Stallcus Blaze

[William Lang]

@forkemaz i keep hearing the refs say "action" over and over without actually doing anything. When i watch recent freestyle it feels like they don't much bother with that and just call stalling or passivity on someone. I think that would be preferable to me vs. hearing a ref say "you're stalling" in whatever words over and over without doing anything.

as to blaze - i think that would be called stalling at the world level. it seems like a pretty impenetrable stance though, so i see why he gets away with it within current folkstyle rules. borderline stalling to me and the match with devino was kinda boring, even though it was skilled. 

 

[Caveira]

I wrestled in college….
Followed wrestling from then to now.   Nothing special just a point.  
 

My brother stopped after high school (1995 I think).   He has not kept up or watched really.   Example: wtf was that 3 points for a td?     Again nothing special just a point.  

when I showed him you can bet and I said this line is easy money I think… We bet last nights match    

he said a dozen times like wtf happened to stalling last night.   Not necessarily that match just in general.   
 

just a point.  

[flyingcement]

6 minutes ago, Caveira said:

I wrestled in college….
Followed wrestling from then to now.   Nothing special just a point.  
 

My brother stopped after high school (1995 I think).   He has not kept up or watched really.   Example: wtf was that 3 points for a td?     Again nothing special just a point.  

when I showed him you can bet and I said this line is easy money I think… We bet last nights match    

he said a dozen times like wtf happened to stalling last night.   Not necessarily that match just in general.   
 

just a point.  

if they had called stalling twice, it would have been... just a point

[Le duke]

[mention=574]forkemaz[/mention] i keep hearing the refs say "action" over and over without actually doing anything. When i watch recent freestyle it feels like they don't much bother with that and just call stalling or passivity on someone. I think that would be preferable to me vs. hearing a ref say "you're stalling" in whatever words over and over without doing anything.
as to blaze - i think that would be called stalling at the world level. it seems like a pretty impenetrable stance though, so i see why he gets away with it within current folkstyle rules. borderline stalling to me and the match with devino was kinda boring, even though it was skilled. 
 

Huh?

The vast majority of the match, Blaze is the one with his ass to center. In that match, under UWW rules, Davino gets put on the clock. Taking shots doesn’t get you anything in UWW; holding center gets your opponent put on the clock.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Caveira]

39 minutes ago, flyingcement said:

if they had called stalling twice, it would have been... just a point

Ir says not necessarily this match calm your psuness

[flyingcement]

1 minute ago, Caveira said:

Ir says not necessarily this match calm your psuness

[Caveira]

Just now, flyingcement said:

It was an interesting point on how stalling used to be a thing and now it isn’t.  Tis why I mentioned he stopped paying attention to all the nuanced changes over the years.  

[Paul158]

It would be interesting to get maybe 20 of the top Head coaches perspective on this subject.  Then maybe 20 of the top NCAA wrestler's perspective on this subject. Has anyone seen or heard them talk about this?

[Pinnacle]

How many rules changes have their been since 2010? I have no idea, but I think several at least. Thru all that Penn State still dominates. Change the rules, don't change them. Call stalling more, or call it less. You are all focusing on something you think will bring Penn State back to earth while overlooking the fact they never seem to, cough-cough, come back to earth.

Was Marcus stalling? I don't think so. Could the ref have called it? Sure, they can call whatever they feel like. They could have called Nic Bouzakis. Unless they start deliberately taking away points from the better wrestler, that better wrestler is going to win almost all the time. 

Edited February 15 by Pinnacle

[Caveira]

Just now, Pinnacle said:

How many rules changes have their been since 2010? I have no idea, but I think several at least. Thru all that Penn State still dominates. Change the rules, don't change them. Call stalling more, or call it less. You are all focusing on something you think will bring Penn State back to earth while overlooking the fact they never seem to, cough-cough, come back to earth.

Was Marcus stalling, I don't think so. Could the r ef have called it? Sure, they can call whatever they feel like. Unless they start deliberately taking away points from the better wrestler, that better wrestler is going to win almost all the time. 

The observation had zero to do with psu 

[Paul158]

41 minutes ago, Pinnacle said:

How many rules changes have their been since 2010? I have no idea, but I think several at least. Thru all that Penn State still dominates. Change the rules, don't change them. Call stalling more, or call it less. You are all focusing on something you think will bring Penn State back to earth while overlooking the fact they never seem to, cough-cough, come back to earth.

Was Marcus stalling? I don't think so. Could the ref have called it? Sure, they can call whatever they feel like. They could have called Nic Bouzakis. Unless they start deliberately taking away points from the better wrestler, that better wrestler is going to win almost all the time. 

I think the best thing is have logical well thought rules. Then the rules have to be used and applied consistently across the board. The main problem in most cases is inconsistency. I think if you had 30 referees from across the country view a video of the action we are talking about you would get different responses. Which referee is correct?

[forkemaz]

14 hours ago, Pinnacle said:

Because his threads are troll jobs.

 

No. 

So you can not shoot or attack once in 7 minutes and its not stalling? Thats your opinion? If thats the case stalling isnt even a real thing.

Edited February 15 by forkemaz

[forkemaz]

13 hours ago, BruceyB said:

100%. I was actually shocked that they called action on the edge. I'd bet he even expected to exchange a stall call to get out of that position. Davino actually took several shots and I was very impressed by his ability to avoid the reattacks from Blaze. It's really frustrating to see matches decided in ride-outs when one guy appears to be looking for openings/attacking, and one guy is content to stand their and wait for their opponent to make a mistake. 

IMO it should be very difficult for a match to go to OT 1-1. If in 7 minutes of wrestling no one has scored from neutral, the refs should be finding the one preventing action from happening, or start hitting one or both guys for not taking any chances. There is absolutely no excuse for a guy to not make one committed offensive attack in regulation and be able to make it to overtime.

Marcus is obviously a phenomenal wrestler and I'm not taking anything away from his ability, but the ref should have made him wrestle in that match.

I completly agree. I was picking Marcus before the match. I even said i thought he was going to open up abd put it on Davino to prove a point. How wrong I was is laughable. He did absolutley nothing and the refs let him. I do think Marcus would win even if the refs put him in a position where he had to attack but that match left such a bad taste in my mouth I wont be rooting for him at NCAAs. I want anyone else to win 133.

[Jimmy Cinnabon]

Byrd is winning it all anyway. People are forgetting how good he is 

[Pinnacle]

22 minutes ago, forkemaz said:

So you can not shoot or attack once in 7 minutes and its not stalling? Thats your opinion? If thats the case stalling isnt even a real thing.

 

Davino only took one shot. Had he taken more shots with no counters he would have forced a stall call, but he did not.

And even had they called one stall on Blaze, it would not have changed the outcome. Davino should have converted when he had Blaze hopping on one leg.

[forkemaz]

2 hours ago, Pinnacle said:

 

Davino only took one shot. Had he taken more shots with no counters he would have forced a stall call, but he did not.

And even had they called one stall on Blaze, it would not have changed the outcome. Davino should have converted when he had Blaze hopping on one leg.

Davino had multiple attacks in regulation what are you talking about? He only got in on one and Marcus fled the mat. You need to rewatch the match. 

[MLB9]

3 hours ago, Pinnacle said:

 

Davino only took one shot. Had he taken more shots with no counters he would have forced a stall call, but he did not.

And even had they called one stall on Blaze, it would not have changed the outcome. Davino should have converted when he had Blaze hopping on one leg.

Is there much difference between the way Taylor wrestled Duke and how Blaze approached Davino? They seem quite similar to me. I do hope Blaze will open up a little more, but his constant/consistent positioning and decision making is also what makes him world class.

[PortaJohn]

3 hours ago, Pinnacle said:

 

Davino only took one shot. Had he taken more shots with no counters he would have forced a stall call, but he did not.

And even had they called one stall on Blaze, it would not have changed the outcome. Davino should have converted when he had Blaze hopping on one leg.

 

17 hours ago, BruceyB said:

This is the problem IMO. You shouldn't have to do anything to warrant a stall call. Not doing anything should be enough. Davino seemed like he was looking to find angles, changing levels, and taking penetration steps, even though he was only able to get to the leg once. Blaze looked like he wanted to hold position and wait for Davino to make a mistake, and I don't remember him taking a legitimate shot in all of regulation. Marcus 100% should have been hit for fleeing, and probably again at some point for not making attempts to score.

Stall calls should be used more liberally and not only when it's so egregious that the refs hand is forced. I could make an entire post about how ass backwards stalls are called as a whole. I'll save that for another day.

1st period - Davino took a half shot and an additional shot

2nd Period - Neither Wrestler took a shot

3rd period - Davino in on the leg.  Blaze could've been dinged for fleeing.  Rest of the period no shots were taken

SV1 - Davino 1\2 shot Blaze re-attack 

That was all the offensive output. 

[PortaJohn]

41 minutes ago, forkemaz said:

Davino had multiple attacks in regulation what are you talking about? He only got in on one and Marcus fled the mat. You need to rewatch the match. 

See above.  Both you and Pinnacle are exaggerating 

[Pinnacle]

42 minutes ago, forkemaz said:

Davino had multiple attacks in regulation what are you talking about? He only got in on one and Marcus fled the mat. You need to rewatch the match. 

You have about 10 posts about Marcus feeling the mat or stalling while, in your terms, he was fleeing the mat.

Show me one post where you make the same claim about Nick Feldman in the first minute of period 2 vs Cole Mirasola. 

Davino should learn how to score from that position because the way he attempted to score isn't real text book. Maybe he can ask Dylan Fishback who did score from that same position, and in text book fashion. 

[forkemaz]

Just now, PortaJohn said:

See above.  Both you and Pinnacle are exaggerating 

By your own post davino initiated 4 scoring attempts (which is multiple, which is the word I used) and blaze initiated zero. He had a single re attack attempt in OT. Did nothing for 7 minutes, fled the mat under attack, and his only attempt at offense was after Davino initiated.

Im not exaggerating at all based on your own post. It was some of the most blatant stalling ive seen all year and took from liking Blaze and wanting him to win gold at NCAAs to hoping he doesnt. 

[Pinnacle]

3 minutes ago, PortaJohn said:

See above.  Both you and Pinnacle are exaggerating 

I am making a distinction between an attack and a fully committed attack. Nit picky on my part, but a knee tap or low shot with an immediate pull back isn't fully committed to a score attempt. Yeah, there were some half shots in the match.

[forkemaz]

1 minute ago, Pinnacle said:

You have about 10 posts about Marcus feeling the mat or stalling while, in your terms, he was fleeing the mat.

Show me one post where you make the same claim about Nick Feldman in the first minute of period 2 vs Cole Mirasola. 

Davino should learn how to score from that position because the way he attempted to score isn't real text book. Maybe he can ask Dylan Fishback who did score from that same position, and in text book fashion. 

Is this a Nick Feldman thread? How is that relevant?  I dont have ten posts total in this thread... and that also would have no bearing on if Marcus was stalling. 

Youre grasping at straws.

[forkemaz]

1 minute ago, Pinnacle said:

I am making a distinction between an attack and a fully committed attack. Nit picky on my part, but a knee tap or low shot with an immediate pull back isn't fully committed to a score attempt. Yeah, there were some half shots in the match.

Lmao...

[PortaJohn]

Just now, forkemaz said:

By your own post davino initiated 4 scoring attempts (which is multiple, which is the word I used) and blaze initiated zero. He had a single re attack attempt in OT. Did nothing for 7 minutes, fled the mat under attack, and his only attempt at offense was after Davino initiated.

Im not exaggerating at all based on your own post. It was some of the most blatant stalling ive seen all year and took from liking Blaze and wanting him to win gold at NCAAs to hoping he doesnt. 

If you want to count 1/2 shots be my guest but they're a far cry from being a scoring attempt.  Listen, you're exaggerating.  It's ok.  It's all good