ideamark

A couple more comments from Bryan Van Kley's column in the April 4, 2008 issue of WIN-Magazine (quotes are directly from the column):

> How takedowns are being called: "I'm not calling for any drastic overhaul, but something needs to be done about the lack of offense in Division I from the neutral position. I heard many wrestling lovers comment on how boring many of these 2-1 and 3-2 matches are. Top-level kids are just getting so good at their defense from their feet."

"One modification would be to change the rules slightly sot hat a takedown is awarded when a wrestler is in on a double and controlling an opponent's legs on the mat... This takedown is not currently being called and whent he defensive wrestler has a tight lock around his opponent's waist or legs. YOu'll see this takedown called at the edge of the mat but in the middle the refs will let them wrestle. Most of the time, this ends up in a stalemate. This needs to be two points to create more action and scoring. Riding time has gotten to be way too big a factor in wrestling because of the decrease in takedowns."

Head-and-arm ride: "Another big warning sign of what could be a negative trend played itself out in the 184 lb final. Did you notice how Ohio State's Mike Pucillo was able to ride out Iowa State's Jake Varner in OT? He simply locked up Varner's head and arm and hung on for 30 seconds. I'm not at all faulting Pucillo for it. It was a smart, strategical move that was well within the rules..."

"Wrestlers used to choose down in overtime because they were certain they could get out. Now many are starting to find loopholes in the rules or in ref's interpretations and they're taking advantage of them. If this head-and-arm ride becomes prevalent as a way to win tiebreakers, it will be bad for wrestling."

Whadya think?
Mark

__________________
Peace
www.RevWrestling.com

Those who are ignorant of wrestling history are doomed...

Zapp Brannigan

I agree with all of it. Especially the takedown thing. If you're on your butt, but happen to have your opponents leg, I think that's a takedown.

__________________
"I've made it with a woman. Inform the men."

architeuthis

Personally, I'm indifferent to the takedown suggestion. I've never been much on my feet, so anything that could potentially make it easier for me to give up 2 points I'm against.

In regards to the head/arm tie from Pucillo. The referee's job is to determine stalling. There is a way to take advantage of most rules if you look hard enough and are willing to go far enough.

In my opinion, this was sort of a unique incident that happend on the biggest stage. I think that it is much more advantageous to pick top in over time, but is that any different from having it be advantageous to choose bottom?

In the Varner match, it wasn't a matter of the headlock, it was a matter of being beat at his own game. There was never any doubt that Varner would get out eventually. he just wasn't able to hold Pucillo down. it was just strategy, and I don't think they can tamper with OT anymore than they already have.

My two cents, not a knock on Varner at all, it was an anticlimactic match all around.

_SL_

i say no to both, especially with the take-down. I wouldn't mind seeing a push-out point like in FS to keep people from using the edge of the mat so much though.

goferphan

I thought it very appripeaux that Varner would lose in such a manner.

__________________
"That is what Gable would have done to Owings the second time around. (Metcalf/Caldwell)"

arm-spin

As a freestyle guy watching folkstyle matches on the internet, it drives me crazy when a guy in on his back but no takedown is awarded because he's hanging onto a leg or something. In my mind, if you're on your back that should be a takedown.

Oh, and I did some wrestling in South Africa, freestyle and Greco, where the refs actually call passivities. Just throw up points if you're not attacking the whole time. It drove me crazy at first, especially in greco, but you sure don't see many boring matches. I remember scoring 3 pts and getting a caution in the 1 min greco standing period. I'm sure it's been said on this site a thousand times, but penalize someone for being passive and they'll stop. I saw dozens of pins an one clinch at the freestyle nationals (granted that may say something about South African defence)...

goferphan

that's the louisiana cajun spelling of appripeaux...not apropos from the greek...LOL...bluestater, that was for you.

__________________
"That is what Gable would have done to Owings the second time around. (Metcalf/Caldwell)"

arm-spin

I just watched the Keith Gavin- Ben Askren final match (anything to keep from doing actual work). At the scramble in the end, the announcer mentions that Gavin is struggling not to get pinned, and the referee announches that there is "no control- still neutral." Askren eventually gets his points, but that's the kind of stuff I'm talking about in my first reccomendation.

Gantry

I personally feel that in rideout situations in OT there should never be stall calls. Lets be honest - the nature of the 2ot period means that the top wrestler is looking strictly to ride his opponent. NOBODY goes for backpoints or pins in a rideout situation, so why call stalling if you're just trying to keep the bottom man down?

Wiltz

I personally am in favor of calling stalling on the head and arm ride, hate that ride with a passion.

I think any ride without the attempt to turn is stalling IMO. I agree on the point about OT unless you are just dropping to an ankle.

__________________
"He quits, not because he wants to, but because he has to. He has no choice.
" -Tom Brands 01/20/08