Ask the Ref.
- Thread starter Refman
- Start date
Was just really youth exhibition matches before a HS match the other night, but curious if there is an actual rule for this or just "good mechanics".
2 mats in the same HS gym, first match of the night (so the scoreboard for mat A and B were not setup properly yet, more on that in a minute).
On mat B, wrestler 1 gets a TD early and is on top with less than 10 seconds left in the first period. With about 8 or 9 seconds left the buzzer from mat A goes off (their period ended, after this first time the clock operator and referee got it fixed to a silent horn and the bopper was used). When the buzzer went off for mat A, the wrestler 1 on top of wrestler 2 on mat B stops wrestling for a second and looks at the ref.
At this point the ref just says "keep wrestling" and in a panic wrestler 1 locks hands since wrestler 2 never stopped wrestling. Wrestler 1 gives up the reversal and locking hands in the last seconds of rd 1. This obviously upsets him as a 2-0 match goes to 2-3 due to a buzzer misshap on the other mat.
My question is this. Is there a hard rule or just some referee mechanics about whether the match should be stopped/restarted (in this case from the referee's position since there had been a TD)? If one wrestler obviously stops wrestling due to a gym buzzer going off and the other one doesn't is that a sure stop or is that a "too bad, you should only stop wrestling when the whistle from your referee is blown" situation?
The kid lost 5-4 and had the only 2 TDs of the match, but just curious about is there a rule, just a mechanics thing, or just a "depends on the ref and how he feels it should be handled"?
Thanks
2 mats in the same HS gym, first match of the night (so the scoreboard for mat A and B were not setup properly yet, more on that in a minute).
On mat B, wrestler 1 gets a TD early and is on top with less than 10 seconds left in the first period. With about 8 or 9 seconds left the buzzer from mat A goes off (their period ended, after this first time the clock operator and referee got it fixed to a silent horn and the bopper was used). When the buzzer went off for mat A, the wrestler 1 on top of wrestler 2 on mat B stops wrestling for a second and looks at the ref.
At this point the ref just says "keep wrestling" and in a panic wrestler 1 locks hands since wrestler 2 never stopped wrestling. Wrestler 1 gives up the reversal and locking hands in the last seconds of rd 1. This obviously upsets him as a 2-0 match goes to 2-3 due to a buzzer misshap on the other mat.
My question is this. Is there a hard rule or just some referee mechanics about whether the match should be stopped/restarted (in this case from the referee's position since there had been a TD)? If one wrestler obviously stops wrestling due to a gym buzzer going off and the other one doesn't is that a sure stop or is that a "too bad, you should only stop wrestling when the whistle from your referee is blown" situation?
The kid lost 5-4 and had the only 2 TDs of the match, but just curious about is there a rule, just a mechanics thing, or just a "depends on the ref and how he feels it should be handled"?
Thanks
This is actually a great question. Plain and simple answer for me. Some common sense has to be used for me.
If it happened just like you said and the wrestlers were close by the buzzer, I would have stopped the match. However, I've seen a similar situation where the wrestler seemed to be extremely tired and acted like he was distracted by the buzzer and stop wrestling. Not stopping that one.
I already know what some would think, how do I know if the kid is tired and faking. Have to make a decision and not cheat the other wrestler in the process.
If it happened just like you said and the wrestlers were close by the buzzer, I would have stopped the match. However, I've seen a similar situation where the wrestler seemed to be extremely tired and acted like he was distracted by the buzzer and stop wrestling. Not stopping that one.
I already know what some would think, how do I know if the kid is tired and faking. Have to make a decision and not cheat the other wrestler in the process.
I view it as... if one stops and one doesn't, well then keep going because I still didn't blow the whistle. If they both stop, then I will blow the whistle and reset them so neither wrestler "freaks" and does something stupid.
It might not be "FAIR", but they are to start and stop on my whistle, what if the buzzer was just plain OFF and I knew there were 30 some seconds on the clock yet... or the power went out on the clock and the "mental" clock turns on and has to start counting down.
It might not be "FAIR", but they are to start and stop on my whistle, what if the buzzer was just plain OFF and I knew there were 30 some seconds on the clock yet... or the power went out on the clock and the "mental" clock turns on and has to start counting down.
I view it like football. You hear coaches yell play until the whistle. This is false. You cannot blast someone late because there wasn't a whistle. Why? Because the whistle does not end the play. The rule ends the play.
We don't have a rule in place for this type of unique situation so I have to use some common sense and judgement. I'm not into cheap points or cheating the kids in anyway, shape, or form. So anytime this type of situation happens it is pretty much different each time. I will have to make the best decision possible at that time.
We don't have a rule in place for this type of unique situation so I have to use some common sense and judgement. I'm not into cheap points or cheating the kids in anyway, shape, or form. So anytime this type of situation happens it is pretty much different each time. I will have to make the best decision possible at that time.
double stalling?
I was informed a few weeks ago that double stalling is no longer a rule. Is this true? I was told by a local ad that he recieved an email on it but when I aske a few different refs they were not aware of the rule change.
If it is true how should I approach the question to a ref. I hardly ever see it but I did have a match that the 2 wrestlers were hit with double stalling in the first period. I asked the ref after the match about the rule change and he wasn't aware of the possible rule change so I then asked him if it was changed how would he have made the call? He told me that he would have basically flipped a coin????
I was informed a few weeks ago that double stalling is no longer a rule. Is this true? I was told by a local ad that he recieved an email on it but when I aske a few different refs they were not aware of the rule change.
If it is true how should I approach the question to a ref. I hardly ever see it but I did have a match that the 2 wrestlers were hit with double stalling in the first period. I asked the ref after the match about the rule change and he wasn't aware of the possible rule change so I then asked him if it was changed how would he have made the call? He told me that he would have basically flipped a coin????
It waz called today at ECC and I agree
d. But then i always agree with the men in stripes!
Refman
Humble Moderator
Just another side to the blood being seen prior to a TD....depending on the amount, I might allow the TD to occur then stop it. Same as in NF criteria or going to NF criteria, what I might stop it for might be different than another referee. It all depends on the "amount". A gusher is a gusher...a drop is a drop.
Also...double stalling. My opinion always has been...pick one, then pick the other. I have called double stalling but it is rare, and can only recollect it was only with heavyweights, as they are the ones for some reason that tend not to shoot and just lock up and try to throw, and when both are doing that...both get called.
Also...double stalling. My opinion always has been...pick one, then pick the other. I have called double stalling but it is rare, and can only recollect it was only with heavyweights, as they are the ones for some reason that tend not to shoot and just lock up and try to throw, and when both are doing that...both get called.
I tend to go about the blood situation the same way you explained. Technically, per the rules he called it correctly.
However, you want to let the action go and give the aggressive wrestler a chance to finish if possible. This kind of balance and decision making by the official happens in several sports.
For example: not calling every little tug in football holding, every little bit of contact by a defender pass interference, every little bit of contact in basketball a foul, etc.
However, you want to let the action go and give the aggressive wrestler a chance to finish if possible. This kind of balance and decision making by the official happens in several sports.
For example: not calling every little tug in football holding, every little bit of contact by a defender pass interference, every little bit of contact in basketball a foul, etc.
Last edited:
Hardwork21
New member
can a JR High Wrestlers practice at the same time on same mat with the high team and are NOT being coached by the high school coach?
Jim Behrens
Well-known member
My take is that this is an administrative task. It really doesn't fall within my role as an on the mat official. I always tell people to call the OHSAA office with questions like this because there may be factors that I know nothing about.
Better to get the correct answer from the people who make the rules.
Better to get the correct answer from the people who make the rules.
Scenario: Top man has double legs in and the bottom man can't work to his base, but is fighting off wrist and hand control. After a few seconds, neither wrestler is able to advance their position.
I've seen this situation called a number of ways: 1. Bottom man gets called for stalling because he does not work to his base. 2. Top man gets called for stalling for not advancing the move. 3. Stalemate is called.
What is the correct call?
I've seen this situation called a number of ways: 1. Bottom man gets called for stalling because he does not work to his base. 2. Top man gets called for stalling for not advancing the move. 3. Stalemate is called.
What is the correct call?
The safest, most common sense call from the situation you described would be a stalemate. If it continued after the restart I would be less inclined to call a stalemate and would be looking harder for stalling by one or both.
Jim Behrens
Well-known member
While I pretty much agree with this, I do have a question.
Based on what was written, what is keeping the offensive man from changing or improving? He is choosing this attack but (again from what is written) he does have options. Unhook a leg and create an angle.
A stalemate is a situation where neither wrestler CAN improve. At least from what I am seeing, that is not the case. Certainly the defensive man has few options.
I agree that if it is called a stalemate the first time, I would be looking very seriously at the offensive man if it were to happen again.
This response interests me, because my wrestlers have been on the receiving end of stalling calls from the bottom position here, and I can never get a good explanation from the ref. The official says that bottom man is stalling because he isn't trying to get out - but how can he get out when the top man just keeps both legs in and continues to roll wrists?
Kinda wish there was consistency.
The original post was rather vague relative to what the top man was actually doing to work for a fall. Therein my explanation.
Jim Behrens
Well-known member
My response was more for the original poster and not so much for your response.
Sorry if it sounded that way.
Jim Behrens
Well-known member
Don't we all!!
I understand where you are coming from and I do not disagree with you.
However, I have long maintained that we could put 20 coaches in a room and they would not be able to make stalling calls with any consistency either. They know when the opponent is stalling (they always help us recognize it by telling us) but they never seem to see it in their own wrestler.
Odd how that seems to work!
BobPreusse
Well-known member
high school folkstyle could go to a modified top/down scenario, to eliminate this endless discussion that is never resolved. Lets go to how freestyle is with modification:
...if top man cant turn bottom guy within 30 seconds then both are put on their feet in neutral. So now theres no stalling or stalemates.
...however, could still keep rules that bottom man can reverse for 2 or get out for 1 point in that time. what u think?? ...s/BobP
...if top man cant turn bottom guy within 30 seconds then both are put on their feet in neutral. So now theres no stalling or stalemates.
...however, could still keep rules that bottom man can reverse for 2 or get out for 1 point in that time. what u think?? ...s/BobP
Second this motion.
Jim Behrens
Well-known member
I can call it whatever way the rules tell me to but I want to point something out.
Over the years I am/we are constantly hearing that Ohio wrestlers are not ready for college and specifically ready for mat wrestling. The officials seem to be the reason because we call stalling too fast and don't allow wrestlers to "work". At least that is what we hear.
While I have no problem with this proposal, I wonder how this would help in that development? There would be very little or no mat wrestling at all (unless I am missing something which is very possible). Either wrestler just lays there and in 30 seconds they are back to neutral.
Seems to solve a stalling issue but creates a different problem, doesn't it?
Lambeau Fields
Well-known member
Third it!
Though I love FS, I might modify it further, I would probably limit the "exposure" scoring. Simply rolling someone over shouldn't score points
Here's my dream sport, it's called Fr-olk Style:
1.) Back to the feet within 30 seconds
2.) 15 points for a tech
3.) Near falls score points, not just simple exposure
4.) Push-outs worth 1
I know. "Kids wouldn't learn how to ride out" and this would hamper the 0.3% of wreslters who go on to wrestle in college. I still think it would be a lot more entertaining, for both wrestler and fan alike.
Lambeau Fields
Well-known member
I saw both wrestlers simultaneously warned for it this past weekend. They were just circling each other. Weren't HWTs though.
As an official I like this and have pushed for some of it already. I'd like to see this in high school and college.
BobPreusse
Well-known member
"Seems to solve a stalling issue but creates a different problem, doesn't it?"
JimB, not for me, top guy still gets 30 seconds, the better ones will learn to use that time to aggresively go for back points. The bottom guy can just lay there and fight it off for 30 seconds or he can try to score himself. Either way it eliminates much of the boring riding. U must use top or lose it.
And then this miserable, tired, worn out, never resolved old topic will not come up again.
Refs should love it. ...s/BobP
JimB, not for me, top guy still gets 30 seconds, the better ones will learn to use that time to aggresively go for back points. The bottom guy can just lay there and fight it off for 30 seconds or he can try to score himself. Either way it eliminates much of the boring riding. U must use top or lose it.
And then this miserable, tired, worn out, never resolved old topic will not come up again.
Refs should love it. ...s/BobP