Matt Brown's "Championship"
- Thread starter maddog50
- Start date
I think a literal linterpretation of the rules backs up the calls. The thing I've always thought, though, is the top wrestler usually gets a split-second of adjustment/reaction time to unlock his hands once he's taken his opponent to the mat. Wilps was not given that benefit of the doubt IMO. I will say, though, that Brown outworked Wilps during the match, so I'm not disappointed with the outcome.
I was very happy that they made the calls because they were the correct calls and it was nice to see. If they wouldn't have called the locked hands after the guy clearly locked his hands the ncaa refs would have looked even worse than when they let realbuto win.
I didn't like the stall call but it was correct based on the new rules. The locked hands seemed pretty obvious in the replays so I am not certain how they could not have called it. I don't consider his championship to be tainted, he earned it.
locked hands was a slam dunk no brainer. what upset me about it, ref was right in front staring at it and didn't call it. Brown didn't back into the championship if that's what you're implying.
Those calls are never made, certainly not both in the last 12 secs of a Championship match. The early stall call that set up the penalty point call would not be called 99.9% of the time, 8 seconds after a neutral start in the middle of the mat. Calling these by the "letter of the law" when it is almost never done is a poor excuse. Brown worked harder in the match? His opponent was legitimately winning by scoring more points, should not be punished for being ahead.
This post was edited on 3/23 10:44 AM by maddog50
This post was edited on 3/23 10:44 AM by maddog50
You are correct that the refs tend not to call stalling by the book -- while in this case they did. But a clasp they always call closely; even though it's more rare. In fact, the refs completely missed the clasp call much to Brown's detriment, and only overturned it once video review provided irrefutable evidence that there was a clasp.
As a ref myself I can tell you a clasp call is never easier to make than that one. Usually the bottom many is belly down, so the clasp is underneath where it's hard to see. In this case Brown was upright on his knees, so the clasp was as big as day for the whole world to see; and it was held for about 2 seconds. The only bizarre thing is that the ref missed it to begin with.
How did you miss the locked hands? With more than a second left Wilps clearly had one hand clasped over the other until the whistle blew. That was an easy call to make.
The stall call was also the right call per the new rules. Wilps needed to move up. The last thing we need is to complain about the few new rules that encourage people to wrestle and not stall. We need more changes like this.
Getting a good chuckle out how bitter this post is, thanks
118-16 with 2, 5 and 1 finishes, not bad for a kid only wrestling 3 years (and what was his overall recruiting ranking again? like 78? lol)
118-16 with 2, 5 and 1 finishes, not bad for a kid only wrestling 3 years (and what was his overall recruiting ranking again? like 78? lol)
Here are my thoughts on it.
1) The stall call. Yes I know he was on the ankle / leg but was trying to move it, but it's really freaking hard to move up when the guy is kicking away from you. It's one thing to call it when there's no action, but when you're actively trying to move up, I don't know if that justifies the call.
2) You have to allow reaction time. His hands were not locked but they did overlap which is the rule and when you're looking at it in slow-mo that's all your looking for and not how it actually affected the match. Also, I think Brown put his hands in that position and then pointed it out.
I didn't have a horse in the race, just saying what was going threw my head, but I don't think he should have been dinged for either violation.
Didn't Dubuque lose to Nickerson in similar fashion?
1) The stall call. Yes I know he was on the ankle / leg but was trying to move it, but it's really freaking hard to move up when the guy is kicking away from you. It's one thing to call it when there's no action, but when you're actively trying to move up, I don't know if that justifies the call.
2) You have to allow reaction time. His hands were not locked but they did overlap which is the rule and when you're looking at it in slow-mo that's all your looking for and not how it actually affected the match. Also, I think Brown put his hands in that position and then pointed it out.
I didn't have a horse in the race, just saying what was going threw my head, but I don't think he should have been dinged for either violation.
Didn't Dubuque lose to Nickerson in similar fashion?
Both were correct calls. I think this is more demonstrative of how rules are much easier to enforce when you take out the subjectivity of them. There was no room for interpretation for either of them so both got called correctly.
Now let's figure out more ways to take away judgement calls from the refs on things like stall calls.
Now let's figure out more ways to take away judgement calls from the refs on things like stall calls.
KidNittany
I am the only one in this thread that has questioned the calls in the match. All other Hawk fans and refs have tried to point out my ignorance or bias in my point of view. I accept their POV and respectfully disagree. I don't think I have been bitter and I have learned something.
I am not a PSU fan mainly because I am a Hawk fan. I also think that Brown and a dozen or so other PSU wrestlers have been great for the sport.
Trolls should go home.
I am the only one in this thread that has questioned the calls in the match. All other Hawk fans and refs have tried to point out my ignorance or bias in my point of view. I accept their POV and respectfully disagree. I don't think I have been bitter and I have learned something.
I am not a PSU fan mainly because I am a Hawk fan. I also think that Brown and a dozen or so other PSU wrestlers have been great for the sport.
Trolls should go home.
How many times did Wilps sprawl on the edge to get a foot or hand off the mat to get a restart when Brown was in deep? Brown legitimately could have scored in every occasion as the leg was shelved and he was working to pull Wilps back in. I am perfectly fine with the outcome.
Didn't really have time to read all the posts but it sucked that a match ended on locked hands...I was there and didn't have the benefit of seeing it on TV so I have no opinion but Brown was the aggressor the whole match. I thought time had run out when Pitt had locked hands but I never saw it up close. I am ok with Matt Brown being a national champion. Would rather it go to one of the four B1G guys that have been killing each other over the years than anybody else. Kudos to him.
Saw it live and on TV. Those hands were locked. No doubt. The stall was dead on.
The only thing that sucked about the match was that because the red did not call the lock right away and the went through all the drama, it robed Brown of his glory moment. That moment when you won and can be excited. He was robbed of it and that sucks. The kid from Pitt can bitch all he wants. His has were overlapped while they were on the mat. Pee-wee to college that is a point against you. Sucks for him but he locked.
The only thing that sucked about the match was that because the red did not call the lock right away and the went through all the drama, it robed Brown of his glory moment. That moment when you won and can be excited. He was robbed of it and that sucks. The kid from Pitt can bitch all he wants. His has were overlapped while they were on the mat. Pee-wee to college that is a point against you. Sucks for him but he locked.
At the time ESPN had a great angle that they showed in slow-motion several times. The hands were clearly locked, and locked for quite a while. However, now I can't find any pictures or video from that angle. But watching it over and over on TV it seemed like a no-brainer.
I would like to chime in. It is great to come here and hear knowlegable fans discuss and applaud the backing of the rules dispite how they may feel about the contestants! In the past when some controversial statements have been made your board has in most all instances has backed the correct ruling. It is appreciated and I would expect this from Iowa.
For anyone who knows or has watched Matt Brown over the years, you have a good perspective of who Matt is and realize this is never how he wanted to win a championship. Do I feel for Tyler Wilps......hell yes, but I am so very proud of Matt and who he is as a person and a wrestler.
This post was edited on 3/23 8:55 PM by BDB57
For anyone who knows or has watched Matt Brown over the years, you have a good perspective of who Matt is and realize this is never how he wanted to win a championship. Do I feel for Tyler Wilps......hell yes, but I am so very proud of Matt and who he is as a person and a wrestler.
This post was edited on 3/23 8:55 PM by BDB57
I do wonder if the ref did not want to call the locked hands that late and that had more to do with it than not seeing it. If it had not been challenged and the ref would have let the stall go by it would definately put a bad light on officiating! I think too many kids accept they will lose when taken down with short time and perhaps this may be a good learning experience to learn that anything can happen if you wrestle till the absolute end.
Because the ref did his job and called a stall EARLY in the match, Brown was able to benefit from the rules that are in place for just such an occasion. 98 out of 100 times, there is no stall called early and Wilps is able to take a stall in that situation.
From a stall perspective, this is exactly what should have happened and almost never does. Brown was the aggressor, he earned the win. From watching these matches you would think that refs can only call stalling late in the 3rd period. I am glad it was called like it was. As for locked hands, seems like ref should have seen it, they got the call right in the end, but locked hands for a second or two happens all the time and is not called as much as it could be.
From a stall perspective, this is exactly what should have happened and almost never does. Brown was the aggressor, he earned the win. From watching these matches you would think that refs can only call stalling late in the 3rd period. I am glad it was called like it was. As for locked hands, seems like ref should have seen it, they got the call right in the end, but locked hands for a second or two happens all the time and is not called as much as it could be.
How about the fact that the ref actually made a stall call that mattered? He had stones enough to make a call that would determine (at the time) whether a match would go into overtime. Granted, that call was based on a pretty objective stall criteria, but its a step in the right direction. We need to see more refs willing to call stalling, regardless of what point in the match it is, consistently.
Yet, Brown was able to point to Wilp's overlapping had with his hand and still force the violation? Sure Wilps, sure.
I have no problem with the calls or Brown winning a championship. The kid is a great wrestler and seems like a very nice young man. He always competes with tenacity but I've never seen anything chippy from him that I can recall. Hard-nosed, hard-working wrestler -- would have been great to have him in black and gold. Congrats to him for battling to the end and never giving up. It's nice to see that pay off now and then.
If this betters the sport by coaches preaching to push action and points to avoid outcomes beyond their control (except locked hands) then I am all for it.
I would like some clarification on the new stalling rule though. I have looked and cannot find a clear definition:
Wilps picked up a leg and was standing attempting a return to the mat. Does the stall count in this scenario? I perceived the new rule to prohibit dropping to ankles and hanging on. I am not saying that it was not stalling, because you can hop around for an entire period, but I am curious if the rule still applies if you are on your feet?
I would like some clarification on the new stalling rule though. I have looked and cannot find a clear definition:
Wilps picked up a leg and was standing attempting a return to the mat. Does the stall count in this scenario? I perceived the new rule to prohibit dropping to ankles and hanging on. I am not saying that it was not stalling, because you can hop around for an entire period, but I am curious if the rule still applies if you are on your feet?
Here you go...
1. Legislative Items. The NCAA Wrestling Rules Committee agreed to the following experimental rules proposals for the 2014-15 season. The committee requests approval from the NCAA Playing Rules Oversight Panel for the following items:
a. Rule 5.9.3.4.1 Stalling - Offensive and Defensive Positions.
(1) Recommendation. When in an offensive position, a wrestler moves his/her lock or hold to around a leg or legs below the buttocks and does not breakdown the opponent, execute an offensive move or work back up to the upper extremity for five seconds as counted by the referee, the offensive wrestler shall be called for stalling. The count shall be both verbal and visual.
This post was edited on 3/23 1:36 PM by Sullivan
Report of the NCAA Rules Committee
1. Legislative Items. The NCAA Wrestling Rules Committee agreed to the following experimental rules proposals for the 2014-15 season. The committee requests approval from the NCAA Playing Rules Oversight Panel for the following items:
a. Rule 5.9.3.4.1 Stalling - Offensive and Defensive Positions.
(1) Recommendation. When in an offensive position, a wrestler moves his/her lock or hold to around a leg or legs below the buttocks and does not breakdown the opponent, execute an offensive move or work back up to the upper extremity for five seconds as counted by the referee, the offensive wrestler shall be called for stalling. The count shall be both verbal and visual.
This post was edited on 3/23 1:36 PM by Sullivan
Report of the NCAA Rules Committee
So you just came over to troll and didn't even read the actual responses did you? I see another one of your fans Amalone is back to his usual ways as well, sad. He came over and pretended to be a good wrestling fan for a few weeks but that was obviously a facade.
For the topic at hand I thought the ref made the right calls. I agree with BDB57, I was wondering the same thing that the ref maybe didn't want to call it so it wouldn't end that way, hard to say.
Would've really like to see them wrestle on though to decide it.
You sound like Askren
Bitching about stalling all season and then bitching when it gets called correctly.
Good to see pretty much everyone on this thread applaud the ref in this case.
Tony Ramos and McDonough were joking on Twitter that Wilps had a good leg lace and gut wrench going - thought that was funny.
Bitching about stalling all season and then bitching when it gets called correctly.
Good to see pretty much everyone on this thread applaud the ref in this case.
Tony Ramos and McDonough were joking on Twitter that Wilps had a good leg lace and gut wrench going - thought that was funny.
From a PSU fan POV, appreciate all the good comments, especially the comments to the effect that the action prior in the match pretty much dictated the stall call (think it was pablow there). Very true.
I think this thread is also a good example of how thing's can be twisted on other message boards, other fan bases, etc - if you just read the thread topic, you would be very surprised at the conversation going on here.
I am slightly disappointed in the ending of the match - as Brown said, it was "ugly" - and it takes away from the celebration of a great athlete and great role model winning a championship.
The stall call was absolutely correct, and even at that, there could have been another one earlier before they went OOBs. The rule, I think, was called very consistently this weekend. Once you are down there, by rule, you have to get yourself up to the hips no matter what the defensive guy is doing in the way of kicking out or you are supposed to be called after a 5 count. It's a great rule. The only subjectivity I saw this weekend with it, was when the offensive wrestler brought the leg up so that both were in a standing position. By my interpretation of the rule, the 5 count should still start right away and the defensive wrestler needs to be returned to the mat and you need to be up to the hips by 5 or it should be called again - but they don't call it that way. They should.
I think the ref probably wanted the match to go to OT. I certainly thought it would be the fair way to decide that match. Wilps - although he did play the edge quite a bit - did score a clutch TD in the 3rd. That was probably part of the thought process when the locked hands was missed.
Unfortunately, it was blatant and the ref was called on it. Once it went to review - nothing you could do. It's unfortunate, but it was Wilps fault that he couldn't ride out 3 seconds. At that point he could have LEGALLY dropped to a leg and forced OT. Match awareness...
I think this thread is also a good example of how thing's can be twisted on other message boards, other fan bases, etc - if you just read the thread topic, you would be very surprised at the conversation going on here.
I am slightly disappointed in the ending of the match - as Brown said, it was "ugly" - and it takes away from the celebration of a great athlete and great role model winning a championship.
The stall call was absolutely correct, and even at that, there could have been another one earlier before they went OOBs. The rule, I think, was called very consistently this weekend. Once you are down there, by rule, you have to get yourself up to the hips no matter what the defensive guy is doing in the way of kicking out or you are supposed to be called after a 5 count. It's a great rule. The only subjectivity I saw this weekend with it, was when the offensive wrestler brought the leg up so that both were in a standing position. By my interpretation of the rule, the 5 count should still start right away and the defensive wrestler needs to be returned to the mat and you need to be up to the hips by 5 or it should be called again - but they don't call it that way. They should.
I think the ref probably wanted the match to go to OT. I certainly thought it would be the fair way to decide that match. Wilps - although he did play the edge quite a bit - did score a clutch TD in the 3rd. That was probably part of the thought process when the locked hands was missed.
Unfortunately, it was blatant and the ref was called on it. Once it went to review - nothing you could do. It's unfortunate, but it was Wilps fault that he couldn't ride out 3 seconds. At that point he could have LEGALLY dropped to a leg and forced OT. Match awareness...
Agree with this. Saw it called both ways when the wrestlers went to their feet. Some refs started the count, some didn't. Even saw some refs that started counting it at one point in the match and didn't later in the same match. Wasn't sure if there is some fine detail in there that I am missing or if they were just that inconsistent.
Similar threads
