Pushout/grounding

[dragit]

Apologies if this has been well covered elsewhere.

I'm generally fan of the pushout rule.  I think it creates good incentives and produces more action. 

But aren't we approaching a point where the tactics around grounding are threatening to produce the same problem as we have in folkstyle?  It comes down to the subjective discretion of the ref. Action/stalling.  Grounded/not grounded.

My take as of now is there shouldn't be a grounding rule.  If you're out, you're out.

The benefit from the pushout rule is that it is objective.  That's what creates the incentives for more action in the center of the mat. 

It's now descending into a subjective morass. You watch a few different low scoring matches and see inconsistent application of the standard, which is exactly what the rule is supposed to avoid.

[Scouts Honor]

it has been that way almost since the pushout and grounding came into being.

[mspart]

There's always a way around a rule. 

mspart

[forkemaz]

Get rid of criteria. Add OT. First score wins. Pushouts only in OT. No such thing as grounding. 

[dragit]

1 hour ago, forkemaz said:

Get rid of criteria. Add OT. First score wins. Pushouts only in OT. No such thing as grounding. 

I like criteria.  The incentives are bad without them. Both guys will be more cautious.  Criteria is a little unfair but it is objective and it increases action. The pushout is objective too but the grounding rule is a giant loophole that can and often does swallow the rule.

[dragit]

5 hours ago, mspart said:

There's always a way around a rule. 

mspart

If the rule didn't allow for grounding, wouldn't that take away the way around it?