Region 1 Officiating video...You make the call.

[tnsmokediver]

Standing right beside the table with officials all around and never asked to move.

 

It was made clear before the finals started who was allowed on the floor.

 

As to officials being all around you, that is incorrect. The officials who were not on the mat for the

finals or consolation finals are sitting down in the background of your video.

 

Once again proving my point of the ignorance of the rule book as there is to be no one within 10 feet of the table except for scorekeepers and clock operators.

 

We as officials can only do so much for crowd control because our main focus has to be on the mat. The administrators of the host facility are responsible for crowd control per the rule book.

 

BTW, your previous post states you didn't take the video but you now indicate your were beside the table. If you were in two places at once, you obviously have a talent we could use next year if you are willing to purchase a gray shirt.

Edited February 13, 2012 by tnsmokediver

[humphreyssm]

It was made clear before the finals started who was allowed on the floor.

 

As to officials being all around you, that is incorrect. The officials who were not on the mat for the

finals or consolation finals are sitting down in the background of your video.

 

Once again proving my point of the ignorance of the rule book as there is to be no one within 10 feet of the table except for scorekeepers and clock operators.

 

We as officials can only do so much for crowd control because our main focus has to be on the mat. The administrators of the host facility are responsible for crowd control per the rule book.

look...this is irrelevent to this post...the officials I'm speaking of are the officials that ref'd the match as they were waiting to start the match because they were handing medals out of another match...again not my video!This video was recorded by the team cameraman. And I agree! the tournament director/scorekeepers/tableworkers should have asked the camera person to leave.

Edited February 13, 2012 by humphreyssm

[anotherref]

Anotherref...of course Trent didn't question you..He was raised not to question authority.. by me, his mother!! And my son doesn't make excuses..thats the reason he smiled and said thank you. Trent was sure the pin was good and no out of bounds called because he thought Goldsteins feet were in bounds. The question was made by me, and after reviewing the video in the car on the way home Trent questioned it also so I asked someone to review it and thats what they posted. Every referee doesn't call things the same..that was evident this past weekend. I can respect that too. However, this was a region championship that should have been watched really closely, regardless of the fast and furious activity.

 

The reason for this post is stated above...were they out of bounds? Thats the question..not who won or lost.

 

I actually never said that he would have questioned authority the point I was making was he never even asked about it and I have heard Trent ask me questions about certain things before not in a disrespectful manner more of a friendly hey what do you think kind of thing Trent is a very respectable kid

[humphreyssm]

It was made clear before the finals started who was allowed on the floor.

 

As to officials being all around you, that is incorrect. The officials who were not on the mat for the

finals or consolation finals are sitting down in the background of your video.

 

Once again proving my point of the ignorance of the rule book as there is to be no one within 10 feet of the table except for scorekeepers and clock operators.

 

We as officials can only do so much for crowd control because our main focus has to be on the mat. The administrators of the host facility are responsible for crowd control per the rule book.

 

BTW, your previous post states you didn't take the video but you now indicate your were beside the table. If you were in two places at once, you obviously have a talent we could use next year if you are willing to purchase a gray shirt.

 

 

Never did I state I was even on the floor...re-read the post...I said the team camera person was beside the table.

[humphreyssm]

I actually never said that he would have questioned authority the point I was making was he never even asked about it and I have heard Trent ask me questions about certain things before not in a disrespectful manner more of a friendly hey what do you think kind of thing Trent is a very respectable kid

EXACTLY!! thats the reason I gave the explanation. You obviously know my son.

[coachknepper]

Stephanie,

 

I would ask you to let this manner go (at least in a public forum like this).

 

People get on here just to put fuel to the fire sometimes and know how to toy with emotions.

 

Personally I believe Trent was out of bounds from the perspective of the video...but from a referee's perspective (which many times can be a judgement call), it may have looked differently.

 

The best thing I would say to Trent is don't get hammerlocked like that ever again and it won't matter what the referee's perspective is.

 

Good luck at state!

 

Coach Knepper

[oneblindref]

Oneblindref,

 

Can you reference where in the rulebook or casebook that it states that the supporting points would transition to the feet in this case?

 

Just wondering if that is a judgement or if it is actually covered somewhere. That would probably help shed some light on it. This certainly doesn't seem to match logic on where the supporting points would be considered and I am sure is where xbody's disagreement stems from.

From the case book:

*5.15.2 SITUATION A: Wrestler B is in a near-iall situation so the shoulders and scapulas are outside the boundary line. A is still inbounds and has a deep half nelson with an inside crotch pinning situation. In (a), A attempts to bring B back into the inbounds area. In (, A makes no attempt to bring B inbounds. RULING: in (a) or ( B cannot be pinned nor can near fall points be awarded because part of the shoulders and scapula of B are not on or inside the boundary line. if there were an attempt on the part of the offensive wrestler to bring the opponent back inbounds as in (a), wrestling will continue. However, in ( when there is no attempt to bring B inbounds, the referee has no alternative but to declare an out of bounds and wrestling will be resumed from the starting position on the mat.

5.15.2 SITUATION B: Wrestler A is successful in turning Wrestler B in a pin¬ning situation near the edge of the mat so the shoulders of B are touching out of bounds although the supporting parts of A remain inhounds. In this and similar situations, what are the guidelines concerning the amount of time the offensive wrestler has for pulling the opponent back inbounds? RULING: There are no spe¬cific time guidelines, and the decision of whether to stop the match and declare an out of bounds rests entirely with the referee. The rules require the referee to permit the offensive wrestler an opportunity to bring the opponent back inbounds. if, in the referee's judgment, the offensive wrestler is making progress, wrestling will be permitted to continue. Only when the referee observes no progress is being made or no attempt to pull the defensive wrestler back inbounds, will wrestling be stopped and the match restarted as if an out of bounds occurred from the starting position. COMMENT: Many coaches and ref¬erees are looking for a specific number of seconds as well as the number of inch¬es in other situations upon which to base their decisions as to whether to award points or stop the match. Because of the infinite number of combinations devel¬oping in wrestling, it is impossible to assign a specific time and distance to every different situation. Referees must, through experience and application of good judgment, make decisions upon the action in each particular situation.

[tnsmokediver]

look...this is irrelevent to this post...the officials I'm speaking of are the officials that ref'd the match as they were waiting to start the match because they were handing medals out of another match...again not my video!This video was recorded by the team cameraman. And I agree! the tournament director/scorekeepers/tableworkers should have asked the camera person to leave.

It is relevant to the point that fans, parents, etc seem to ignore what we as officials or the rule book ask except for when it will not benefit you or your wrestler.

[tnsmokediver]

Stephanie,

 

I would ask you to let this manner go (at least in a public forum like this).

 

People get on here just to put fuel to the fire sometimes and know how to toy with emotions.

 

Personally I believe Trent was out of bounds from the perspective of the video...but from a referee's perspective (which many times can be a judgement call), it may have looked differently.

 

The best thing I would say to Trent is don't get hammerlocked like that ever again and it won't matter what the referee's perspective is.

 

Good luck at state!

 

Coach Knepper

 

Thanks Coach! It's because of your attitude that we as officials respect you and those like you.

 

We may not always walk away from the mat agreeing with every call made but we do respect each other when we do. Perspective is everything on a wrestling mat.

 

Not every view of situations will look the same and that's what makes this sport so great!

[Sommers]

This is why it was so easy to hang up my b/w striped(?) shirt & whistle after one year in the eighties. You are under such scrutiny that you better take to memory every criteria and exception, take every assignment, jv, middle elementary etc to practice or it can become a nightmare out there. I didn't have near enough time trying to keep up with BlueRaider76!!

 

Now... As far as My being a good judge,,, Even after watching the video I THOUGHT it was the right call, but after 2nd review, it does appear,,,, for a split second that the Wrestlers were both out out bounds. Again, IF you feel the arm bar coming, you'd better base up or get turned,,, especially if they hook in the hammer lock. Life's lessons are learned on the mat. Play it safe & base up! Let the authorities keep the kids safe and not play a part in the outcome is my suggestion.

Edited February 14, 2012 by Sommers

[TNKO2]

Oneblindref,

 

Can you reference where in the rulebook or casebook that it states that the supporting points would transition to the feet in this case?

 

Just wondering if that is a judgement or if it is actually covered somewhere. That would probably help shed some light on it. This certainly doesn't seem to match logic on where the supporting points would be considered and I am sure is where xbody's disagreement stems from.

while ONEBLINDREF references the casebook I believe, and not the NFHS rulebook, I regretfully am wrong as is ONEBLINDREF.

 

The RULEBOOK states.... RULE 5, SECTION 15, ART 2b, ...... When the defensive wrestler is on his back while the supporting parts of either wrestler are inbounds, wrestling shall continue as long as there is a possibility of the offensive wrestler bringing the opponent back into the inbounds area. IN THIS SITUATION, ANY PART OF A DEFENSIVE WRESTLERS SHOULDER OR SCAPULA IS CONSIDERED TO BE THE SUPPORTING PARTS.

 

So if the offensive wrestler is out of bounds, and he clearly was, and the rule says above the defensive wrestlers supporting parts while on his back is his shoulder or scapula, are out of bounds as well, it is considered OUT OF BOUNDS.

 

I ref and I was wrong.... but you learn something new everyday.

Edited February 14, 2012 by TNKO2

[ghouse]

From the case book:

*5.15.2 SITUATION A: Wrestler B is in a near-iall situation so the shoulders and scapulas are outside the boundary line. A is still inbounds and has a deep half nelson with an inside crotch pinning situation. In (a), A attempts to bring B back into the inbounds area. In (, A makes no attempt to bring B inbounds. RULING: in (a) or ( B cannot be pinned nor can near fall points be awarded because part of the shoulders and scapula of B are not on or inside the boundary line. if there were an attempt on the part of the offensive wrestler to bring the opponent back inbounds as in (a), wrestling will continue. However, in ( when there is no attempt to bring B inbounds, the referee has no alternative but to declare an out of bounds and wrestling will be resumed from the starting position on the mat.

5.15.2 SITUATION B: Wrestler A is successful in turning Wrestler B in a pin¬ning situation near the edge of the mat so the shoulders of B are touching out of bounds although the supporting parts of A remain inhounds. In this and similar situations, what are the guidelines concerning the amount of time the offensive wrestler has for pulling the opponent back inbounds? RULING: There are no spe¬cific time guidelines, and the decision of whether to stop the match and declare an out of bounds rests entirely with the referee. The rules require the referee to permit the offensive wrestler an opportunity to bring the opponent back inbounds. if, in the referee's judgment, the offensive wrestler is making progress, wrestling will be permitted to continue. Only when the referee observes no progress is being made or no attempt to pull the defensive wrestler back inbounds, will wrestling be stopped and the match restarted as if an out of bounds occurred from the starting position. COMMENT: Many coaches and ref¬erees are looking for a specific number of seconds as well as the number of inch¬es in other situations upon which to base their decisions as to whether to award points or stop the match. Because of the infinite number of combinations devel¬oping in wrestling, it is impossible to assign a specific time and distance to every different situation. Referees must, through experience and application of good judgment, make decisions upon the action in each particular situation.

 

 

while ONEBLINDREF references the casebook I believe and not the NFHS rulebook I regretfully am wrong as is ONEBLINDREF.

 

The RULEBOOK states.... RULE 5, SECTION 15, ART 2b, ...... When the defensive wrestler is on his back while the supporting parts of either wrestler are inbounds, wrestling shall continue as long as there is a possibility of the offensive wrestler bringing the opponent back into the inbounds area. IN THIS SITUATION, ANY PART OF A DEFENSIVE WRESTLERS SHOULDER OR SCAPULA IS CONSIDERED TO BE THE SUPPORTING PARTS.

 

So if the offensive wrestler is out of bounds, and he clearly was, and the rule says above the defensive wrestlers supporting parts while on his back is his shoulder or scapula are out of bounds as well, it is considered OUT OF BOUNDS.

 

I ref and I was wrong.... but you learn something new everyday.

 

OneBlindRef & TNKO2,

 

Thanks for taking the time to pull what you believed were the relevant passages.

 

However, the passage pulled by OneBlindRef does not cover the topic I asked for which was where the statement that once out of bounds the scapula were no longer supporting points and the feet became supporting points. This was the issue xbody was trying to bring to light and disagreed with the interpretation of. This section instead is focused on when it is proper to restart from that position assuming Wrestler A remains inbounds.

 

The passage quoted by TNKO2 does specifically state that in this situation the scapula are the supporting points of the defensive wrestler and not the feet as was stated previously. Based on that interpretation it would seem that an out of bounds should have been called as it does appear that the offensive wrestler was out of bounds.

 

These are the type of conversations that are worth having when all sides can be open to the possibility that either was wrong and allow the rulebook to help take out some of the subjectivity. As TNKO2 stated, you get to learn something here. Of course, I wouldn't expect most referees to necessarily get this right the first time in the heat of a match... that is difficult as many have already stated. Calls are made and in the long run you will find that they balance out either in the wrestler's individual career or through a coach's career. Of course it never feels that way at the time.

 

All of that said, until more officials in the state of TN learn to adopt the learning approach it will be tough to continue to improve. It is important for all involved to be willing to sit down later and look at the call rationale and objectively to see if we can better ourselves from it. The officials should strive to learn how to call the situation better and the coaches should learn the nuances and how to review the situation during the match with the official to see if it can be broken down to a misapplication of a rule of it was truly a judgement call.

 

I am hoping that was the intent of this conversation. To bring the situation to light so that everyone can be bettered by it and allow it to be called correctly per the intent of the rules the next time someone is in that situation.