Is the PASSIVITY rule poorly enforced or pre-maturely called?

[Folkster]

While I watch certain freestyle wrestling matches it appears to me (my opinion) that referees are calling PASSIVITY on the wrong wrestler or too soon, or I did not know how to apply the rule correctly while watching a match.

Edited August 10 by Folkster

[gimpeltf]

One of the rules that officials must follow is that there must be scoring by the first 0:45-1:00 and then again in the next same time period. So you will generally see a call at 5:15-5:00 (verbal warning in FS). It's not that important to determine who is to blame for the lack of scoring as to try to guess who will react by scoring when warned/put on the clock. If it's clear hit that wrestler otherwise, hit someone.

And it's about scoring- not just trying to score. You can be considered passive by constantly trying the same move that doesn't score unless it's clear the other wrestler is using "negative" wrestling to prevent the score. Different philosophy from folkstyle.

Edited August 10 by gimpeltf

[JeanGuy]

I think it is poorly named. People watch a guy dart in and out, shoot, etc. and then get put on the clock. People see that as forcing the action. When in fact in F/S they want the wrestles to really work their offense from ties. So passivity isn't the right name. I don't know what I would call it but you know what the referee is looking for. 

[Scouts Honor]

12 minutes ago, gimpeltf said:

One of the rules that officials must follow is that there must be scoring by the first 0:45-1:00 and then again in the next same time period. So you will generally see a call at 5:15-5:00 (verbal warning in FS). It's not that important to determine who is to blame for the lack of scoring as to try to guess who will react by scoring when warned/put on the clock. If it's clear hit that wrestler otherwise, hit someone.

And it's about scoring- not just trying to score. You can be considered passive by constantly trying the same move that doesn't score unless it's clear the other wrestler is using "negative" wrestling to prevent the score. Different philosophy from folkstyle.

that rule needs to be changed

[denger]

8 hours ago, Scouts Honor said:

that rule needs to be changed

My non-wrestling friends look at me dumbfounded when I try to explain the officiating on this.

Sure, it could be that I'm an inarticulate moron, and that my friends are the most ignorant people in the world.

I don't hate the rule, mostly because I hated the era of reaching into a bag to grab a ball a whole lot more...Especially hated trying to explain that one to non-wrestlers. That shit was an embarrassment to the sport!

The shot-clock kinda works, but it's still idiosyncratic, just not as eFfed as the ole ball grab. 

 

[Hammerlock3]

As far as who gets called, i've had a half dozen refs explain to me that they are smart because they put the wrong guy on first, so they can put the right guy on second and the right guy will be winning on criteria. this is why people hate refs.

Edited August 11 by Hammerlock3

[forkemaz]

6 minutes ago, Hammerlock3 said:

As far as who gets called, i've had a half dozen refs explain to me that they are smart because they put the wrong guy on first, so they can put the right guy on second and the right guy will be winning on criteria. this is why people hate refs.

Hate refs or hate fakestyle?

[Hammerlock3]

3 minutes ago, forkemaz said:

Hate refs or hate fakestyle?

I love fakestyle, I don't  like the pseudo science refs invent to compensate themselves for having a difficult and thankless job, and in freestyle that is way more prevalent. 

[forkemaz]

1 minute ago, Hammerlock3 said:

I love fakestyle, I don't  like the pseudo science refs invent to compensate themselves for having a difficult and thankless job, and in freestyle that is way more prevalent. 

You can blame the refs. Theyre enforcing a rule set. An awful rule set. A subjective rule set. I blame the rule set. And thusly the style.

[Hammerlock3]

5 minutes ago, forkemaz said:

You can blame the refs. Theyre enforcing a rule set. An awful rule set. A subjective rule set. I blame the rule set. And thusly the style.

I'm saying that poor rule sets exacerbate the problems within the culture of referees.

So while what you are saying is true, I think it is reductionist.

[forkemaz]

5 minutes ago, Hammerlock3 said:

I'm saying that poor rule sets exacerbate the problems within the culture of referees.

So while what you are saying is true, I think it is reductionist.

How funny i state the problem is the wider rule set and you who blames reffing calls me a reductionist.

[wrestle87]

41 minutes ago, Hammerlock3 said:

As far as who gets called, i've had a half dozen refs explain to me that they are smart because they put the wrong guy on first, so they can put the right guy on second and the right guy will be winning on criteria. this is why people hate refs.

Came here to say exactly this, passivity sucks because it arbitrarily allows refs to decide who they want to tip the scales in favor of.  It’s an open window to legal corruption in the sport.

[1032004]

Seems even more subjective than stalling to me, don’t like it.  I guess we need @LJB here to enlighten us all about it being about “keeping your butt in the center.”

I like the shot clock in theory but seems like most guys just concede the point (maybe because they know it’s likely the other guy will get put on the clock later).

[alex1fly]

3 hours ago, 1032004 said:

Seems even more subjective than stalling to me, don’t like it.  I guess we need @LJB here to enlighten us all about it being about “keeping your butt in the center.”

I like the shot clock in theory but seems like most guys just concede the point (maybe because they know it’s likely the other guy will get put on the clock later).

Same. Though the definition seems to waver. 

[Wrestleknownothing]

Whenever I watch a match I keep track of who I think is controlling the center, rather than who looks most active. And about 90% of the time I wind up in agreement with the call by the ref. Trying to think back after thr call is made is too hard and filled with bias from all that "action".

One thing I think I have noticed is that US wrestlers like to circle and look for angles. While this may prove ultimately fruitful for scoring, it is the exact opposite of how the poorly named, but effectively used, passivity rule is written.