|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Was it NF for Ramos...and why wasn't it?
Mark Niemann added to this discussion on March 26, 2013
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Was it NF for Ramos...and why wasn't it?
Ben Golden added to this discussion on March 26, 2013
|
|
Quote from Ethan Moore's post:
|
|
"FloWrestling tweeted a pic of the scenario yesterday.
Logan responded: "@flowrestling if you watch it in slow mo, you could probably get a 5 count"
I thought that was hilarious, and perhaps, the tweet of the century."
|
Yeah, I bet he never gets tired of hearing both of his titles over tremendous opponents called into question.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Was it NF for Ramos...and why wasn't it?
John Flanigan added to this discussion on March 26, 2013
|
Yes, it was 2NF. I was more worried about Ramos getting the pin than the 2, as it was close. I still think Logan controlled the match and Ramos would not have won. I think Logan wanted to beat him soundly, which we all would have enjoyed.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Was it NF for Ramos...and why wasn't it?
Jason L. Jackson added to this discussion on March 26, 2013
|
I'm not so sure it was 2 after looking on another board. A poster on the mat stated that he did a slo-mo review and the exposure was 2.2 seconds. Therefore, in real time, it was a blink of an eye from either being 2 or not. I would posit that .2 seconds is within allowable error, even for a referee
I would bet that most people could not start and stop a watch within .3 seconds. Forget, try to start a stopwatch and stop it at exactly 2 seconds. See if you are fast or slow.
In the end, I think the call is being blown out if proportion.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Was it NF for Ramos...and why wasn't it?
Mark Niemann added to this discussion on March 26, 2013
|
0:00.06 is as fast as I've ever gotten on a stopwatch, amiright!?!?!?!
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Was it NF for Ramos...and why wasn't it?
Mike Taylor added to this discussion on March 26, 2013
|
I watched the match again. The ref did stop in the middle of his second swipe (just like Fred said he was told). Something I still don't understand regarding the loss of video replay is the official stated "call on the mat is confirmed." Saying that means you saw video evidence that supported your call. So, if the video went out thus making it impossible to confirm the call why did he say the call was confirmed?
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Was it NF for Ramos...and why wasn't it?
Rex Holman added to this discussion on March 27, 2013
|
Mike-
You have to fill in the blanks, ...barring any evidence to contrary, call stands as is. Semantics regarding confirmation of video.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Was it NF for Ramos...and why wasn't it?
Fred Feeney added to this discussion on March 27, 2013
|
Mike...I think most of us refs tended to say that the call was confirmed....when we should of said that the call stands.
Here is the rule:
NCAA WRESTLING
Mat-side Video Review Experimental Rule
The NCAA Wrestling Committee has agreed to, and has received approval to use, mat-side video review on an experimental basis during the 2012-13 season. The only action that is not review-able is a fall.
Experimental Rule Participation
Mat-side video review will be allowed during the 2012-13 season, excluding open tournaments.
The host shall 1) provide notification to participating coaches not later than weigh-ins if mat-side video review will be used; 2) designate the official mat-side video review system to be used; and 3) determine the number of mats and the rounds the mat-side video review system will be used for video review.
Mat-side video review may be used to confirm or reverse on-the-mat decisions, except a fall. The mat-side video review process operates under the assumption that the ruling on the mat is correct, and only when there is indisputable video evidence that a ruling was incorrect will a call/non-call be changed. Absent that evidence, the original ruling stands.
Procedures for the use of the experimental rule will supersede rules references in the 2011-12 and 2012-13 Wrestling Rules and Interpretations Book regarding videotaping and error review request, that is Rules 1.9; 1.16; 3.21; and 5.6.1.
Mat-side Video Review System Operator, Equipment, Location and Use
The minimal required equipment includes a tripod and a digital video camera that has recording capabilities and is connected to a computer monitor or a TV monitor. The match clock and riding time clock should be captured whenever possible when taping wrestling action. The equipment used for the review may also be a system that integrates the time, the score and the recorded action so that all three are seen during replay of the video.
The mat-side video review system operator shall be one individual who operates the replay camera and monitor. This person, in conjunction with the match referees, helps ensure calls are reviewed in an efficient and timely manner.
The equipment used to review a call and the video review system operator shall be located at or next to the mat-side table. During a review, this area is restricted for all persons except the system operator and match referees.
Reviewable Calls
Any call/non call made by a referee, with the exception of a fall, is reviewable.
The Review
The two ways to stop a match for a video review include: 1) referee’s action; and 2) coach’s challenge.
Referee’s Action
The referee may stop a match when there is no significant action and the referee believes: 1) there is reasonable doubt that an error was made regarding timing, scoring, or the proper positioning of the wrestlers; 2) the situation is reviewable; or 3) the outcome of a review may have an impact on the results of the match. The referee shall review all unsportsmanlike conduct and flagrant misconduct calls.
There is no restriction on the number of times a referee may stop the match for a review and there is no time limit to conducting a review, but the referees should strive for each review to be efficient and timely.
Coach’s Challenge
Each team is allowed one challenge per dual meet, including team advancement tournaments, to be used at the coach’s discretion. Each team in an individual advancement tournament, excluding open tournaments, is allowed three challenges to be used at the coach’s discretion. If a coach’s challenge is successful, the team retains that challenge.
A coach may ask the referee to stop the match for a challenge by approaching the scorer’s table and, when there is no significant action, request the match be stopped. This signifies the coach believes an error was made and the referee will ask the coach if he is questioning a call or asking for a video challenge. If the coach is asking for a video challenge, both wrestlers remain in the center of the mat, the coach returns to the team area and both coaches remain in their designated coaching areas during the review.
If a coach challenges a previously made ruling on a challenge or if a coach challenges a ruling when the team’s allotment of challenges has been used, the actions are considered intentional delay of the match and the coach is penalized for failure to comply. (See Rule 3.13.4.) If a coach challenges a fall, which is not reviewable, the action shall count as a challenge.
The Outcome
Only the referees (no other personnel) shall be immediately present at the mat-side table for the review of the video replay screen. A reversal shall only be based on indisputable video evidence. After the review process is complete, the head referee makes one of the following announcements:
a) If the video evidence confirms the on-the-mat ruling, “After further review, the ruling on the mat is confirmed.”
b) If there is no indisputable and conclusive evidence to reverse the original ruling, “After further review, the ruling on the mat stands.”
c) If the on-the-mat ruling is reversed, “After further review, the ruling is [followed by a brief description of the video evidence]. Therefore, [followed by a brief description of the impact of the ruling].”
If a ruling is reversed, the official scorer shall supply the referee with the following information in order for wrestling to resume under accurate match conditions: the period, the position of the wrestlers and the status of the match/riding time clock.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Was it NF for Ramos...and why wasn't it?
Mike Taylor added to this discussion on March 27, 2013
|
Thank you Rex and Fred.
The only reason I asked was because of the conspiracy theories that are destined to come out by the many Ohio State haters. "The video just happened to break during that match" and "that ref lied saying he confirmed the call when the video wasn't working" "clearly the refs were out to get Iowa."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
