a shot, wouldn't that be one point? I see that from time to time, where maybe a coach is yelling for stalling, but his kid is only pushing the other kid out of bounds. It just seems to me that rule could get a little fuzzy.

Obviously, everything is subjective, and there isn't really a 100% cure to this, but I would like to see some approach to change. Actually would be nice to see coaches to start pushing for changes as obviously, that could help. Outside of watching Logan (unfortunately against Jeva) and Martinez-Ness, the finals yesterday we mind blowingly boring to watch.

Not sure what others think as there's a lot of discussion around this from time to time, but man, I wish the powers that be could take hold of this and run with it to make/force some changes.

 

[HoundedHawk]

I used to take numerous people with me to college wrestling, but now I can't. It's just too stinking boring.

Look at the B1G tourney. Evans doesn't record a single TD and manages 3rd. What does that say? Both him and Storley should have been stalled out and each disqualified by the end of the 1st.



Look at the mindset of our wrestlers. Tomasello wins the B1G title and in an interview brags about keeping on his offense!! He took ONE shot, and even the absolutely pathetically slow to call stalling refs gave him stall calls.

People are winning by stinking riding time with not even a hit of back exposure. BOOOOOORRRRRIIIIIIINNNNNNNGGGGG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



Either the refs have to radically enforce the actual rules, or new rules are needed. I've already advocated the pushout. I think that would help fix it, too.



This will be my 21st NCAA championships I've gone to. I'm appalled at how most matches have slowly evolved into an event in which my mind actually starts wandering.

This post was edited on 3/9 2:39 PM by HoundedHawk

 

[redghost1974]

I agree with all that was stated previously on stalling. Let's take the refs out of the equation and stop plodding head on. Create some angles and vary the attack. Tomasello had one takedown and Gilman outshot him 20-0 the rest of the match, but what was his shot/shots that he took? Straight ahead and ear to ear set ups, not really effective. No redirection, no ankle picks, no real movement but straight. Sorenson had the same issue.

Create an angle and chain wrestle. The two best matches were I-Mart/Ness and Kokesh/Brown, tons fo action and movement. Ref's deserve plenty of blame but we need to stop whining when our guy didn't do enough to win. 7 minutes of wrestling and you can only manage a escape and maybe a riding point? That is not enough to keep a victory from being stolen from you.

 

[AFHawk86]

Eliminating RT would reduce some stalling but the push out doesn't necessarily do anything about guys not creating any offense. Refs need to play their part as well.
Posted from Rivals Mobile

 

[wyldhawk9]

I'm not sure how this stuff actually gets changed (and who the actual decision makers are), but according to the document below, some of the things we're complaining about are on the docket regarding stalling. However, would one of you more politically-savvy individuals be willing to tell us how we go about making our complaints a little more effective? IE, who should we contact and what is the most receivable way to communicate our concerns? The rules committee will be meeting again April 13-15, 2015...

NCAA Rules Committee meeting notes from 2014.

 

[HoundedHawk]

Originally posted by AFHawk86:
Eliminating RT would reduce some stalling but the push out doesn't necessarily do anything about guys not creating any offense. Refs need to play their part as well.
Posted from Rivals Mobile

Since pushing out scores an offensive point, it would become offensive.

What I know is that it certainly works in freestyle. When they get near the edge all sorts of crazy stuff happens.

 

[MVPFAN]

Here are the rules and if the gutless refs actually followed them like they are supposed to things would be fine. Someones ass needs to be on the line! In no other sport do they not enforce the rules. I agree with the poster who said the 5 count sucks, it has created more stalling because before a ref could hit a guy anytime he felt they needed it and now they just stall their asses off and know full well they won't get called because they can hear the count. They just move up for a second and the count starts over, it is a friggin joke. Meanwhile they have totally forgot about calling all the other stalling listed below that has nothing to do with a count. If they see stalling then call it, screw the counting crap! Call it like you are supposed to and how the rules say and people will adjust and quick. Take all the damn refs and have off season training watching all these bullshit matches and instruct them about all the places they should be calling stalling. Refs who don't follow the book can be let go.

I do like the push out if they are going to continue to not do their jobs. I do worry about it leading to teams getting a bunch of meat heads to win matches just by pushing people and it would really get boring. I'd maybe have it be a point if they step out on their own or to avoid a shot or wrestling hold like underhooks etc. If they do a push out they still need to call stalling if a guy runs all over inside the circle avoiding action. I guess people will learn to stay away from the edge either way.

I like getting rid of riding time for sure, the sooner the better.

I also like an action clock and if on the mat no one can get a turn or escape in 30 seconds then put them back up. If you get backs you can get another 30 seconds to work.




5.9 Stalling


5.9.1 Initiating Action. Action is to be maintained throughout the match by the contestants staying near the center of the mat and wrestling aggressively in all positions (top, bottom or neutral). Stalling is defined as one or both wrestlers attempting to avoid wrestling action as an offensive or defensive strategy. When a referee recognizes stalling, the first violation will be a warning; the second violation will result in 1 point being awarded to the opponent; the third violation is 1 point being awarded to the opponent; the fourth violation is 1 point being awarded to the opponent; and the fifth violation will result in a disqualification. A "double stalling" violation is given when both wrestlers fail to initiate an offense. (See Penalty Table for sequence of penalties.)


5.9.2 Neutral Position Stalling. Each wrestler must attempt to work toward the center of the mat and continue wrestling in an attempt to secure a takedown, RULE 5 / INFRACTIONS WR-57 regardless of the time or score of the match. Stalling in the neutral position is defined as follows: [/B]


5.9.2.1 Continually backing away from the opponent without creating offensive action. This happens all the time.[/B]


5.9.2.2 Near the edge of the wrestling area, a wrestler shall not leave the wrestling area unless it is to sprawl from an opponent's takedown attempt or when interlocked in wrestling. Over and over with this one[/B]


5.9.2.3 A wrestler shall be called for stalling if kicking out from a lower leg hold when this action results in the defending wrestler going out of the wrestling area. Happens a lot, have not called it for 2 or 3 years[/B]


5.9.2.4 Fleeing or attempting to flee the wrestling area as a means of avoiding being scored upon. (See Rule 5.13.) Have not seen this called much if at all but happens a lot.[/B]


5.9.3 Stalling-Offensive and Defensive Position. Offensive and defensive wrestlers shall make an attempt to sustain active wrestling and remain in the center. The offensive and defensive stalling situations include:


5.9.3.1 The offensive wrestler does not aggressively attempt to break down the opponent. This is big time abused.[/B]


5.9.3.2 Either wrestler pushing or pulling the opponent out of bounds to prevent scoring. Big time abused, people are constantly pushing or pulling people OB to avoid an escape. This is even easy to call, should be automatic.


5.9.3.3 The offensive wrestler grasping the defensive wrestler's leg(s) with both hands or arms, unless such action is designed to break down the opponent for the purpose of securing a fall or to prevent an escape or reversal. Big time stall tactic.


5.9.3.4 Repeatedly grasping or interlocking hands around a leg without attempting an offensive move. Big time stall tactic.


5.9.3.5 The defensive wrestler must initiate action to escape or reverse the opponent. Done some but not as bad as top guy stalling.


5.9.3.6 Repeatedly applying the legs while in the rear-standing position is stalling. With the defensive wrestler in a standing position, the offensive wrestler is allowed reaction time to attempt to bring the opponent back to the mat. Waters


5.9.4 Stalling by Delaying Match. Delaying the match-such as straggling back from out of bounds or unnecessarily changing or adjusting equipment-shall be penalized as stalling. This crap is non stop, guys dinking around and slowly getting back to the center while the other guy and ref wait. If the ref and one guy are ready and waiting then nail em don't wait on em.

This post was edited on 3/9 3:24 PM by MVPFAN

This post was edited on 3/9 4:13 PM by MVPFAN

 

[LutherAce]

Originally posted by redghost1974:

I agree with all that was stated previously on stalling. Let's take the refs out of the equation and stop plodding head on. Create some angles and vary the attack. Tomasello had one takedown and Gilman outshot him 20-0 the rest of the match, but what was his shot/shots that he took? Straight ahead and ear to ear set ups, not really effective. No redirection, no ankle picks, no real movement but straight. Sorenson had the same issue.

Create an angle and chain wrestle. The two best matches were I-Mart/Ness and Kokesh/Brown, tons fo action and movement. Ref's deserve plenty of blame but we need to stop whining when our guy didn't do enough to win. 7 minutes of wrestling and you can only manage a escape and maybe a riding point? That is not enough to keep a victory from being stolen from you.

effectiveness shouldn't be a factor...who cares if they are straight on, level changing attempts. One wrestler is trying to be offensive and the other is blocking. Now, if it was a knee tap while still in a tie, that is another issue, but Gilman was changing levels and trying to create the angle, and Tomasello would just tie up to prevent it, and hang on.

Jordan Burroughs has a shot that is straight on so it's a valid offensive move.

 

[pablow]

Great post MVPFAN. Every year the rules committee rearranges the toothpaste in the tube - total waste of time.

 

[wahlberg]

Originally posted by Auger:
I live out West where wrestling fans only exist in small pockets. It has been really hard to grow the sport partially due to stalling. Yesterday I was at a bar watching the tourney with two buddies who have partial interest in wrestling and they were both turned away because of the stalling. One friend even stated that he thought wrestlers were tough and didn't understand the cowardly actions of back stepping after having the lead. I couldn't argue with him. When half the match is two guys slapping at each other and the other half is one guy back stepping it doesn't make for great TV sports watching to casual fans. Wrestling has been a very important sport for my family so it is hard to see it viewed so harshly by other sport fans but I can't blame them after watching yesterday's championship.

Situations like this are exactly why a system has got to be figured out in a hurry to get guys being aggressive throughout the match. Wrestling needs all the fans it can get, especially in places like out west where it isn't like what we've got in B1G country.

 

[Stanley75]

Put some incentive in it for not stalling. Any first period ending in 0-0 A point goes to the most active wrestler. If you don't grab a leg in any period a point is warded to the other wrestler. If neither grabs a leg the guy with the most shots gets the point. Don't put it on the refs put it on the wrestlers. Riding time should go to the down wrestler. If a guy rides on top and just is riding for an entire period a point goes to the bottom wrestler. Lots of things can be done to get more action.

 

[Old_wrestling_fan]

Originally posted by MVPFAN:
... In no other sport do they not enforce the rules...

In the main, I very much agree with you...but in this one key area, I see it differently.

A case could be made that in football, virtually offensive play could draw one or more offensive holding or defensive interference penalties. A case could be made that in basketball, virtually every trip down the floor could draw a whistle(foul) on someone, etc.

While there are fouls called and penalty flags thrown of course, it is probably only for about 20% of the infractions that actually occur. As long as there is a referee involved, there's always going to be problems IMO. In other words, I think there is an uneven enforcement of the rules in just about any athletic competition...so let's design a contest that does not rely on someone else.

Jump the shark wrestling world...make changes to the rules to reward an aggressive wrestler and minimize the role of the ref. Relying on the disinterested 3rd party to decide a contest is asking for the shameful crap that we see so often now.

 

[augiehawk]

I agree that we need some direction on how to get things changed. I'm not sure what the best course of action is. Signs at Nationals, emails to director of officiating. Something needs to be done, and to me the easiest change is just get the refs to enforce the existing rules on stalling. I don't want to add anything to the sport that make scoring more confusing, as I know enough people already that say they watch wrestling but they are not sure of all the scoring.

Hopefully someone can come up with some ideas to let all of us wrestling fans drive change.

 

[IaPhoneMan4Hawks]

Originally posted by wyldhawk9:
I'm not sure how this stuff actually gets changed (and who the actual decision makers are), but according to the document below, some of the things we're complaining about are on the docket regarding stalling. However, would one of you more politically-savvy individuals be willing to tell us how we go about making our complaints a little more effective? IE, who should we contact and what is the most receivable way to communicate our concerns? The rules committee will be meeting again April 13-15, 2015...

NCAA Rules Committee meeting notes from 2014.

Well, I'm guessing most of the names on the last page are public figures of some type and can be communicated with (email, social media, etc) I'm sure they already hear it from fans, coaches, and current and former wrestlers but it can't hurt to let them know. I am of the same vein, was really boring to watch even as a die hard fan. It has to be fixed if this sport is to survive.

 

[pumpdog20]

After 1st stall call, get put on a 20 second shot clock, but different than freestyle, the 20 seconds don't count as real match time, it's an "additional" 20 seconds. You get the takedown, no points scored. You don't, 1 point for your opponent.


Then a point after each additional call.

 

[LutherAce]

Originally posted by IaPhoneMan4Hawks:

Originally posted by wyldhawk9:
I'm not sure how this stuff actually gets changed (and who the actual decision makers are), but according to the document below, some of the things we're complaining about are on the docket regarding stalling. However, would one of you more politically-savvy individuals be willing to tell us how we go about making our complaints a little more effective? IE, who should we contact and what is the most receivable way to communicate our concerns? The rules committee will be meeting again April 13-15, 2015...

NCAA Rules Committee meeting notes from 2014.

Well, I'm guessing most of the names on the last page are public figures of some type and can be communicated with (email, social media, etc) I'm sure they already hear it from fans, coaches, and current and former wrestlers but it can't hurt to let them know. I am of the same vein, was really boring to watch even as a die hard fan. It has to be fixed if this sport is to survive.

One thing to realize: You can't just bombard them with "Hey, call stalling more...this is stupid to watch ballroom dancing"

Support your email with facts and examples across the board (recent versus 5 years ago, versus 10 years ago). Show that you care. Provide your YouTube matches of what stalling was like in 90s and compare it to a match today where even less goes on, yet no stalling. Provide insight as to why 2-1 scores are killing the sport.

 

[bawlmerhawk]

If you've forgotten what wrestling looked like when wrestlers knew they had to initiate action, check out any match from 30 years ago. I randomly picked Schultz/Banach from 82 finals. 6-5 after the first period! Imagine two giants showing that much offense these days. In 2015, if Banach had a quick 4-1 lead, he'd be dancing around the mat avoiding confrontation. Enforce the rules.
Mark Schultz vs. Ed Banach

 

[blak&gold]

Personally, I think the officials have to be forced to make calls.

If the score is 0-0 at 1:00, one or both need to be cautioned.
If the score is 0-0 at 2:00, one or both need to be cautioned.

2nd period

If a wrestler chooses top or bottom, they get 1:00 minute to score, if that does not happen they are brought to their feet.
At 1:40 of the period if there has still been no scoring in the period, one or both need to be cautioned.

3rd period

If a wrestler chooses top or bottom, they get 1:00 minute to score, if that does not happen they are brought to their feet.
At 1:40 of the period if there has still been no scoring in the period, one or both need to be cautioned.

Every period is forced to have a point scored or a stalling call (two in first).

OT

Same as current except, if it goes to the final OT instead of riding time difference official decides winner.

Make officials know that they need to impact match. If they don't do it early then they have to decide the winner which they probably don't want to.

MMA does pretty well at getting aggressive competitions, they have to impress judges. If I am a wrestler and I think the official might make the call, I will be forced to be aggressive.

 

[Vallholl]

Late to the conversation but Ironside commented a few times about stalling. Much more than normal (more than ever before since I have been listening). During Telford's match at the end of the second, Mark about blew a gasket that McM got a standing ride for 10 seconds.

 

[clhawks00]

I know many on here are Flo haters but today on their radio broadcast they were talking a lot about stalling. Particularly the Gilman/Tomasello match. Both CP and Willie called out Tomasello for the way he wrestled the match. Very good unbiased analysis. They then talked about how certain wrestlers play the stalling game and refs allow them to do it so more guys are taking advantage to get the W.

 

[CA_Wrestler]

While this is true, I think you have to realize that even though Gilman is good...he's nowhere near as good as JB is in neutral with his shots.

 

[Azchief32]

Originally posted by clhawks00:
I know many on here are Flo haters but today on their radio broadcast they were talking a lot about stalling. Particularly the Gilman/Tomasello match. Both CP and Willie called out Tomasello for the way he wrestled the match. Very good unbiased analysis. They then talked about how certain wrestlers play the stalling game and refs allow them to do it so more guys are taking advantage to get the W.

Just listened...both Christian and Willie were on point. I know both guys are NT fans but they straight up called him out. What sucks is that they are right: Tomasello is normally aggressive...too bad he stalled his ass off FTW.

Edit: Then I listened further and then they had a "I told you so" moment on Jeva saying that it was the fan base calling for the Grothus cut. True, but Grothus did attempt a cut. Had Jeva been as solid as he was at B1G, Grothus probably doesn't attempt the cut.
This post was edited on 3/9 7:44 PM by Azchief32

 

[255]

Someone call Ben Askrin...he knows the answer.

 

[northernboarderhawk]

Originally posted by blak&gold:
Personally, I think the officials have to be forced to make calls.

If the score is 0-0 at 1:00, one or both need to be cautioned.
If the score is 0-0 at 2:00, one or both need to be cautioned.

2nd period

If a wrestler chooses top or bottom, they get 1:00 minute to score, if that does not happen they are brought to their feet.
At 1:40 of the period if there has still been no scoring in the period, one or both need to be cautioned.

3rd period

If a wrestler chooses top or bottom, they get 1:00 minute to score, if that does not happen they are brought to their feet.
At 1:40 of the period if there has still been no scoring in the period, one or both need to be cautioned.

Every period is forced to have a point scored or a stalling call (two in first).

OT

Same as current except, if it goes to the final OT instead of riding time difference official decides winner.

Make officials know that they need to impact match. If they don't do it early then they have to decide the winner which they probably don't want to.

MMA does pretty well at getting aggressive competitions, they have to impress judges. If I am a wrestler and I think the official might make the call, I will be forced to be aggressive.

I like what you are thinking as far as calling stalling with 0-0 scores, also know your ideas are just examples but I do not like the idea on putting time constraints on when to call it. I personal would just like to see it called like it was in the 80's early 90's. Pretty much every match had a stall called on one if not both wrestlers if there wasn't any scoring late 1st. period, then they didn't wait until the next period was over before they would call it again if there was still no activity. The parallel body ride, riding behind the arms, they would call this quit regularly and early if the top guy wasn't at least getting off to the side and trying to turn his opponent . I always loved it when Gable would stand at the edge of the mat and holler that guy is stalling that's one, and it was his own wrestler that he wanted the stalling called on. I really think it would help the sport a lot if coach's would do this today. As I already know this isn't going to happen because the coach's also know that with the way the officials call it by todays standard it may help their guy get that exiting 2-1 win. As many others have already pointed out the 5 count is one of the worst things that they have done to the sport. It just lets the official of the hook for actually doing his job in the match. Not all officials start the count at the same time, not all of them count at the same pace. What should be a 5 count for some, actually turns into about a count of 7 to 8 or even worse. Officials need to be held accountable, and even suspended for lack of doing what they are getting paid to do. I realize everything is subjective and could be hard to get done, but it can be done. Somebody has got to grow a pair and start to enforce the rules.

 

[caseyballzz]

Originally posted by clhawks00:
I know many on here are Flo haters but today on their radio broadcast they were talking a lot about stalling. Particularly the Gilman/Tomasello match. Both CP and Willie called out Tomasello for the way he wrestled the match. Very good unbiased analysis. They then talked about how certain wrestlers play the stalling game and refs allow them to do it so more guys are taking advantage to get the W.

This is what is killing the sport. More and more wrestlers are applying this strategy. It was posted earlier about Evans not recording a takedown in the tournament and getting 3rd. Yes, one of our own has taken this strategy and found out it works.