Referring

[Drem2Achev]

I think Don was knocked out at Bradley by some 215's or 275's came back and finished. Don is not a big guy, but he throughs himself in there to help protect the kids. Does a great job.

[BayouBear]

I think Don was knocked out at Bradley by some 215's or 275's came back and finished. Don is not a big guy, but he throughs himself in there to help protect the kids. Does a great job.

 

Donnie was kicked in the head in a 103 or 112 match last year at the Bradley Invitational. It was the only time I've ever seen blood time on a bout sheet for a ref.

 

He does a lot of Bradley matches. He's been knocked down more times than Ali.

 

He's a heck of a good guy as well as referee.

[texas23]

I say that I will pay your 50.00 for you to get a shirt and whistle and dare you to to do a better job. Clint Abbott

does that mean that the calls were good then? Or just that making calls are difficult? Nevermind, I know the answer.

[michael.geasley]

I say that I will pay your 50.00 for you to get a shirt and whistle and dare you to to do a better job. Clint Abbott

 

I agree with those who say that wrestling referees are to be commended for their dedication to the sport and that the referees do not choose to do this job for the small amount of money they earn. I am very glad that there are men that are willing to take on the duties of a referee.

 

However, it appears to me that every time a negative comment about a referee’s call is posted on this message board several people choose to ignore the problem that was brought up and instead criticize the person that pointed out the problem.

 

Here are a couple of situations I've seen recently that indicate to me that not all referees are meeting the standards that should be required to do the job:

 

So far in this short season I seen a referee award near fall points to a defensive wrestler and then bet the coach $50 that it was the right call. (Rule 5, § 9, Article 2, & 2b) The coach missed out on an easy fifty bucks.

 

I've also seen a wrestler, who is being held in a guillotine. moan in pain and rapidly tap the mat (many would recognize it as "tapping-out), yet the referee didn't recognize the wrestler's gestures as a default (Rule 5, § 5, also see Case Book and Manual Rule 5, § 5 situation, as well as Rule 6 § 4, Article 4), nor did the referee choose to stop the match and award 2, 3 or 4 near fall points. (Rule 5, § 9, Article 2, f through i). Luckily for this wrestler the second time he moaned and tapped the mat it was at the end of the period. It just doesn't seem safe, legal or fair to make a kid continue to wrestle in agony when he doesn't wish to. (Although I would disagree, some might judge that the offensive wrestler was intentionally and illegally inflicting pain. Even so, I feel the match should have been stopped).

 

Okay, so now I'm the messenger, I'm ready to take my shots.

 

P.S. Someday, when I'm down to just one job, I may very well take up your challenge and don the black and white jersey (if I'm not black-balled first!).

[pattonboysdad]

I agree with those who say that wrestling referees are to be commended for their dedication to the sport and that the referees do not choose to do this job for the small amount of money they earn. I am very glad that there are men that are willing to take on the duties of a referee.

 

However, it appears to me that every time a negative comment about a referee’s call is posted on this message board several people choose to ignore the problem that was brought up and instead criticize the person that pointed out the problem.

 

Here are a couple of situations I've seen recently that indicate to me that not all referees are meeting the standards that should be required to do the job:

 

So far in this short season I seen a referee award near fall points to a defensive wrestler and then bet the coach $50 that it was the right call. (Rule 5, § 9, Article 2, & 2b) The coach missed out on an easy fifty bucks.

 

I've also seen a wrestler, who is being held in a guillotine. moan in pain and rapidly tap the mat (many would recognize it as "tapping-out), yet the referee didn't recognize the wrestler's gestures as a default (Rule 5, § 5, also see Case Book and Manual Rule 5, § 5 situation, as well as Rule 6 § 4, Article 4), nor did the referee choose to stop the match and award 2, 3 or 4 near fall points. (Rule 5, § 9, Article 2, f through i). Luckily for this wrestler the second time he moaned and tapped the mat it was at the end of the period. It just doesn't seem safe, legal or fair to make a kid continue to wrestle in agony when he doesn't wish to. (Although I would disagree, some might judge that the offensive wrestler was intentionally and illegally inflicting pain. Even so, I feel the match should have been stopped).

 

Okay, so now I'm the messenger, I'm ready to take my shots.

 

P.S. Someday, when I'm down to just one job, I may very well take up your challenge and don the black and white jersey (if I'm not black-balled first!).

 

 

i could not agree more with you...as i read this thread it seems to me that if you see crazy stuff from refs that you want to bring up or get frustrated about...and you do it here on coach t...watch out...

 

current or ex refs get defensive...whoa!

 

no need to do that current or ex refs...because if you are honest...you see stuff from other refs that make your skin crawl because you know that all refs will be put in the same category for 2 or 3 refs crazy calls or attitudes

 

even today in the tullahoma duals...one ref called a penalty point for taunting on a wrestler....here is what the situation was...wrestler "A" starts off with a 5-0 lead on wrestler "B"...wrestler "B" reverses wrestler "A" and then wrestler "B" puts legs in and begins to tilt wrestler "A" for three back points...on the third tilt (while keeping the legs in the whole time) and the score 10-5 in favor of wrestler "B"...the ref stops the match and gives wrestler "A" one point because he said wrestler "B" was taunting him by tilting wrestler "A" and then letting him return to his stomach only to work the tilt again

 

the coach questioned the call and had a long calm disscussion with the ref...even another ref came over and said he did not agree with the call (after he heard the details) but that he could not call the match for the ref being questioned

 

the ref being questioned never changed his thought...said he was right and actually said... " why would he want to keep tilting the guy"...we all said the answer was...TOO SCORE POINTS TO WIN OR TECH HIS OPPONENT!!!

 

this answer did not seem to phase this ref...

 

never...in 30 years of being around wrestling have i seen this call...

 

now i do understand the rule that says in affect... that a wrestler cannot have a pinning combination on his opponent and then just jump off of him...let him up totally...just to do it all over again....that is taunting and unsportsman like...but this was not the situation today...

 

today's situation was what you see at every match and tournnament...

 

so...in conclusion...there are good refs for the most part...greatly appreciate their work and effort...but there are also guys with egos and who are not very good...let us all call the bad one's out...help them, encourage them to work hard to be better refs, encourage them to change or... refuse to use them...this would put some accountability in place to raise the standard of all refs so that a few bad apples will not ruin the whole bunch

 

and i am waiting for my shots to come as well

[reftn]

now i do understand the rule that says in affect... that a wrestler cannot have a pinning combination on his opponent and then just jump off of him...let him up totally...just to do it all over again....that is taunting and unsportsman like...but this was not the situation today...

 

PBD,

 

I wouldnt shoot you, no shots.

 

Could you quote me this from the rule as you have paraphrased it and reference the rule it comes from?

 

reftn

[pattonboysdad]

now i do understand the rule that says in affect... that a wrestler cannot have a pinning combination on his opponent and then just jump off of him...let him up totally...just to do it all over again....that is taunting and unsportsman like...but this was not the situation today...

 

PBD,

 

I wouldnt shoot you, no shots.

 

Could you quote me this from the rule as you have paraphrased it and reference the rule it comes from?

 

reftn

 

good question...i was told by a head coach and two other refs that this is a new rule...and...that they recently sent a flyer around to all refs and coaches explainning this new rule...

 

so to answer your question...no...i cannot quote you the rule in the book...actually don't have one...

 

but...the word interpretation was used many times in the discussion today about this call...one ref saying he would not interpret the new rule this way and the ref who made the bad call saying he would...

 

one of our points was...that the leg riding tilt is not a move that you actually pin from...you just get back points...and that the match was cleary still in question with 2 big strong seniors going at it in a close match

 

and thanks for not shooting me...smile

[reftn]

This is my point, and thank you for your help.

 

We are now left with some vague interpretation of a taunting rule that cannot be found in the rules book. Imagine the possibilities:

 

A kid in a cradle that he cannot possibly pin in cannot just let him go.

A kid with legs in and has a kid turned in a half cannot just let him go once he has earned his 3.

A kid turns another in a tilt, this is not a pinning combination, but tilts have pinned before.

etc...etc...etc....

 

Any of these may or may not be in violation of the rule, suddenly this becomes totally subjective to the official on the mat.

 

Is it any less taunting to go through a series of pinning combinations than it is a series of takedowns? Yet one is taunting and the other is not. I see kids look for more foolish being taken down and let up than to be turned and returned in pinning combinations.

 

The rules have a 15 point tech fall margin to prevent pointing an opponent to excess. Maybe we should move to default the offensive wrestler for creating such a humiliating margin of victory! Tsk.....

 

So dont be too harsh on me if I dont call things exactly as they seem to be logical, sometimes they take the logic out.

 

You think this is fun? Wait until the third weekend in February and four different officials associations come to Chattanooga with their own valid, subjective interpretations!

 

Thanks again, I feel much better!

 

reftn

[reftn]

This is my point, and thank you for your help.

 

We are now left with some vague interpretation of a taunting rule that cannot be found in the rules book. Imagine the possibilities:

 

A kid in a cradle that he cannot possibly pin in cannot just let him go.

A kid with legs in and has a kid turned in a half cannot just let him go once he has earned his 3.

A kid turns another in a tilt, this is not a pinning combination, but tilts have pinned before.

 

If your kid is down by 6 points in the third period, dont you think about turning him twice for 3 points each. Your strategy changes to ....how many take downs will you need letting him escape each time? I cant take into account the situation at hand, the coach in the other corner will demand, and rightly so, I make this call. And if the kid happened to have been observed without shoelace cover, BANG! He is out of the match/tournament.

 

etc...etc...etc....

 

Any of these may or may not be in violation of the rule, suddenly this becomes totally subjective to the official on the mat.

 

Is it any less taunting to go through a series of pinning combinations than it is a series of takedowns? Yet one is taunting and the other is not. I see kids look for more foolish being taken down and let up than to be turned and returned in pinning combinations.

 

The rules have a 15 point tech fall margin to prevent pointing an opponent to excess. Maybe we should move to default the offensive wrestler for creating such a humiliating margin of victory! Tsk.....

 

So dont be too harsh on me if I dont call things exactly as they seem to be logical, sometimes they take the logic out.

 

You think this is fun? Wait until the third weekend in February and four different officials associations come to Chattanooga with their own valid, subjective interpretations!

 

Thanks again, I feel much better!

 

reftn

[pattonboysdad]

This is my point, and thank you for your help.

 

We are now left with some vague interpretation of a taunting rule that cannot be found in the rules book. Imagine the possibilities:

 

A kid in a cradle that he cannot possibly pin in cannot just let him go.

A kid with legs in and has a kid turned in a half cannot just let him go once he has earned his 3.

A kid turns another in a tilt, this is not a pinning combination, but tilts have pinned before.

 

If your kid is down by 6 points in the third period, dont you think about turning him twice for 3 points each. Your strategy changes to ....how many take downs will you need letting him escape each time? I cant take into account the situation at hand, the coach in the other corner will demand, and rightly so, I make this call. And if the kid happened to have been observed without shoelace cover, BANG! He is out of the match/tournament.

 

etc...etc...etc....

 

Any of these may or may not be in violation of the rule, suddenly this becomes totally subjective to the official on the mat.

 

Is it any less taunting to go through a series of pinning combinations than it is a series of takedowns? Yet one is taunting and the other is not. I see kids look for more foolish being taken down and let up than to be turned and returned in pinning combinations.

 

The rules have a 15 point tech fall margin to prevent pointing an opponent to excess. Maybe we should move to default the offensive wrestler for creating such a humiliating margin of victory! Tsk.....

 

So dont be too harsh on me if I dont call things exactly as they seem to be logical, sometimes they take the logic out.

 

You think this is fun? Wait until the third weekend in February and four different officials associations come to Chattanooga with their own valid, subjective interpretations!

 

Thanks again, I feel much better!

 

reftn

 

 

i just noticed that your post name is reftn...so i guess you are a ref...one of the good guys...smile

 

could not agree more with all you said...we lived it today in full color

 

and...since you mentioned the takedown situation as possibly being taunting...the ref today in question actually said...that what he was calling taunting in the tilting situation was the same rule he would use if a guy took a guy down and let him up over and over again...that this would be taunting as well

 

we said that he better watch a few ncaa matches...because this is nearly all they do...he said...this is not the ncaa...this is the tssaa...wow!

 

i think the 15 point rule is what saves a kid from being embarressed to much...and if a wrestler is show boating and strutting...i am assuming that would be called taunting...which i think should

 

but this stuff today was crazy

 

let me know if you hear anything else from other refs around the state..thanks

[pattonboysdad]

I say that I will pay your 50.00 for you to get a shirt and whistle and dare you to to do a better job. Clint Abbott

 

 

a little defensive???

 

no need for that...there are alot of very good refs...no doubt...but there are a few that should not be a ref with out some more work on doing there job right...

[delaWarr]

 

 

we said that he better watch a few ncaa matches...because this is nearly all they do...he said...this is not the ncaa...this is the tssaa...wow!

 

 

 

 

Without commenting on the rules or the rules interpretation by the ref, because I'm not current on rules either on the National High School Federation level or on the NCAA level, I would caution against automatically accepting the NCAA as a standard by which to judge scholastic, because the rules for the two organizations are not always written the same.