Yappi Sports - THE Ohio Prep Sports Authority  

Go Back   Yappi Sports - THE Ohio Prep Sports Authority > Boys HS Sports > Wrestling

Hello Guest!
Take a minute to register, It's 100% FREE! What are you waiting for?
Register Now
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 03-10-18, 12:04 AM
closer617 closer617 is offline
All District
 
Join Date: 01-01-07
Posts: 183
closer617 is on a distinguished road
Stickley v. Wymer ....what happened???

I saw the match....it was a barn burner....BUT......WHAT HAPPENED....STRANGE CALLS
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #2  
Old 03-10-18, 12:20 AM
FunkRoll FunkRoll is offline
All Region
 
Join Date: 01-02-09
Posts: 328
FunkRoll is on a distinguished road
I feel really bad for Stickley!!! That was very poorly officiated at the end and cost the kid a trip to the finals and possibly a state championship!!!!
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 03-10-18, 12:56 AM
Crab Ride Crab Ride is offline
All District
 
Join Date: 03-28-17
Posts: 209
Crab Ride is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by FunkRoll View Post
I feel really bad for Stickley!!! That was very poorly officiated at the end and cost the kid a trip to the finals and possibly a state championship!!!!
A kid from Graham got screwed over???? Say it ainít so!
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 03-10-18, 12:59 AM
CoachHoversten CoachHoversten is offline
All Region
 
Join Date: 11-25-13
Posts: 255
CoachHoversten is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by FunkRoll View Post
I feel really bad for Stickley!!! That was very poorly officiated at the end and cost the kid a trip to the finals and possibly a state championship!!!!
If calls went the other way, stvm fans would say the exact same thing. Canít win as an official on those bang bang calls.

I didnít have a good view of what actually happened, but the two refs were on opposite sides of the action (as should be) and ref that called two was on wrestlers left, ref on right came in, said something, and it was waved off. Simple answer seems that what appeared a TD actually wasnít. Maybe stvm had a whizzed, a leg, whatever, on the far side of head official. If so, itís not a big conspiracy theory.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 03-10-18, 07:28 AM
wash.c.h.legend wash.c.h.legend is offline
All World
 
Join Date: 12-11-05
Location: greenfield
Posts: 2,720
wash.c.h.legend is on a distinguished road
Stickley v. Wymer ....what happened???

It was a good call. Called it too quick when stvstm grabbed the leg and turned it into a scramble situation.
Kudos to the refs for making the overturned call.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 03-10-18, 08:05 AM
tkdn_wizard tkdn_wizard is offline
All Ohio
 
Join Date: 12-01-08
Posts: 856
tkdn_wizard is on a distinguished road
Also don’t get three penalty points...
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 03-11-18, 12:34 AM
FiredUp1 FiredUp1 is offline
Junior Varsity
 
Join Date: 12-19-15
Posts: 36
FiredUp1 is on a distinguished road
220 D-3 semi finals. Skye vs Kuhn.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 03-11-18, 12:43 AM
CincyWrestler CincyWrestler is offline
All Region
 
Join Date: 02-13-05
Location: wrestling purgatory
Posts: 454
CincyWrestler is on a distinguished road
The penalty point in OT was 100% the right call, can’t figure four the body, it was clear as day
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 03-11-18, 03:45 PM
FunkRoll FunkRoll is offline
All Region
 
Join Date: 01-02-09
Posts: 328
FunkRoll is on a distinguished road
Wymer doesn’t grab his leg until after the whistle was blown.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 03-11-18, 05:54 PM
bucksman bucksman is offline
All Yappi
 
Join Date: 10-10-01
Location: Having fun somewhere :-)
Posts: 30,913
bucksman will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by CincyWrestler View Post
The penalty point in OT was 100% the right call, canít figure four the body, it was clear as day
The grievances were related to takedown(s) being waved off as well as the penalty point(s) in regulation to level the bout.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 03-11-18, 07:13 PM
eyes r burning eyes r burning is offline
All American
 
Join Date: 11-08-12
Posts: 1,237
eyes r burning is on a distinguished road
Willie from flo has this video on his Twitter page. That's a really tough call either way you look at it. Was a very quick TD call, but it looks like all criteria was met for a takedown except for reaction time. I know the hips don't necessarily have to be covered for a TD and think that's why the TD call was too quick and should have allowed for more reaction time.

Would be nice if one of our officials on this board could look at it and give an opinion.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 03-12-18, 12:33 AM
KB1 KB1 is offline
Freshman
 
Join Date: 10-27-16
Posts: 20
KB1 is on a distinguished road
It also be nice if the official would look into the OBVIOUS "no call" on the defensive pin right in front of the match refs eyes that was clear as day !! It would also be nice if the refs would look into and review the THREE no stall calls against Graham when the STVM wrestler immediately stood to his feet from bottom position and the Graham wrestler never returned opponent to mat. 1st stand up STVM was on his feet 15+ seconds then stalemate to a fresh start , then the 2nd and 3rd stand ups were 10+ seconds each and never a stall call only stalemates ???? Haven't these stall calls against the top wrestler been made MANY times in way less than 10 seconds in other many other matches in this years tournament? Isn't is very clear in the rule book that you must return your opponent to the mat if you are the top wrestler? ALSO, Ohio really should look into all the "emotional" time outs so many kids are taking in this era. Are the time outs not supposed to be only "injury" time outs?? If the proper stall calls were made in regulation this match it doesn't even get to OT. In my opinion the STVM wrestler was more composed and the sharper wrestler in this match and absolutely deserved the win. AND then he proved he deserved to be a state champ in the finals as well !!
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 03-12-18, 12:44 AM
cvwrestle cvwrestle is offline
All District
 
Join Date: 02-25-04
Location: Columbus
Posts: 132
cvwrestle is on a distinguished road
I was front row watching this one

1) First penalty- Fleeing. I didn't think so. Judgement call
2) Second penalty- During the leg pass scramble he kicked him in his face. Wasn't malicious but it was a kick to the face.
3) Figure Four- Clear as day.. more like a triangle choke for 15 seconds.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 03-12-18, 08:56 AM
wlpdrpat wlpdrpat is offline
Varsity
 
Join Date: 12-05-17
Posts: 67
wlpdrpat is on a distinguished road
I was front row watching this one too. I have always cheered for whoever is against Graham as they are typically the underdog. I will say there were more than a few times that I was disappointed/surprised by calls or lack of calls during this match. The fleeing call and kick to the face were both BS calls, however, I think these were balanced out by the lack of stalling calls and I believe regular time ending in a tie was the correct outcome (just for the wrong reasons).

Having said that, I was horrified by the way the SV round was handled. It was pretty clear that Stickley had the TD and because it was the SV round action was stopped. In the SV round if there is any doubt in the referees mind about whether or not it is a TD then they should not call it a TD until they are certain because it stops the current action. Calling a TD and stopping the action at that point prevents Stickley from having the opportunity to complete the TD. Had the action not been disrupted at that point IMHO Stickley would have either completed the TD or time would have expired. By calling the TD, stopping action then overturning his own call during the SV round this referee injected his own will into the outcome of this match.

What ended as a figure four on the body started as a scissor. I have to ask isn't a scissor on the body with a power half a demonstration of control and therefore a TD? SVSM was trying to shake down the leg ride and come out the back door and pulled up the inside scissor leg to the figure four in the process. Yes, Stickley was very likely going to lose control of that position, however, he had already achieved a position that demonstrates control/TD but the TD wasn't called.

So, the first time in SV the ref calls the TD too soon and reverses his call, then he doesn't call the TD because it looks like SVSM may come out the back door and in SVSMs attempts to get out he pulls the body scissor into a figure four which gives the ref and easy out.

Final thought - I still enjoy seeing Graham get beat (Loved the Stone vs Braun match) but more than anything I want to see them actually get beat not robbed by poor officiating. In this case, there was more than a single poor judgement call that influenced the outcome and by far Stickley should have and did win this match, then it was stolen from him and gift wrapped for SVSM. So clearly, that I have to ask what connection this ref has to SVSM or grudge does he have against Graham?
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 03-12-18, 10:52 AM
wjjsj wjjsj is offline
Unbias Nation
 
Join Date: 10-21-01
Location: Cincinnati, OH USA
Posts: 2,734
wjjsj is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by wlpdrpat View Post
I was front row watching this one too. I have always cheered for whoever is against Graham as they are typically the underdog. I will say there were more than a few times that I was disappointed/surprised by calls or lack of calls during this match. The fleeing call and kick to the face were both BS calls, however, I think these were balanced out by the lack of stalling calls and I believe regular time ending in a tie was the correct outcome (just for the wrong reasons).

Having said that, I was horrified by the way the SV round was handled. It was pretty clear that Stickley had the TD and because it was the SV round action was stopped. In the SV round if there is any doubt in the referees mind about whether or not it is a TD then they should not call it a TD until they are certain because it stops the current action. Calling a TD and stopping the action at that point prevents Stickley from having the opportunity to complete the TD. Had the action not been disrupted at that point IMHO Stickley would have either completed the TD or time would have expired. By calling the TD, stopping action then overturning his own call during the SV round this referee injected his own will into the outcome of this match.

What ended as a figure four on the body started as a scissor. I have to ask isn't a scissor on the body with a power half a demonstration of control and therefore a TD? SVSM was trying to shake down the leg ride and come out the back door and pulled up the inside scissor leg to the figure four in the process. Yes, Stickley was very likely going to lose control of that position, however, he had already achieved a position that demonstrates control/TD but the TD wasn't called.

So, the first time in SV the ref calls the TD too soon and reverses his call, then he doesn't call the TD because it looks like SVSM may come out the back door and in SVSMs attempts to get out he pulls the body scissor into a figure four which gives the ref and easy out.

Final thought - I still enjoy seeing Graham get beat (Loved the Stone vs Braun match) but more than anything I want to see them actually get beat not robbed by poor officiating. In this case, there was more than a single poor judgement call that influenced the outcome and by far Stickley should have and did win this match, then it was stolen from him and gift wrapped for SVSM. So clearly, that I have to ask what connection this ref has to SVSM or grudge does he have against Graham?
Connection or grudge comment is not necessary and foolishness. Also, people keep saying figure 4 on the body. It was on the head. Scissors and Four on the head is illegal.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 03-12-18, 11:23 AM
wash.c.h.legend wash.c.h.legend is offline
All World
 
Join Date: 12-11-05
Location: greenfield
Posts: 2,720
wash.c.h.legend is on a distinguished road
From my vantage point which was close. It appeared to be a drapsing head scissors initially. I was surprised at the call myself when it was called illegal. I couldnít actually tell that it became illegal and i believe that it was the assistant ref that actually made the illegal move call.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 03-12-18, 11:36 AM
wdanforth wdanforth is offline
All Ohio
 
Join Date: 12-10-03
Posts: 569
wdanforth
I was shooting across from the other D2 semi. This is what I saw.

Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 03-12-18, 12:13 PM
eyes r burning eyes r burning is offline
All American
 
Join Date: 11-08-12
Posts: 1,237
eyes r burning is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by wdanforth View Post
I was shooting across from the other D2 semi. This is what I saw.

Great picture! Looks like at that moment that an illegal head scissor is the correct call.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 03-12-18, 12:25 PM
wash.c.h.legend wash.c.h.legend is offline
All World
 
Join Date: 12-11-05
Location: greenfield
Posts: 2,720
wash.c.h.legend is on a distinguished road
Great picture. It was certainly not a drapsing head scissors at that point.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 03-12-18, 03:34 PM
wlpdrpat wlpdrpat is offline
Varsity
 
Join Date: 12-05-17
Posts: 67
wlpdrpat is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by eyes r burning View Post
Great picture! Looks like at that moment that an illegal head scissor is the correct call.
Please review item 7-1-5 of the rules book. This is a body scissor at this point as it includes an arm and is definitely legal. If his crossed legs occur at the knee and the crossing leg is flex at the knee then it is a body figure four, which is illegal. From my vantage point his foot was on the lower calf and the arm was included therefore a legal body scissor. If the ref had concerns for the SVSM wrestlers safety then he should have stopped it for potentially dangerous rather than calling it illegal.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 03-12-18, 03:41 PM
wjjsj wjjsj is offline
Unbias Nation
 
Join Date: 10-21-01
Location: Cincinnati, OH USA
Posts: 2,734
wjjsj is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by wlpdrpat View Post
Please review item 7-1-5 of the rules book. This is a body scissor at this point as it includes an arm and is definitely legal. If his crossed legs occur at the knee and the crossing leg is flex at the knee then it is a body figure four, which is illegal. From my vantage point his foot was on the lower calf and the arm was included therefore a legal body scissor. If the ref had concerns for the SVSM wrestlers safety then he should have stopped it for potentially dangerous rather than calling it illegal.
Incorrect. It is a scissors and a Figure Four around the head. This is illegal. Go watch the video.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 03-12-18, 03:58 PM
wjjsj wjjsj is offline
Unbias Nation
 
Join Date: 10-21-01
Location: Cincinnati, OH USA
Posts: 2,734
wjjsj is on a distinguished road
Draping scissors of course is different.

In this situation pressure is being applied. I watched the video once and saw a Figure 4 on the head with an arm encircled. Also, an arm being included does not make it legal. It is still illegal. Kind of like locking hands around the body. Arm included or not it is still locking hands.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 03-12-18, 04:04 PM
wlpdrpat wlpdrpat is offline
Varsity
 
Join Date: 12-05-17
Posts: 67
wlpdrpat is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by wjjsj View Post
Connection or grudge comment is not necessary and foolishness. Also, people keep saying figure 4 on the body. It was on the head. Scissors and Four on the head is illegal.
Review the picture provided above and rule book item 7-1-5. It includes and arm and therefore it is a body scissor and legal.

So, when the OSU's football coach asks for a change in policy of keeping the video reviewers anonymous, you are telling me that they didn't hold a grudge in their later rulings and shouldn't have been sanctioned for their actions?

I was a ref for more than a decade and I voluntarily relieved myself from dozens of matches because I had known pre-dispositions (I liked or disliked teams or coaches and I didn't want that to influence the outcome nor did I want to feel like I was overcompensating) however, my colleagues almost never did this although they absolutely had pre-dispositions and in watching them ref they left no doubt of which teams they favored.

In this match I would wager that any other two referees and the match would have gone to Stickley without the need of an SV period. As such, I have to question why?

I wouldn't question a state level referees knowledge of the rules - so that is out. They both appeared to be relatively physically fit - so I can't question that. Neither appeared to have recently suffered a brain injury - so that's out. I am pretty certain that they had not recently been sprayed in the eyes with pepper spray or mace. What's left to question? Based on my own personal experience of being a ref I would wager that either one or both had some level pre-disposition that made them favor SVSM in that match.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 03-12-18, 04:31 PM
wjjsj wjjsj is offline
Unbias Nation
 
Join Date: 10-21-01
Location: Cincinnati, OH USA
Posts: 2,734
wjjsj is on a distinguished road
I feel like I'm losing brain cells by even replying to the stuff you just posted but hey here it goes any way.

Are his legs around his head or body? HIS HEAD! Not his torso. It is a 4 on the head. PERIOD!
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 03-12-18, 04:37 PM
jfide650 jfide650 is offline
Freshman
 
Join Date: 02-03-18
Location: Lorain
Posts: 6
jfide650 is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by wlpdrpat View Post
Review the picture provided above and rule book item 7-1-5. It includes and arm and therefore it is a body scissor and legal.

So, when the OSU's football coach asks for a change in policy of keeping the video reviewers anonymous, you are telling me that they didn't hold a grudge in their later rulings and shouldn't have been sanctioned for their actions?

I was a ref for more than a decade and I voluntarily relieved myself from dozens of matches because I had known pre-dispositions (I liked or disliked teams or coaches and I didn't want that to influence the outcome nor did I want to feel like I was overcompensating) however, my colleagues almost never did this although they absolutely had pre-dispositions and in watching them ref they left no doubt of which teams they favored.

In this match I would wager that any other two referees and the match would have gone to Stickley without the need of an SV period. As such, I have to question why?

I wouldn't question a state level referees knowledge of the rules - so that is out. They both appeared to be relatively physically fit - so I can't question that. Neither appeared to have recently suffered a brain injury - so that's out. I am pretty certain that they had not recently been sprayed in the eyes with pepper spray or mace. What's left to question? Based on my own personal experience of being a ref I would wager that either one or both had some level pre-disposition that made them favor SVSM in that match.
Rule 7 - Infractions
Section 1 - Illegal Holds/Maneuvers
Article 5 - Other illegal holds/maneuvers include, but not limited to:
e - straight head scissors (even though an arm is included);
r - figure 4 around the body, the head or both legs;
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 03-12-18, 05:01 PM
FunkRoll FunkRoll is offline
All Region
 
Join Date: 01-02-09
Posts: 328
FunkRoll is on a distinguished road
We were right above this, so opposite view of those pictures, and it was very clear that he figured four the head/arm.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 03-12-18, 05:54 PM
Jim Behrens Jim Behrens is offline
All Ohio
 
Join Date: 01-18-11
Posts: 596
Jim Behrens is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by wlpdrpat View Post
I was a ref for more than a decade and I voluntarily relieved myself from dozens of matches because I had known pre-dispositions (I liked or disliked teams or coaches and I didn't want that to influence the outcome nor did I want to feel like I was overcompensating) however, my colleagues almost never did this although they absolutely had pre-dispositions and in watching them ref they left no doubt of which teams they favored.

Based on my own personal experience of being a ref I would wager that either one or both had some level pre-disposition that made them favor SVSM in that match.
So, if I am understanding you correctly, because YOU could not be fair with schools, or coaches, that you liked or disliked you assume that anyone and everyone else is incapable of being fair? Are you really that clueless?
BTW, in my District, do you know what we call an official with a decade of experience?
A rookie.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 03-12-18, 05:55 PM
KB1 KB1 is offline
Freshman
 
Join Date: 10-27-16
Posts: 20
KB1 is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by wlpdrpat View Post
Review the picture provided above and rule book item 7-1-5. It includes and arm and therefore it is a body scissor and legal.

So, when the OSU's football coach asks for a change in policy of keeping the video reviewers anonymous, you are telling me that they didn't hold a grudge in their later rulings and shouldn't have been sanctioned for their actions?

I was a ref for more than a decade and I voluntarily relieved myself from dozens of matches because I had known pre-dispositions (I liked or disliked teams or coaches and I didn't want that to influence the outcome nor did I want to feel like I was overcompensating) however, my colleagues almost never did this although they absolutely had pre-dispositions and in watching them ref they left no doubt of which teams they favored.

In this match I would wager that any other two referees and the match would have gone to Stickley without the need of an SV period. As such, I have to question why?

I wouldn't question a state level referees knowledge of the rules - so that is out. They both appeared to be relatively physically fit - so I can't question that. Neither appeared to have recently suffered a brain injury - so that's out. I am pretty certain that they had not recently been sprayed in the eyes with pepper spray or mace. What's left to question? Based on my own personal experience of being a ref I would wager that either one or both had some level pre-disposition that made them favor SVSM in that match.
You are trying too hard and desperately reaching here wlpdrpat. I think you may have "some level of pre-disposition" that makes you favor Graham ? But I do agree with you that the match should not have went to OT. Because if the proper stall calls were made SVSM would have won in regulation!
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 03-12-18, 06:43 PM
Styxbb Styxbb is offline
Junior Varsity
 
Join Date: 02-16-18
Posts: 37
Styxbb is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by KB1 View Post
I do agree with you that the match should not have went to OT. Because if the proper stall calls were made SVSM would have won in regulation!
Had proper stall been made all evening, Graham would have had a couple less state champs and one less 4 timer. Overall, my opinion of Saturday night a bunch of wrestlers trying not to lose versus trying to win. IE...A certain wrestler is up 4-0 20 seconds into his to match. In the end a 5-4 decision.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 03-12-18, 07:23 PM
StillNeutral StillNeutral is offline
Freshman
 
Join Date: 11-16-16
Posts: 4
StillNeutral is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by KB1 View Post
It also be nice if the official would look into the OBVIOUS "no call" on the defensive pin right in front of the match refs eyes that was clear as day !! It would also be nice if the refs would look into and review the THREE no stall calls against Graham when the STVM wrestler immediately stood to his feet from bottom position and the Graham wrestler never returned opponent to mat. 1st stand up STVM was on his feet 15+ seconds then stalemate to a fresh start , then the 2nd and 3rd stand ups were 10+ seconds each and never a stall call only stalemates ???? Haven't these stall calls against the top wrestler been made MANY times in way less than 10 seconds in other many other matches in this years tournament? Isn't is very clear in the rule book that you must return your opponent to the mat if you are the top wrestler? ALSO, Ohio really should look into all the "emotional" time outs so many kids are taking in this era. Are the time outs not supposed to be only "injury" time outs?? If the proper stall calls were made in regulation this match it doesn't even get to OT. In my opinion the STVM wrestler was more composed and the sharper wrestler in this match and absolutely deserved the win. AND then he proved he deserved to be a state champ in the finals as well !!

There is nothing in the book that you "must return" your opponet, it does say you "must make an attempt".
Can you also explain "emotional time out" and what u are specifically referring to with that
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Fairless girls coach. What happened? sam the butcher Girls Basketball 2 02-05-18 03:53 PM
What happened to the Thanks4Giving game this year? Yappi Football 4 11-24-17 08:43 PM
What ever happened to the Spray Paint?! Money Ball General Board 10 10-24-17 02:13 PM
What happened to Watterson? cal Football 7 10-04-17 03:37 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:57 AM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Registration Booster - Powered By Dirt RIF CustUmz