|
Post by Alumni on Feb 12, 2007 11:54:56 GMT -5
Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.
My opinion of the stall call is that it should be done to encourage action. Not so much to punish a wrestler for lack of action but to get them to compete. If the refs were to establish from the very first whistle of the tournament that they are going to force the guys to wrestle by warning quickly in the match I think we would have seen a lot more action. The finals were loaded with talent just waiting to put on a show. Imagine what it would have been like if the refs had just encouraged them to compete.
|
|
|
Post by pinmaster on Feb 12, 2007 12:16:58 GMT -5
Agreed totally, and if the wrestler continues to not force action he should get hit with a stall again. There are clever ways to disguise a stall, which actually looks like you are forcing action but in reality you are not. Experienced refs usually cannnot be fooled by it.
|
|
|
Post by ooldad on Feb 12, 2007 13:20:51 GMT -5
I agree with how a stall warning is used to push the action. However some of the calls in the finals were very suspect. The Edmonds vs Barrett match. Edmonds gets called for stalling and Barrett gets a point. Edmonds pressed the action from the beginning. He never stalled!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Barrett technically did. His whole approach was to be defensive and counter. He rarely pressed the action. Classic example of looking like your doing something to score but really have no intention of trying to score offensively. I believe Barrett was given favorable calls in the match and I believe Edmonds lost due to poor officiating not by being beaten by a better wrestler. Barrett is a classy champion and I wish him well at Stanford. EDMONDS GOT BEAT BY THE REF. A stall call. Go get them next year Trey, I really enjoyed watching you wrestle this year.
|
|
|
Post by Alumni on Feb 12, 2007 13:41:10 GMT -5
I agree with how a stall warning is used to push the action. However some of the calls in the finals were very suspect. The Edmonds vs Barrett match. Edmonds gets called for stalling and Barrett gets a point. Edmonds pressed the action from the beginning. He never stalled!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Barrett technically did. His whole approach was to be defensive and counter. He rarely pressed the action. Classic example of looking like your doing something to score but really have no intention of trying to score offensively. I believe Barrett was given favorable calls in the match and I believe Edmonds lost due to poor officiating not by being beaten by a better wrestler. Barrett is a classy champion and I wish him well at Stanford. EDMONDS GOT BEAT BY THE REF. A stall call. Go get them next year Trey, I really enjoyed watching you wrestle this year. The 160 Finals for the 4A was the same way. The Bonanza kid seemed to be just trying to hang around, keep it close and get counter points in the end. He showed no desire to even come close to instigating offense. How that ref failed to even warn the kid was amazing. Give a warning! Give a point! We want to see them wrestle not back up.
|
|
|
Post by pinmaster on Feb 12, 2007 14:13:13 GMT -5
Have to disagree with Edmonds Barrett view. Barrett is a tremendous at neutral, he wants to let a guy up and go for points from netral, which he had two takedowns, Edmunds was smart trying to ride him out as long as possible as to not let it get to neutral, but when he did this it waves the stall red flag. I believe coach Carter yelled for Trey to cut Barrett loose in the third for fear of another stall call was coming. Carter is a smart coach and wanted it to be sttled on the mat, which evetually it was. If he wanted to press the action he should have cut Barrett loose imediately whenever he got the takedown or reversal, it was obvious both wrestlers were to strong to be turned or pinned, that being the case let your opponent up and get after it.
|
|
|
Post by ooldad on Feb 12, 2007 14:23:41 GMT -5
The perfect example of stalling. Fortunately Lamborn didnt get frustrated and was able to finish it off in overtime.
|
|
|
Post by pinmaster on Feb 12, 2007 14:27:21 GMT -5
The perfect example was Padilla-Price, Padilla got a stall point against him, and still refused to force much action. Close but boring match. Morales is notorious for this type of match at the 215 weight class. He perfected it untill Williams just thoughly overpowered him.
|
|
|
Post by matanimal on Feb 12, 2007 21:19:00 GMT -5
The match that comes to mind is the Cronin and Degroat match. First the light went out when they were wrestling. Then they move down to the only mat that had light, then once the light came on before they even started wrestling they asked to go back to the mat they were wrestling on and the ref said NO! So they began to wrestle and Degroat was the only on in action all Cronin did was stall. I paid good money to watch wrestling on stalling and this happen all weekend. I think that the ref should have to have train class through the year so that the good wrestler do not end up on the wrong side of the bracket. There were seveal coachs that said it should have be Longmire and Degoat I think this would have been one of the bigs matchup at state. By the way Longmire great job and enjoy your State Title.
|
|
|
Post by watchin on Feb 13, 2007 2:25:05 GMT -5
WHY IS IT THAT THE OFFICIALS MUST "MAKE" THE WRESTLERS DO SOMETHING??? WOULDN'T IT BE BETTER IF THE COACHES TEACH AND DEMAND THAT HIS WRESTLERS STAY AGGRESSIVE. VERY FEW OF THE COACHES ADMIT THAT THEIR GUY IS STALLING. WHEN IT IS CALLED THE COACHES WHINE AND CRY IF IT IS ON THEIR WRESTLER. A LITTLE HELP FROM THE COACHES WOULD HELP. I HEARD A STORY ONCE, ABOUT THE COACH OF THE TOP WRESTLER COMPLAINING THAT THE BOTTOM WRESTLER WAS STALLING. AFTER ABOUT 25 SECONDS, THE OFFICIAL STOPPED THE MATCH AND THE BOTTOM WRESTLER WAS UNCONSCIOUS. THE COACH YELLED AT THE OFFICIAL THAT HE KNEW THE BOTTOM WRESTLER WAS DOING NOTHING AND WANTED TO KNOW WHY IT TOOK SO LONG FOR HIM TO SEE THAT. THE QUESTION THE OFFICIAL ASKED THE COMPLAINING COACH WAS "WHY COULDN'T YOU WRESTLER TURN SOMEONE THAT WAS UNCONSCIOUS?" AGAIN IT'S NEVER YOUR KID, ITS ALWAYS THE OTHER. THAT'S THE BIGGEST PROBLEMS WITH OUR SOCIETY TODAY. NO ONE EVER TAKES RESPONSIBILITY!!!!
|
|
lenny
New Member
Posts: 7
|
Post by lenny on Feb 13, 2007 16:55:20 GMT -5
I officiated the Lamborn 160lb match. Neither wrestler would attempt or dictate any action at all. Neither wrestler opened up. Lamborn could have taken to him if he wanted. Making stall calls doesn't dictate aggressive wrestling in this particular match. That is why I didn't call any stall calls. I let the wrestlers decide the match and that is what we are taught. We as officials are NOT there to "Make them wrestle." How can officials "Make them wrestle" If the coaches would teach a more aggressive style of wrestling and get the wrestlers in some kind of shape then we would have better wrestling. You should NEVER let the ref decide the match for you. You have wrestlers that make it to state and they are still out of shape, explain that one. I thought that we brought one of the best officiating crews that state has seen in awhile. We received allot of compliments.
|
|
nnw
Junior Member
Posts: 23
|
Post by nnw on Feb 13, 2007 18:13:51 GMT -5
Hey Lenny,
How did you feel about the Barrett vs Edmunds match. Are you willing to give an honest professional opinion?
|
|
lenny
New Member
Posts: 7
|
Post by lenny on Feb 13, 2007 18:29:35 GMT -5
I was officiating on the other mat and didn't see the entire match.
|
|
noone
Full Member
Posts: 41
|
Post by noone on Feb 13, 2007 19:00:38 GMT -5
There may be other reasons for wrestlers to be out of shape at State than just being lazy. At Zone a ref made a comment to someone after a match about a wrestler who had just wrestled, not being in shape. That kid just came off a not one but TWO knee surgeries and a broken hand, he wrestled the last few weeks of the season is all. How is he supposed to be in shape? He wasnt the only one either, I know of several who barely got to wrestle this season due to injuries but they were there at Zone and some at State also. So dont assume that just because they are at State that they have had a season to get in shape. My own son went to the Zone finals with a record of 4-2 one year, was he in shape? No way! Just heart.
|
|
|
Post by Alumni on Feb 13, 2007 20:45:41 GMT -5
I officiated the Lamborn 160lb match. Neither wrestler would attempt or dictate any action at all. Neither wrestler opened up. Lamborn could have taken to him if he wanted. Making stall calls doesn't dictate aggressive wrestling in this particular match. That is why I didn't call any stall calls. I let the wrestlers decide the match and that is what we are taught. We as officials are NOT there to "Make them wrestle." How can officials "Make them wrestle" If the coaches would teach a more aggressive style of wrestling and get the wrestlers in some kind of shape then we would have better wrestling. You should NEVER let the ref decide the match for you. You have wrestlers that make it to state and they are still out of shape, explain that one. I thought that we brought one of the best officiating crews that state has seen in awhile. We received allot of compliments. First of all let me say that I applaud you for stepping up here and voicing your point of view. Which is truly a point of view that NONE of us had. I also want to say that overall I felt the officiating was very good the entire weekend. I just felt that stalling seemed to be a tactic used by some wrestlers and I think the referees should use what is in the rules to "encourage" action. This is also why I titled my post "correct me if I'm wrong". Absolutely, no ref should decide a match. In the four matches that I felt stalling was being abused (Padilla match, 52's, 60's and Heavies) I don't think a stalling call would have changed the outcome. What it would have done is help to create action. All Athletes test out their particular event just to see what they can get away with. If not then what do we need referees for anyways? The referee has a job to do and some do it better than others. You stated above that "Making stall calls doesn't dictate aggressive wrestling in this particular match. That is why I didn't call any stall calls." Does that mean you did see stalling, but chose not to call it? If so, while I don't agree with that approach I do respect the fact that you make a call based on what is happening at the moment and it is always easier for us to sit here after the fact and be critical. What I absolutely do not agree with and to be honest have no respect for is an official that points fingers at High School wrestlers implying they were out of shape. That is out of line. Most of these kids work harder at their sport than many of us would have ever imagined doing. If anyone is going to imply they are out of shape then they better be able to say they have seen the kid work out, day after day, month after month, year after year. Not just because they saw eight minutes of wrestling and determined the kid was out of shape.
|
|
pinu2
Full Member
Posts: 41
|
Post by pinu2 on Feb 13, 2007 21:18:14 GMT -5
Alumni, You felt there was stalling in the Harris/Evans match, can I ask by who and in your "opinion" did the best wrestler win? just wondering
|
|