Ask Chuck Via Updated October 8, 2015

Transcription

1 Ask Chuck Via Updated October 8, Question: One thing that was not addressed in the video is what is out of bounds with the new rules changes. There was no mention of what is considered out of bounds changing, but yet in many of the examples shown someone being pushed off the mat so that Wrestler A was out of Bounds and Wrestler B was still in bounds. I am not sure if this was the camera angle or the view not being wide enough. In years passed this meant that wrestling could continue under the college out of bounds rule, but in these examples stalling was called. Are we considering one wrestlers two feet leaving the mat being out of bounds now like high school or do both wrestlers need to be completely off the mat? Answer: The rules regarding what constitutes out of bounds (or in bounds) in the neutral position have not changed and can be found on pages under Rule 2.4. The new stalling rule outlined in Rule is a mandatory referee call that occurs only after the out of bounds call has been made. 2. Question: The penalty sequence for stalling is outlined in Rule on page 52 and again in the penalty table on page 56 of the and rules book. However, footnote number three on page 59 of the penalty table conflicts with the two previous rules for penalizing stalling, is this an error? Answer: Yes, this is in fact an error and footnote #3 on page 59 should be stricken from your and rules book. As stated in your question, the penalty sequence for stalling: first violation warning, second violation one point, third violation one point, fourth violation one point, fifth violation disqualify is correct as stated in Rule on page 52, and also in the penalty table on page 56. In addition to posting this response in the ask Chuck section of the Arbiter Center Mat website I will also compile a wrestling rules book corrections document that will be posted on the Center Mat homepage that will outline this, and any other, rules book errors so that all coaches and officials will have ready access in which to review them. Thank you for bringing this needed correction to my attention. 3. Question: If a flagrant call is missed at a tournament or event that does not have replay can the film be observed by you (the SRE) and then the athlete dq d for his next event. Football does this and I really believe we should too. Response: No, the rules book currently confirms only that flagrant misconduct calls and unsportsmanlike conduct calls shall be reviewed if video review is being utilized for the dualmeet or the tournament round in question. Here is the applicable Rule d: Once a flagrant misconduct violation has been assessed, the referee shall review the official designated mat-side video. The review shall take place immediately after the violation has

2 been assessed. The flagrant misconduct violation shall not be changed after the subsequent match begins in a dual meet and once the bout sheet leaves the table in a tournament. (See Rule a.) I will however log this question as a point of discussion for the wrestling rules committee to consider. 4. Question: The coach s box area in duals, do we need to move coaches to the corners? We usually set chairs on the side and coach from there. The rule seems very specific to the area that is set for the corner of the mat. Response: The annual wrestling rules video may have been a bit confusing as to what is acceptable for a designated reserved zone for dual meets since the picture that was in the video was a single mat setup, but there was no distinction as to whether that was a tournament or a dual-meet (it was in fact a tournament). For dual meets, coaches and game managers should continue to adhere to Rule which states that the coaching zone shall be at least 10 feet from the mat and scorer s table. There is no other distinction on where the coaching area should be located as long as it satisfies this 10 foot rule. For the purposes of this rule, the term mat indicates the edge of the mat and not the competition circle. For the purposes of control of mat area violations in dual meets where the designated reserved zone is often not marked, coaches should know that if they are on the mat or within 10 feet of the mat s edge or the scorer s table they shall be called for a control of mat area violation. The only exceptions to approaching the mat are: to question timing and/or scoring, request a video review or during a charged timeout. (Rule ). For tournaments, we need to continue to satisfy rule which allows for an 8 foot restricted zone to be placed in any two corners of the mat. Also, game managers should consider the recommendation that when using video review, the red corner be placed to the right of the mat-side table and the green corner to be placed to the left of the mat-side table 5. Question: After a double leg take down and a wrestler is working for a turk to turn the opponent, does the stall count start immediately? Response: In this instance, there would be no mandatory count by the referee and I will restate the situation with a bit more detail: the wrestler has just executed a double leg takedown and has one hand at or near the knee level of the opponent and is executing a bottom leg turk, with that hand, while the top hand is working up near the head and/or neck area to turn the opponent to secure a back exposure. A key passage in applying rule b to keep in mind is the offensive wrestler applies a hold/hand on or around the defensive wrestler s waist while applying the other arm/hand below the buttocks. In the recent rules video there were two additional examples discussed that are similar to yours: an athlete with a cross body ride who is grasping the neck with one hand and the ankle with the other hand in order to break an opponent down to the mat or turn them and also an athlete using a drape ride, where one had is on the ankle and one is on the neck and

3 the offensive wrestler is working to secure a cradle or some other pinning combination. Both of the aforementioned situations are allowable and do not require an immediate referee count. For a related situation where the wrestler executing the takedown does not immediately work up see rule 5.9.3, situation #9 on page 122 of the rule book. 6. Question: The words criterion and criteria are used a few times and I am not sure they are consistent. For example, in rule and it talks about when the criterion is met for a 2 point near fall. (Many may feel that this would require a 2 count). In the past I was always under the assumption that this means the defensive wrestler has met a near fall criterion (singular) and that a 2 count was not necessary for the offensive wrestler to earn a 3 point near fall last year and a 4 point near fall this season. He had to just reach one of the 4 near fall definitions. On page 109 situation 3 it discusses this again and does not mention the 2 count. Then is it says criteria for a 4 point near fall are met which clearly means a 2 or 3 count. However in it says criterion. I am sure that I understand the intent of these rules, but it has been brought up by more than a few officials. Unless I am wrong, the intent is that a 2 count does not need to be completed and all that is necessary is that the defensive wrestler has met one of the 4 near fall criteria so that a 4 point near fall can be awarded in these situations where there is injury or excessive bleeding as indicated in Answer: Let me see if I can answer all of your questions. In regards to the use of criteria and/or criterion, a wrestler only has to satisfy one near fall criterion or we could say, any one of the near fall criteria. I will make a note to review the rule book in detail to ensure we are using the singular or plural versions of this word correctly. I m not exactly certain of your specific question in the second part but I do understand you re concerned with the application of the near fall rules when an injury timeout occurs. I have highlighted the keywords in the rules below relating to injury timeout and near fall. You can see that for rule no count is required, only that near fall is imminent as determined by the official. In rule the criterion for a two point near fall must be met, this means if the referee gets to a two count or a three count in the match and it is stopped for an injury then the wrestler would receive a four point near fall. Finally, in rule a five point near fall only occurs if a match is stopped for an injury after the criterion for a four point near fall is secured Injury Two Points. When a pinning combination is executed legally by the offensive wrestler and a near fall is imminent, but the defensive wrestler is injured, indicates an injury or has excessive bleeding before a near-fall criterion is met, action will be stopped and a twopoint near fall shall be awarded to the offensive wrestler. (For a nonbleeding injury timeout penalty, see Rule ) Injury Four Points. When a criterion for a two-point near fall is met and the match is stopped for an injury, the defensive wrestler indicates an injury or has excessive bleeding, action will stop and a four-point near fall shall be awarded to the offensive wrestler. (For a nonbleeding injury timeout penalty, see Rule )

4 2.9.6 Injury Five Points. When the criteria for a four-point near fall are met, and a match is stopped for an injury, the defensive wrestler indicates an injury or has excessive bleeding, a fifth point shall be awarded to the offensive wrestler. (For a nonbleeding injury timeout penalty, see Rule ) 7. Question: Page 113 says that for a control of mat violations, the head coach is removed on the teams 3rd infraction. The penalty chart does not say that and could cause some confusion since on page 28 rule it says removal of individual(s). I can understand the confusion for some on this rule. Please clarify that it is the head coach that is removed as opposed to the individual(s) for rule questioning the referee. If it is the head coach then this is different than who is removed when removing someone for questioning the referee that would be the actual offender. Answer: Rule failure to comply control of mat area states that upon the third control of mat area violation: deduct two team points and remove individual(s) involved from the premises. This means that whomever is involved in the incident shall be removed, this can be a head or assistant coach. The word individual in rule has the plural option because subsequent penalties beyond the third control of mat area violation will result in additional individual(s) being removed from the premises. For example, on a team s 3 rd control of mat area violation the assistant coach could be the one removed, then on this same team s 4 th control of mat area violation the head coach could be removed, and so on. Finally, rule 3.13 situation #1 that you mentioned, is providing guidance to officials on who to remove from the premises if both the head coach and the assistant coach are in violation simultaneously. When/if the head and assistant coach are both involved in the 3 rd control of mat area violation (or any beyond the 3 rd as well) the official shall remove the head coach from the premises. 8. Question: On page 122, it says that if the offensive wrestler has a leg in and the defensive man stands, or does not stand, and the offensive man applies a cross body ride, that we are to start a count. I understand the side headlock, but not sure I understand the intent why we should start a count with just a cross body ride in. Just looking to understand the thought process here. Answer: The terminology on page 122 actually only says cross body or side, to describe the type of headlock referenced in Rule c. For example, cross body headlock or side head lock. 9. Question: Is it allowable for a contestant, who has indicated an injury to be coached while we wait for the trainer to get to a mat. Answer: No, coaching would not be allowed in this instance. However, in expanding slightly on the rule interpretation, in the cases where there is a severe traumatic injury, the coach would be allowed to calm the athlete until the medical personnel arrives to the mat. 10. Question: In a situation where the 2 wrestlers start down on the mat, and the defensive wrestler starts to get out and face his opponent while they are still down on the mat and he

5 sprawls and then the offensive wrestler locks hands around one leg, would you start a count in these situations or call a stalemate. Answer: Yes, the referee would start a count in the situation and continue until the referee reaches his fifth count, or until the offensive wrestler improves his position, moves his hold back up above the buttocks of the defensive wrestler, or releases the hold.