Super 32
- Thread starter TheFan1
- Start date
JMO: I don't think you could possibly have more stalling in college wrestling ... the very existence of riding time ensures stalling. I think takedowns should be rewarded by more than 1 point greater than an escape, so I like the 3-pt TD. I've seen way too many HS matches where one guy gets 3 TDs and the other guys gets 4 escapes ... and it's a close match!! It's a one-move match!! Then the ref starts warning the guy who has generated ALL of the offense for stalling. IMO, if the TD battle is 3-0, and the non-offensive guy also has NO reversals and NO back points (i.e., no offense of any type), it should NOT be a close match.
While college folkstyle wrestling is not necessarily intended to be a "feeder" to international wrestling, I do like moving folkstyle toward FS, and this does that by emphasizing TDs and not mat wrestling. I would much rather watch guys trying to get TDs versus sitting on an ankle and riding.
I agree with the point that, in college, 3+4+1 equals match over. My fix would be eliminate the riding time and cap back points at 3. Then it's "only" 6-0, and the losing wrestler still has a chance if he can get a couple 3-pt TDs of his own.
While college folkstyle wrestling is not necessarily intended to be a "feeder" to international wrestling, I do like moving folkstyle toward FS, and this does that by emphasizing TDs and not mat wrestling. I would much rather watch guys trying to get TDs versus sitting on an ankle and riding.
I agree with the point that, in college, 3+4+1 equals match over. My fix would be eliminate the riding time and cap back points at 3. Then it's "only" 6-0, and the losing wrestler still has a chance if he can get a couple 3-pt TDs of his own.
cant disagree with any of that
roadkill22
Member
I like the potential for 3 point takedowns in HS for all those reasons. I hate watching matches where someone is getting "dominated", but the "trade 2 for 1" leaves the match within reach for some surprise back points. I guess it could go either way - if someone can defend back points or a pin long enough, they are never really out of it if they catch the other wrestler in a mistake. Just seems unfair to the wrestler who has possibly had control 90% of the match to leave it within reach of anything besides a pin. I know the answer, but I always wonder why a reversal can't be 3 points, which would include the escape point. I find a reversal much more impressive than an escape and a quick takedown.
It will be interesting in college with the 1 point for riding time worth less than a takedown/escape combo now. Giving up the possibility of getting that riding time point for another takedown, even with the potential for an escape point should potentially change some strategy...
I still like the combination of folkstyle, then freestyle in the year. If it was all folk/free, I feel like I would get bored of watching the same style constantly. Totally different strategies, moves, thinking, action, etc. Would be interesting to hear how current wrestlers would view that...
WrestlingGuy285
Active member
The only "problem" I see with the 3 point takedown is how it's going to change the record books. The NCAA record for takedowns won't be passed given the new rule. At the end of the day, and in the grand scheme of things, this to me is actually pretty negligible given how much I agree with everyone's points on the point differential between takedowns and escapes
GrizzlyDad
Well-known member
To much like freestyle, guys need to learn top/bottom
Isn't the US the only place where Folkstyle - as we define it - is wrestled? I don't think there is another style outside the US that is similar to what is wrestled in grade school through college in the USA. That being the case, why not move it closer to the international Freestyle wrestling. I like the idea of riding time being allowed for no more than 30 seconds at a time. You still need to learn to turn someone and also to prevent being turned on the bottom, you are just allowed more time than in freestyle. On the other hand, Freestyle competitions have to look more closely at what they are allowing and scoring as back exposures. It's gotten ridiculous - and the replays are taking up to 3-4 minutes to get a decision on the scoring.
DoubleBoots
Well-known member
I like having two sports--folk and free!
Agree with some criticism of current FS exposure rules. The rules have changed over the years, but at one time the rules were:
-- 2-pt exposure meant that the defensive wrestler went "elbow-to-elbow" or lower.
-- 1-pt exposure was "hand-to-hand," but there was still a requirement that the back was exposed.
Too often now, any sort of roll-through is granted 2 points, even if the defensive guy didn't break 90-degrees. And the ridiculous challenge delays can definitely disrupt the flow of the match. I think re-introducing the 1-point hand-to-hand exposure could assuage some of the discomfort that people have with so many quick (uncontrolled) 2-pt maneuvers.
WishYouWereHere
Well-known member
Any sport that consistently causes chaos with the scoring should not be introduced to youth, high school or college.
When the commentators say this and another says that, then the refs say something else, then he has to look at the side judge to get confirmation, then takes 5 mins to look at the tape and come up with something that we all scratch our heads, then it’s not good.
If you want to wrestle freestyle, then you may.
But don’t try to make folkstyle more like freestyle.
When the commentators say this and another says that, then the refs say something else, then he has to look at the side judge to get confirmation, then takes 5 mins to look at the tape and come up with something that we all scratch our heads, then it’s not good.
If you want to wrestle freestyle, then you may.
But don’t try to make folkstyle more like freestyle.
Jim Behrens
Well-known member
Hint: Don't listen to the commentators. Part of their job is to create controversy.
Jim Behrens
Well-known member
I do not know of a single official who wants to go OT on a stalling call. However to not make a call, if it is there, is not fair to the guy who isn't doing the stalling.
Actually no one wants to go OT for any reason.
Last edited:
Are you seriously gonna say that in 1 point matches (especially in the 3rd period championship rounds) refs don’t tend to be extremely liberal with putting a red or green fist in the air? I guess the 2022 D2 144 State championship match was an outlier? I’m aware that I can’t prove my opinion beyond a reasonable doubt; it’s just my observation!!
Jim Behrens
Well-known member
I am absolutely going to say it. Can it happen? Certainly it can but look at the entirety of the match.
I think I just remembered the match you referenced. What I remember, correct me if I am wrong, is that off the whistle with a few seconds left the wrestler who was leading went straight backward. If you don't think that the right call was made, we simply will never agree. Procedurally it should have been handled differently but the call was there for all the world to see.
Out of 1000's of matches wrestled and maybe 100's that go OT and you cite one example that you feel "proves" your point? Not only can you not prove it beyond a reasonable doubt, you can't prove it at all. Feelings are not facts.
Put yourself in the position of the wrestler or coach and you are losing by 1 point late in the match. The opponent IS stalling (running backward, blocking, whatever) and the official does not make a call that Ray Charles could see. How are YOU going to feel?
By a wide margin, stalling is always going to be the most controversial call to be made. 50% of the people love it and 50% hate it. However to quote a line I think applies, to not decide is to decide.
Again, I will state with 100% certainty, no official wants to make a call (especially in a state finals) that sends a match into OT. We would MUCH prefer a quick fall or tech fall.
I am aware that nothing I could say will change your mind but it is not as cut and dry as you believe.
I think he was referencing the 4 stalling calls in the last minute.. not simply the last one that was actually made after the match was over and a coach argued for it.
on a side note, I agreed with the last one... just not the first 3 that happened in the last minute ish of the match
First, it’s a fact that stalling is called 3x’s more often in the 3rd period compared to the 1st, even in identical situations. Also, can you give me an example of a match where a ref has called stalling 4x’s in 40 seconds in the first period? Lastly, nothing is of certainty when it comes to the discretion of refereeing. It’s unanimous that we’ve all witnessed reprehensible calls made by referees in the down stretch of competitions that ultimately changed the outcome of the event. The human element of an official defies all logic regardless of the level of said referee, or sport genra.
You can’t infer 100% of officials prefer a certain outcome, as it’s impossible to know what someone is thinking. That statement alone displays your inability to determine fact over feelings. But I am aware that nothing that I can say will change your mind!
Jim Behrens
Well-known member
Again, numbers with nothing to back them up. Three times more often? I have never seen any stats that support that. BTW, no situations are identical.
I know this concept escapes you but did you ever think that more stalling occurs in the third period? Obviously you have not thought of it but guys get tired and/or have something to protect. That is not true in period one.
"Reprehensible calls"? A bit over the top, isn't it? "Unanimous"? Really? Everyone agrees with you?
I can't infer anything? I have been there and I know the people. I can feel very comfortable with the statement.
Can't come up with your own closing lines, you have to repeat what I said?
With that, I am done with this but have a great weekend.
ztrain-- -remember the ref yappi clan have never ever seen a bad call. and there has never been a situation where a ref has had a bias going into the match. when refs get caught on a hot mic bad mouthing coaches it is simply a shame that the mic caught it, 4 stalling calls in 40 seconds in the third period is 100 percent rightly justified and refs never change how they call stalling in the third period....
inferring anything else is simply ludicrous because such things could never happen even when a human element is involved. if you are a ref you become immune to human elements as they do not exist in the reffing world
LucMurphy134
Well-known member
At the risk of beating the horse that has been dead for 2 years, re '22 D2 144 final, Graham 100% should have done more to help his cause and stay on the offensive, BUT the BW wrestler IMHO never really made a real offensive attempt at an attack the whole match- yet was rewarded. Collar tie, wrist, push, a few 1/2 shots- you might say Iowa-ish style. Kept position, square stance, pressured forward, took ground, but never took a risk. Solid wresting & certainly effective. Active perhaps, but not really offensive. Good on him, and good on the BW coaches for the game plan and pushing for the stall call from the get go. Hard to swallow that the guy who scored all of the offensive points did not win.
After the TD, Graham rode out the 2nd period with the BW wrestler flat, on belly, head down on the mat for the last 45 seconds - with no stalling call on BW. One wonders if BW gets warned at that juncture, does Graham get more offensive in the third? Graham goes down, escapes w/in 10 seconds for 3-0 lead, and is hit with stalling 16 seconds later as BW pushed forward to the edge, took a 1/2 shot, Graham counters with a downblock/snap and was circling in - I don't agree that Ray Charles could have made that make that call. I think it was a premature call and requires nuance and understanding of that position, and what options the defensive wrestler has to defend himself in that situation? Turned out to be the difference in the match.
The other stalls calls are arguably warranted, but I often wonder why / how stalling is called differently in the last 30 seconds than in the first 30 seconds of a match. Obviously there is an urgency on the losing wrestler to score which can lead to desperate flurries, but the winning wrestler also has the right to defend attacks. If the winning wrestler scored enough points in the first 5:30 of the match to build a lead, why is the onus on him to stay offensive?
The last and deciding call, Graham clearly had a brain fart. If he takes one step forward he wins, but we've all seen that call not made w/ 2 seconds left 1000 times.
Also the Refs mechanics and situational awareness were not great. Ref was ready to go overtime.
Last edited:
Claw Rider
Active member
I thought this was a “Super 32” thread?!?!
Thinking the same thing.
Yankeefan33
Well-known member
Bringing it back to Super 32...I think I'm going Sunday. Really excited to see some of these guys, hopefully Ohio can put up a good performance and bring home some hardware.
Pantherontheporch
Well-known member
Does anyone know whether it will be on Track?