|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Big Tens
Ethan Moore added to this discussion on March 9, 2026
|
Absolutely stellar performance from OSU.
A couple observations from the finals.
- Hitting Davino for stalling was criminal. He is constantly looking to score. In an era of passing ankles the refs really need to reward the offensive wrestler.
- I was super annoyed with the ref at 184. First, hitting MN for stalling 30 seconds into the match is a joke. I rewatched the sequence and it was a terrible call. Second, if the replay on ESPN with the clock in slow-motion was accurate, that HAS to be a takedown in OT. He literally dropped Rocco on both shoulders. Could have been a touch fall in FS he was so flat in that instant. Has to be a TD.
- The figure four penalty point at 174 I also disagree with. That was not an intentional hold, just his legs happening to touch while Haines advanced his position.
Both those calls when to a 3rd party reviewer and were uphelp. In my opinion, that's terrible.
It's often discussed in NFL broadcasts that the officiating fraternity does like to disagree with their peers. That's what I saw in these scenarios.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Big Tens
Bruce Andrews added to this discussion on March 9, 2026
|
Statements above that Cannon took third. He took fourth.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Big Tens
Jim Kessen added to this discussion on March 9, 2026
|
I'm very curious to see how they seed 133.
Davino B10 Champ 25-1
Jax Forest B12 Champ 13-0
Aaron Seidel ACC Champ 15-1
Marcus Blaze B10 Runner-up 21-1
My best guess
1 Davino
2 Forest (I don't believe he has enough matches for RPI)
3 Blaze
4 Seidel
5 Larkin
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Big Tens
Ben Golden added to this discussion on March 9, 2026
|
Then Ayala and Byrd at 6 & 7? Gotta tell you, if it plays out that way, I love it.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Big Tens
Jim Behrens added to this discussion on March 9, 2026
|
|
Quote from Ethan Moore's post:
|
|
"
The figure four penalty point at 174 I also disagree with. That was not an intentional hold, just his legs happening to touch while Haines advanced his position.
"
|
I was on the mat all weekend (Kenston and Mentor) so I have not watched any of this coverage. However this particular statement caught my attention, specifically the word "intentional".
Let me state that not one can judge intent except the person committing the act. In my 43 years as an official, not one time have I ever called a full nelson that was intentional. It is is ALWAYS a mistake. However it is clearly spelled out as an illegal move and has to be called. BTW, the defensive man's coach will always help me make that call.
Watching as fan, you have no idea whether it was intentional to not and it doesn't matter either way. If the official sees it, he has to make the call. There are no rules in the Rule Book that we can choose to ignore because the move was not intentional.
BTW, if I am understanding what you wrote, the move happened while advancing his position? If the position is gained through an illegal move or UNR, that is the very reason the rule exists. No one gets into a Fig 4 by accident, you have to work at it.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Big Tens
Bruce Andrews added to this discussion on March 9, 2026
|
The tip of the foot just briefly brushed the back of the knee on the other leg.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Big Tens
Dan Strope added to this discussion on March 9, 2026
|
|
Quote from Jim Behrens's post:
|
|
"
|
Quote from Ethan Moore's post:
|
|
"
The figure four penalty point at 174 I also disagree with. That was not an intentional hold, just his legs happening to touch while Haines advanced his position.
"
|
I was on the mat all weekend (Kenston and Mentor) so I have not watched any of this coverage. However this particular statement caught my attention, specifically the word "intentional".
Let me state that not one can judge intent except the person committing the act. In my 43 years as an official, not one time have I ever called a full nelson that was intentional. It is is ALWAYS a mistake. However it is clearly spelled out as an illegal move and has to be called. BTW, the defensive man's coach will always help me make that call.
Watching as fan, you have no idea whether it was intentional to not and it doesn't matter either way. If the official sees it, he has to make the call. There are no rules in the Rule Book that we can choose to ignore because the move was not intentional.
BTW, if I am understanding what you wrote, the move happened while advancing his position? If the position is gained through an illegal move or UNR, that is the very reason the rule exists. No one gets into a Fig 4 by accident, you have to work at it."
|
I believe a more accurate description would be that the action of the defensive wrestler caused the momentary touching to the legs. I am not sold on the fact that it should have been called in that situation.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Big Tens
Ethan Moore added to this discussion on March 9, 2026
|
I was 100% certain you would come to the defense of the ref! :)
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Big Tens
Jim Behrens added to this discussion on March 9, 2026
|
|
Quote from Ethan Moore's post:
|
|
"I was 100% certain you would come to the defense of the ref! :)"
|
I am not defending the official, I am simply stating what the Rule Book says.
I don't know how the NCAA book reads but in ours it is Rule 7-1-5r which reads "figure 4 around the body, the head, or both legs".
No reference touching or incidental contact. A scissors is fine (as long as it is not used for punishment) but as soon as the foot goes behind the knee it is illegal.
Was it a mistake? Probably so but it can't be ignored.
Being a fan, I understand that some might not think it was the correct call. But like you, I am 100% certain that fans of the other wrestler believe the call was correct.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Big Tens
Casey Talbott added to this discussion on March 10, 2026
|
Jim -
You said you hadn't seen the match.
So here it is.
The concern in question begins at or about the 6:08 mark.
Welcome your input, applying the rule to the match itself.
Does it make any difference that he had the arm with the head?
Guessing not.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GiP4wBkyIqU
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Big Tens
Jim Behrens added to this discussion on March 10, 2026
|
Thank you for posting the video.
Like I said above, I would compare this to a full nelson where the hands barely touch the head for a split second. Was there any intent or damage(harm) to the offended wrestler? The answer is "no" but the current rules do not allow it.
In this case the leg was barely behind the knee and barely touched. However both officials saw it and called it so it was there.
Did he do it intentionally? Probably not but we can not judge that.
Did it hinder the match? Probably not.
BTW, I don't see where Haines created the situation by lifting the leg to create the Figure 4.
Complete side note, I have proposed that we make the full nelson a technical violation instead of an illegal move. My thinking is that in 43 years I have never seen an intentional full nelson and they always get caught very quickly before any damage can be done. The difference is injury time vs recovery time (which is huge). Additionally if the official felt it was done with pressure or designed to injure we can call UNR. I do not expect it to go anywhere but it is worth a try!
The arm being included does not make a difference.
Hopefully this helps.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Big Tens
Michael Rodriguez added to this discussion on March 10, 2026
|
Ethan…It sounds like you think the rule should be changed, not that it was a bad call. Because, by rule, it’s the right call. The guys toe clearly locked into a figure four for a moment.
For the record, I think the “no figure four” rule is crap. But as long as it’s a rule, refs shouldn’t get to just not call it because they don’t agree with it.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Big Tens
Freddy Carr added to this discussion on March 10, 2026
|
After a couple days to reflect, I really find myself impressed with Ohio State’s performance overall. They especially showed well in consos.
Nothing is going to beat PSU (could Nebraska and Ohio State combine teams and even come close?), but Ohio State is right there in the conversation for next best. And that is an improvement over the lull we’ve seen in recent years.
Hoping Cannon can get his lungs and legs back in Cleveland. Would love to see him make some noise.
Bouzakis is will be interesting to watch especially early after weigh ins.
133…sheeeesh. That’s going to be fun to watch unfold.
Vega worries me.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Big Tens
Brian Mathews added to this discussion on March 10, 2026
|
|
Quote from Freddy Carr's post:
|
|
"Nothing is going to beat PSU (could Nebraska and Ohio State combine teams and even come close?)"
|
Short answer--no.
Ohio State and Nebraska's best combined lineup projects to about 126 tournament points, compared to Penn State's projected 182.
Better question is could ANY combination of 10 wrestlers beat PSU this year. They're going to have seven #1 seeds and have a realistic shot at 8 champs.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Big Tens
Roe Fox added to this discussion on March 10, 2026
|
These are fun exercises.
Against an All Star team, they might be had. I see it as follows:
PSU Locks: 165 and 197
Likely: 125 (Lilledahl can be had and has been), 157 (maybe freshman nerves but doubt it), and 174 (Haines has been close with several he will wrestle, including Carson)
50/50: 133 (a lot of studs to go through), 149 (SVN wrestles a lot of close matches), 184 (Welch wrestles too close of matches, no offense and his luck with calls has to run out soon)
Not happening: 141, 285.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
