WOW, tough break for Cooper shore!

Status
Not open for further replies.

rr23724

Well-known member
Stop with the holier than thou....I've seen many officials do a screw job on an athlete where arrogance is involved. Saw Mattueci throw one out of the state tournament for an arrogant ridiculous call completing screwing a multi state champ his freshman year... MOST are good, but to claim none exhibit bias or arrogance is STUPID. MOST athletes who are on injury time, do NOT DEFAULT and take a win. If they are that injured where a medical person or coach claims they are not able to continue.......they are DONE.
They are not done. The ONLY rule regarding that is for concussions.

That was a slam. It’s not even a close call. Shore left his feet as the other kid was on the way down and he was driven into the mat shoulder first. Shore tried to indicate his knee was down first but that is not actually part of the rule the way people think it is. It has to do with being under control and not driving your opponent into the mat and this was clearly out of control and forceful. When both wrestlers are off the ground bad things happen in that situation.

The Garaway kid won by the letter of the rule. He also has the right to attempt to wrestle again by rule. He has no moral obligation to anyone on a message board. Chances are he attempts to wrestle and won’t be able to use that arm much and ends up defaulting. His shoulder could have dislocated and made it impossible to finish yesterday but could have been put back in and with a nights rest and a good brace he may be able to go.

If wrestlers who win or lose by injury are deemed unfit to continue competing by some of you hardcore internet iron men then imagine how many D1 college guys wouldn’t be wrestling next week after all the medical FFs at conference finals.
 

1_beast

Well-known member
They are not done. The ONLY rule regarding that is for concussions.

That was a slam. It’s not even a close call. Shore left his feet as the other kid was on the way down and he was driven into the mat shoulder first. Shore tried to indicate his knee was down first but that is not actually part of the rule the way people think it is. It has to do with being under control and not driving your opponent into the mat and this was clearly out of control and forceful. When both wrestlers are off the ground bad things happen in that situation.

The Garaway kid won by the letter of the rule. He also has the right to attempt to wrestle again by rule. He has no moral obligation to anyone on a message board. Chances are he attempts to wrestle and won’t be able to use that arm much and ends up defaulting. His shoulder could have dislocated and made it impossible to finish yesterday but could have been put back in and with a nights rest and a good brace he may be able to go.

If wrestlers who win or lose by injury are deemed unfit to continue competing by some of you hardcore internet iron men then imagine how many D1 college guys wouldn’t be wrestling next week after all the medical FFs at conference finals.
PERFECT! I couldn't have said it any better!!!
 

350zjk

Active member
Stop with the holier than thou....I've seen many officials do a screw job on an athlete where arrogance is involved. Saw Mattueci throw one out of the state tournament for an arrogant ridiculous call completing screwing a multi state champ his freshman year... MOST are good, but to claim none exhibit bias or arrogance is STUPID. MOST athletes who are on injury time, do NOT DEFAULT and take a win. If they are that injured where a medical person or coach claims they are not able to continue.......they are DONE.
Maybe someone with your expertise should get your official's license. There is a severe shortage. You ever wonder why? LOL!!!!
 

Old142

Well-known member
They are not done. The ONLY rule regarding that is for concussions.

That was a slam. It’s not even a close call. Shore left his feet as the other kid was on the way down and he was driven into the mat shoulder first. Shore tried to indicate his knee was down first but that is not actually part of the rule the way people think it is. It has to do with being under control and not driving your opponent into the mat and this was clearly out of control and forceful. When both wrestlers are off the ground bad things happen in that situation.

The Garaway kid won by the letter of the rule. He also has the right to attempt to wrestle again by rule. He has no moral obligation to anyone on a message board. Chances are he attempts to wrestle and won’t be able to use that arm much and ends up defaulting. His shoulder could have dislocated and made it impossible to finish yesterday but could have been put back in and with a nights rest and a good brace he may be able to go.

If wrestlers who win or lose by injury are deemed unfit to continue competing by some of you hardcore internet iron men then imagine how many D1 college guys wouldn’t be wrestling next week after all the medical FFs at conference finals.
Ummm forfeiting in the FINALS is different than taking the mat, winning by an injury default , especially when you had zero chance to win. Then getting a miraculous recovery and coming back to wrestle.? There's a name for that type of mentality.
 

Old142

Well-known member
They are not done. The ONLY rule regarding that is for concussions.

That was a slam. It’s not even a close call. Shore left his feet as the other kid was on the way down and he was driven into the mat shoulder first. Shore tried to indicate his knee was down first but that is not actually part of the rule the way people think it is. It has to do with being under control and not driving your opponent into the mat and this was clearly out of control and forceful. When both wrestlers are off the ground bad things happen in that situation.

The Garaway kid won by the letter of the rule. He also has the right to attempt to wrestle again by rule. He has no moral obligation to anyone on a message board. Chances are he attempts to wrestle and won’t be able to use that arm much and ends up defaulting. His shoulder could have dislocated and made it impossible to finish yesterday but could have been put back in and with a nights rest and a good brace he may be able to go.

If wrestlers who win or lose by injury are deemed unfit to continue competing by some of you hardcore internet iron men then imagine how many D1 college guys wouldn’t be wrestling next week after all the medical FFs at conference finals.
You must be blind or related or most likely no idea what you're talking about in the sport , they hit the mat almost simultaneously, there was no extra "driving" in the least. The kid looked at the ref to see if he signaled 2..then as soon as he hit he grabbed his shoulder. Shore got hosed by good acting.
 

CoachHoversten

Well-known member
I’m going to preface my comments with a few disclaimers:

1. nothing I say will change anyones mind

2. I have zero dog in the fight, I barely keep tabs on HS wrestling anymore except the handful of kids I used to coach in middle school who are still wrestling (one just took 5th in D1 165 so that was awesome)

3. As I mentioned, I barely follow wrestling, and definitely don’t follow D3 wrestling as I have zero background with any of those teams, and even I know who the Shore family name is, so I say this just to inform that I understand why this is so emotional for many

All that said , here is my 2 cents that’s worth 1 cent, as a former coach and now official:

that is a slam all day every day, twice on Sunday. The only two arguments for it not being a slam are one, that’s Mr Shore so it can’t be a slam; and two, “when we wrestled we appreciated toughness unlike todays wrestling”, neither of which matters.

I umpire college baseball and I played college baseball, as a catcher, when it was legal to blast a catcher in the basepath. So does that mean when I umpire a game next wknd I should look the other way bc we were tougher in my day?

That official would never have gotten another state tournament if he didn’t call that slam, and to some degree, may have been liable if he didn’t call it. I have been out of the meetings too long to know for sure, but in baseball, everyone and their brother wants the game to continue when a storm is here, “the field is fine” , “it was only heat lightning”.

well, I don’t give a **** bc I’m not losing my house over this game when someone snaps an ankle or gets hit by lightning .

The only thing the official did wrong was look uncertain, his body language and mechanics did not demonstrate confidence in the call, but it was correct.

By rule, and to an official that is ALL that should matter, by rule that was a slam, and it wasnt close .

I agree in my day it maybe is let go, I agree in many sports the stars with the right last name get the benefit of the doubt , but no way no how should a HS official not call that.

Oh, and whether arm is trapped or not is irrelevant TO THE RULE (there is stricter rule when it is, but has nothing to do with a slam criteria in general). Whether knee hit first or not (it didn’t) is irrelevant. That is a baseline for determining if someone was straight driven into the mat, ie, if knee doesn’t come down first there is zero question it was a slam, if knee does hit first , that does not mean it can’t be a slam.

freeze the video at 0:28, only thing on ground is Mr Shores toe, his knee and opponent are equal height off the ground.

By every criterion of THE RULE, this was a slam.

Everything else said is bc it’s a good kid from a good family and his sister is amazing, or bc we are older and care about the toughness image. But every official who cares about getting another assignment has to call that 100 of 100 times.

The fact that he did on such a big stage with such a big name on the mat tells me he is a very good official, not a bad one
 
After watching the video clip the official did not call a slam (illegal) he called unnecessary roughness which carries a different criteria... I posted on the other thread about this as well. I don't have an opinion that I will offer as it will be just another opinion amongst many... just correcting one piece (of which there are many on this thread) of misinformation posted.
 

350zjk

Active member
After watching the video clip the official did not call a slam (illegal) he called unnecessary roughness which carries a different criteria... I posted on the other thread about this as well. I don't have an opinion that I will offer as it will be just another opinion amongst many... just correcting one piece (of which there are many on this thread) of misinformation posted.
He certainly did call an illegal slam. There is NO specific signal for an illegal slam. He could make either the illegal or the unnecessary roughness signal, and the penalty chart has exactly the same consequences for either.
 

Lichtenberg

Member
definitely a slam
Definitely not a slam. Both arms were out and Shore’s knee his the ground. It was a solid mat return. Once again the officials are dictating outcomes. They have one simply job. They interject themselves too often. Kinda like that phantom third and goal holding call against the Bengals.
 
This was a slam. There may be doubt in other's mind, but not mine. I feel bad for the Miami East wrestler, but anyone who has wrestled has had some disappointment in regards to a bad or unfortunate call. I have certainly had my share.

Funny (and Sad) Story...I was in the training room after getting injured and defaulting in the State Semis. I "overheard" a conversation between 2 wrestlers- the one wrestler was put in a banana-split by his opponent and it was called illegal (for splitting the crotch). He then admitted that he and his coaches decided to default even though he could have continued. I just sat there shaking my head. Then come to find out after that he was in the other Semi-Final at my weight. I felt bad for the wrestler who lost due to this incident, but not bad enough let him beat me for 3rd place LOL. And I certainly didn't feel bad for the kid who defaulted, then wrestled in the State Finals only to get teched in under 3 minutes. That I enjoyed quite a lot.
 

pirateflash07

Well-known member
Ummm forfeiting in the FINALS is different than taking the mat, winning by an injury default , especially when you had zero chance to win. Then getting a miraculous recovery and coming back to wrestle.? There's a name for that type of mentality.
Omg stfu
 
He certainly did call an illegal slam. There is NO specific signal for an illegal slam. He could make either the illegal or the unnecessary roughness signal, and the penalty chart has exactly the same consequences for either.
You are incorrect a slam is an illegal hold/position/move signified by two hands behind the head (on the neck)... unnecessary roughness is a fist straight away from the body and does not constitute an illegal hold/move/position... You can have unnecessary roughness without an illegal position/hold/move...

The result of either (illegal or UR) which involves an injury results in recovery time (not injury time) and if the wrestler injured cannot continue he/she wins the match as a result.

it may be semantics but UR is not necessarily a result of an illegal hold/move/position it is what it is... unnecessary roughness.
 

350zjk

Active member
You are incorrect a slam is an illegal hold/position/move signified by two hands behind the head (on the neck)... unnecessary roughness is a fist straight away from the body and does not constitute an illegal hold/move/position... You can have unnecessary roughness without an illegal position/hold/move...

The result of either (illegal or UR) which involves an injury results in recovery time (not injury time) and if the wrestler injured cannot continue he/she wins the match as a result.

it may be semantics but UR is not necessarily a result of an illegal hold/move/position it is what it is... unnecessary roughness.
LOL!!! Where did I say that an illegal slam isn't called illegal? I STATED that the official had the OPTION of making the call as EITHER illegal OR UNR. The only difference relative in this case is the signal itself. The consequences are the same.
 

CoachHoversten

Well-known member
Definitely not a slam. Both arms were out and Shore’s knee his the ground. It was a solid mat return. Once again the officials are dictating outcomes. They have one simply job. They interject themselves too often. Kinda like that phantom third and goal holding call against the Bengals.
Neither of which is mentioned in the rule book in regards to a slam.
 

Imareftoo

New member
That was a slam. After recovery you can choose to compete or not. Its the consequence of an illegal or penalty that injures someone. This is nothing new. It seems this happened early in the match. This can make the injury default a tough decision since there was no score and no clear way to determine who would likely win. A lot of "what if's?" in these scenarios. Tough situation to be in as a kid, coach , and opponent.
 
LOL!!! Where did I say that an illegal slam isn't called illegal? I STATED that the official had the OPTION of making the call as EITHER illegal OR UNR. The only difference relative in this case is the signal itself. The consequences are the same.
I think you are misinterpreting what I'm saying... I was stating that unnecessary roughness does not constitute an illegal action... it is what it is... So regardless if the return was legal/illegal is irrelevant as it was called unnecessary roughness therefore it is not a slam (which is an illegal action) it was called as unnecessary roughness... again... no difference in the outcome, just a difference in the judgement of the official... The debate on all of these threads is "was it a slam or not..." to that point it is not relevant whether the mat return was illegal (a slam) as the official called UR. If you are going to debate you have to use the officials call as UR to start the debate and the debate is whether the force used in the return was unnecessarily rough (UR) or not... The return appears to be legal... the question (debate) of the penalty is was the force used in bringing the opponent to the mat. To clarify see below...
Definitely not a slam. Both arms were out and Shore’s knee his the ground. It was a solid mat return. Once again the officials are dictating outcomes. They have one simply job. They interject themselves too often. Kinda like that phantom third and goal holding call against the Bengals.
The first thing in your opinion is irrelevant as a slam was not called... UR was. The second thing in your opinion is completely wrong as there is no criteria in the rules about knees hitting or arms out or anything (Coach H is completely right on this)...
 

Old142

Well-known member
Neither of which is mentioned in the rule book in regards to a slam.
Post the rule if you would. Since you're removing any subjectivity in your opinion....however his knee did hit first, watch it again. It's impossible in that position to stay on only a "toe". They did hit basically simultaneously, if you envision a "slam" hitting at the same time is virtually impossible and interpret it as a slam. Shore did not "shovel" him in the ground in the least, since when can't you lift someone in a mat return and they land on a shoulder ? How much speed or force is permitted? Impossible to call without subjectivity.
 

350zjk

Active member
I think you are misinterpreting what I'm saying... I was stating that unnecessary roughness does not constitute an illegal action... it is what it is... So regardless if the return was legal/illegal is irrelevant as it was called unnecessary roughness therefore it is not a slam (which is an illegal action) it was called as unnecessary roughness... again... no difference in the outcome, just a difference in the judgement of the official... The debate on all of these threads is "was it a slam or not..." to that point it is not relevant whether the mat return was illegal (a slam) as the official called UR. If you are going to debate you have to use the officials call as UR to start the debate and the debate is whether the force used in the return was unnecessarily rough (UR) or not... The return appears to be legal... the question (debate) of the penalty is was the force used in bringing the opponent to the mat. To clarify see below...

The first thing in your opinion is irrelevant as a slam was not called... UR was. The second thing in your opinion is completely wrong as there is no criteria in the rules about knees hitting or arms out or anything (Coach H is completely right on this)...
Call it cymatics or whatever you want but UNR= illegal by definition. An illegal slam=UNR. The signal is actually irrelevant. The slam equates to illegal because it was called as UNR. It was UNR because the wrestler was not returned to the mat safely which IS illegal. I think we agree, but you seem to be caught up in terminology.
 

Jim Behrens

Well-known member
Post the rule if you would. Since you're removing any subjectivity in your opinion....however his knee did hit first, watch it again. It's impossible in that position to stay on only a "toe". They did hit basically simultaneously, if you envision a "slam" hitting at the same time is virtually impossible and interpret it as a slam. Shore did not "shovel" him in the ground in the least, since when can't you lift someone in a mat return and they land on a shoulder ? How much speed or force is permitted? Impossible to call without subjectivity.
Rule 7-1-1
A slam is lifting and returning an opponent to the mat with unnecessary force. This infraction may be committed by a contestant in either the top or bottom position on the mat, as well as during a takedown.
A slam shall be called without hesitation.
 

rocco

Well-known member
That was a slam. After recovery you can choose to compete or not. Its the consequence of an illegal or penalty that injures someone. This is nothing new. It seems this happened early in the match. This can make the injury default a tough decision since there was no score and no clear way to determine who would likely win. A lot of "what if's?" in these scenarios. Tough situation to be in as a kid, coach , and opponent.
shore was clearly going to win
 

Old142

Well-known member
Rule 7-1-1
A slam is lifting and returning an opponent to the mat with unnecessary force. This infraction may be committed by a contestant in either the top or bottom position on the mat, as well as during a takedown.
A slam shall be called without hesitation.
As I figured ....clearly there can be some subjectivity, and by that definition I don't see many interpreting that excessive force. While it doesn't mention a "knee" hitting first, it doesnt take a NASA physicist to understand why thats a big tangible.
 

rr23724

Well-known member
You must be blind or related or most likely no idea what you're talking about in the sport , they hit the mat almost simultaneously, there was no extra "driving" in the least. The kid looked at the ref to see if he signaled 2..then as soon as he hit he grabbed his shoulder. Shore got hosed by good acting.
Wow...you are so blinded by your bias its hilarious. The kid didn't look for the ref first. The kid was wincing and hurt immediately.
 
Call it cymatics or whatever you want but UNR= illegal by definition. An illegal slam=UNR. The signal is actually irrelevant. The slam equates to illegal because it was called as UNR. It was UNR because the wrestler was not returned to the mat safely which IS illegal. I think we agree, but you seem to be caught up in terminology.
We do agree on the outcome and even on the subject... an illegal action happened which resulted in an injury where recovery time was exhausted and the injured wrestler could not continue therefore was granted the win... the actual call of Unnecessary Roughness does not make the mat return illegal... the difference in the two is the call the referee made. It could be argued that he should have indicated a slam using the illegal mechanic... (see below) but he chose to use the UR call instead.

Rule 7-1-1
A slam is lifting and returning an opponent to the mat with unnecessary force. This infraction may be committed by a contestant in either the top or bottom position on the mat, as well as during a takedown.
A slam shall be called without hesitation.
No knees, bodies, elbows, arms or other criteria are stated... this is the rule...

As I figured ....clearly there can be some subjectivity, and by that definition I don't see many interpreting that excessive force. While it doesn't mention a "knee" hitting first, it doesnt take a NASA physicist to understand why thats a big tangible.
There is subjectivity in every call in a match including scoring a takedown on the edge... how would you suggest the referee in this match make a decision as fast as wrestling was moving... It is very easy to watch a video many times and look at all aspects of a call and form an opinion especially when the outcome is already known, but in the heat of a semi-final match in a situation as this without knowledge of what the next action is going to be, how would you expect the referee to rule this?
 

rr23724

Well-known member
Definitely not a slam. Both arms were out and Shore’s knee his the ground. It was a solid mat return. Once again the officials are dictating outcomes. They have one simply job. They interject themselves too often. Kinda like that phantom third and goal holding call against the Bengals.
The knee on the ground is mythical...it has ZERO bearing on a slam call.
 

Old142

Well-known member
We do agree on the outcome and even on the subject... an illegal action happened which resulted in an injury where recovery time was exhausted and the injured wrestler could not continue therefore was granted the win... the actual call of Unnecessary Roughness does not make the mat return illegal... the difference in the two is the call the referee made. It could be argued that he should have indicated a slam using the illegal mechanic... (see below) but he chose to use the UR call instead.


No knees, bodies, elbows, arms or other criteria are stated... this is the rule...


There is subjectivity in every call in a match including scoring a takedown on the edge... how would you suggest the referee in this match make a decision as fast as wrestling was moving... It is very easy to watch a video many times and look at all aspects of a call and form an opinion especially when the outcome is already known, but in the heat of a semi-final match in a situation as this without knowledge of what the next action is going to be, how would you expect the referee to rule this?
Locking hands isn't subjective, you can remove subjectivity from a "takedown on the edge" also, It was a bad call anyway you slice or dice it...and I have no connection to Shore's.
Wow...you are so blinded by your bias its hilarious. The kid didn't look for the ref first. The kid was wincing and hurt immediately.
I never met the Shore's or know anything of their program. I do know my son or myself would never have defaulted out and wrestled, likely taking the state championship away from Shore......it's not real hard for men to understand.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
.
Top