You make the call - interesting debate

[1032004]

This was posted by Flo:

https://www.facebook.com/share/r/17keJ8R4w3/?mibextid=wwXIfr

 

I think the reversal should have been called sooner, looks to me like he had established control before the call.

But a bunch of people in the comments seem to think it can’t be a reversal until the cradle lock is broken.

 

[Rassling2]

7 minutes ago, 1032004 said:

This was posted by Flo:

https://www.facebook.com/share/r/17keJ8R4w3/?mibextid=wwXIfr

 

I think the reversal should have been called sooner, looks to me like he had established control before the call.

But a bunch of people in the comments seem to think it can’t be a reversal until the cradle lock is broken.

 

Reversal should have been called earlier

[Nak21]

Sports today… I can’t tell what’s what anymore. Football? What’s a catch? Seems to be what used to be, isn’t and what wasn’t, is. Bizarro world.

Wrestling is no different. What I think is a TD or a Rev never seems to be, or at least not yet.

i think once he locks his hands on top, he’s sitting out to the side, weight on him, bottom guy can’t move (much) there’s no longer control, award the reversal and start swipes for back. BUT I’m probably wrong and the rule book says not until the grip on the cradle breaks.

Glad I’m not a ref.

[Interviewed_at_Weehawken]

Not sure about college.  NFHS casebook says no reverse until lock is broken.  I assume too much of a case of both guys repeatedly reversing one another in this situation.I had a similar situation last year, which would have resulted in three changes of control and a lot of points being thrown up.

I do like a potentia; change of control when the defensive man locks up the headlock, but have to go with casebook.

[Winners Circle]

4 hours ago, 1032004 said:

This was posted by Flo:

https://www.facebook.com/share/r/17keJ8R4w3/?mibextid=wwXIfr

 

I think the reversal should have been called sooner, looks to me like he had established control before the call.

But a bunch of people in the comments seem to think it can’t be a reversal until the cradle lock is broken.

 

Rule states that the reversal should not be given until the cradle lock is broken. But it should have been a non-controlled fall way before it was called. 

[Truzzcat]

I think he had the reversal by the 6 second mark similar to when guys post out from bottom when they get sucked back into a crab ride imo.

[Gene Mills Fan]

couldn't there be an implication of another criteria in the casebook on this;    one could maintain that the new top wrestler has him in neutral danger for more than three seconds? when the 3 seconds are up. and bottom wrestler still in neutral danger has lost control. Reversal is awarded to the other guy after3 count on neutral danger ???   sticky wicket

[GimJustafan]

5 hours ago, 1032004 said:

This was posted by Flo:

https://www.facebook.com/share/r/17keJ8R4w3/?mibextid=wwXIfr

 

I think the reversal should have been called sooner, looks to me like he had established control before the call.

But a bunch of people in the comments seem to think it can’t be a reversal until the cradle lock is broken.

 

for loss of control to be established the cradle lock has to be broken 

[Interviewed_at_Weehawken]

11 minutes ago, Gene Mills Fan said:

couldn't there be an implication of another criteria in the casebook on this;    one could maintain that the new top wrestler has him in neutral danger for more than three seconds? when the 3 seconds are up. and bottom wrestler still in neutral danger has lost control. Reversal is awarded to the other guy after3 count on neutral danger ???   sticky wicket

Neutral danger only applicable in netral, takedown situation.  Control had already been established here.

[1032004]

12 minutes ago, GimJustafan said:

for loss of control to be established the cradle lock has to be broken 

If that’s actually the rule…seems like a bad rule 

[Interviewed_at_Weehawken]

Just now, 1032004 said:

If that’s actually the rule…seems like a bad rule 

Why?  Rules like that usually come about for a reason.  As stated above, you could get some crazy sequences if you start giving this reversal too early.  If the bottom man reverses control, how is he still being restrained by a cradle?  Break the cradle and we can talk reverse.

[1032004]

23 minutes ago, Interviewed_at_Weehawken said:

Why?  Rules like that usually come about for a reason.  As stated above, you could get some crazy sequences if you start giving this reversal too early.  If the bottom man reverses control, how is he still being restrained by a cradle?  Break the cradle and we can talk reverse.

You could, but the key to folkstyle wrestling is control.   The guy “being cradled” in the vid was pretty clearly in control before the reversal was given.  Can’t remember if it was ever actually in the rulebook, but I think a good rule of thumb is that once the guy is concerned about getting pinned (other than in a pinning yourself situation), he’s probably not in control anymore.

[Interviewed_at_Weehawken]

52 minutes ago, 1032004 said:

You could, but the key to folkstyle wrestling is control.   The guy “being cradled” in the vid was pretty clearly in control before the reversal was given.  Can’t remember if it was ever actually in the rulebook, but I think a good rule of thumb is that once the guy is concerned about getting pinned (other than in a pinning yourself situation), he’s probably not in control anymore.

The top guy is not in control if he started on bottom and is still in a cradle.  Break the cradle and you can argue there is control.  He wasn't so concerned about getting pinned that he released his lock, right.

I don't disagree that when the defensive wrestler locks up a headlock that it appears as if control may have changed... but the fact that this made the casebook indicates that it caused a problem or problems for officials in the past and a rulingv has been made on it as a result.

[Gene Mills Fan]

51 minutes ago, Interviewed_at_Weehawken said:

The top guy is not in control if he started on bottom and is still in a cradle.  Break the cradle and you can argue there is control.  He wasn't so concerned about getting pinned that he released his lock, right.

I don't disagree that when the defensive wrestler locks up a headlock that it appears as if control may have changed... but the fact that this made the casebook indicates that it caused a problem or problems for officials in the past and a rulingv has been made on it as a result.

question? Can the guy on bottom with control get pinned before breaking locked hands?

Edited December 3, 2025 by Gene Mills Fan

[MPhillips]

23 minutes ago, Gene Mills Fan said:

Can the guy on bottom with control get pinned before breaking locked hands?

Why not Gene?

[Gene Mills Fan]

48 minutes ago, MPhillips said:

Why not Gene?

Gene would be good with that ! Pin 2 Win

[Interviewed_at_Weehawken]

5 hours ago, Gene Mills Fan said:

question? Can the guy on bottom with control get pinned before breaking locked hands?

Yes,  Defensive pin.

[GV4444]

Needed to break the cradle for reversal.  It's easy to question in hindsight, but if you give him the reversal and then they guy rolls the cradle over, you look wrong for giving the reversal too soon.  You would have had two reversals without anything actual changing.

 

[Interviewed_at_Weehawken]

36 minutes ago, GV4444 said:

Needed to break the cradle for reversal.  It's easy to question in hindsight, but if you give him the reversal and then they guy rolls the cradle over, you look wrong for giving the reversal too soon.  You would have had two reversals without anything actual changing.

 

And I have had that exact situation happen and then the offensive guy ended up on his back a second time.  Thankfully I held the reversal until the cradle grip broke or I would have been throwing up points like crazy.  

[1032004]

10 hours ago, GV4444 said:

Needed to break the cradle for reversal.  It's easy to question in hindsight, but if you give him the reversal and then they guy rolls the cradle over, you look wrong for giving the reversal too soon.  You would have had two reversals without anything actual changing.

 

I agree that can happen but in this vid the guy being “cradled” held the guy on his back for quite awhile. IMO he establishes control about when he locks his own hands around the head and arm and holds him pretty stationary.  It’s about 12 seconds from that point that he is awarded the reversal.

[BIGTENFANBOY]

The ref called this sequence 100% correct in terms of the reversal. 100% textbook. The only thing that is fair to argue is a defensive pin could have been called earlier while the cradle was still locked.

[Interviewed_at_Weehawken]

1 hour ago, 1032004 said:

I agree that can happen but in this vid the guy being “cradled” held the guy on his back for quite awhile. IMO he establishes control about when he locks his own hands around the head and arm and holds him pretty stationary.  It’s about 12 seconds from that point that he is awarded the reversal.

I don't have a problem with exactly that.  But... the high school casebook says otherwise, and (though I don't own one) my understanding says that is also the NCAA rule.