|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Retherford v Berger
Rex Holman added to this discussion on June 10, 2023
|
This was fascinating.
Berger was outclassed in the first match.
At the end of the first match, he went gangster and head butted Zain. He was ready to fight and he mentally got to Zain.
It reminded me of a story regarding Matt Lindland. Lindland was ruthless. He would headbutt, gouge, bite, break teeth. Whatever he had to do to win. He beat the Cuban World Champion by wrestling in such a way. The Cuban was worried about his teeth. Lindland was'nt.
If you hurt someone or damage them, it is a mental gamechanger.
However, during the second match, Berger went soft, wrestled clean and complained about eye pokes. He had that match won if he kept being nasty.
Cheap shots and dirty wrestling win matches that are otherwise unwinnable.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Retherford v Berger
Jim Behrens added to this discussion on June 11, 2023
|
In my opinion, the official let this go too far. You can not predict the first "cheap shot" but you had better be on guard after that. The slapping/punching that occurred after wrestling resumed should NEVER be permitted.
I certainly can not speak to National or world level FS rules but that head butt was so obvious that, at my level, it would have merited being DQ'd.
"He had that match won if he kept being nasty. "?? There is huge difference between being nasty and competing outside the rules.
Berger was going to lose that match anyway so a DQ would not have done anything. However, if it prevented him from wrestling in the second match, that is very different. Not knowing how the rules read on this, I doubt the officials (on the mat or higher up) have the stones to make that call.
We all make choices and sometimes they don't work out. Maybe Berger "went soft" because he was informed that if he did not wrestle "clean", he would not be wrestling at all?
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Retherford v Berger
Rex Holman added to this discussion on June 11, 2023
|
Absolutely. Disqualified on the spot following headbutt. I found myself saying Mf'er when Berger did it.
Wrestling has gentleman rules in a combat sport. If anyone crosses the line, it needs addressed by official immediately.
I would say that there is a fine line between being nasty and outside of the rules. Some wrestlers know it and engage it.
It brings into play the dynamic of bullying and escalation. Shoving an opponent's head as you go off the mat. A coach pointing at the ref or opposing competitor. Sound familiar?
Regarding the soft comment, I was simply saying that Berger was playing hard and then softened his disposition. There were about a dozen things he could've done to Retherford once the brow was split to further frustrate and demoralize him.
Once he started playing gentleman's rules, he lost.
I have opinions about the Marstellar and Burroughs match as well. There was a good analysis on Flow of the call. Either way, I thought it ridiculous.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Retherford v Berger
Rex Holman added to this discussion on June 11, 2023
|
Watched the singlet grab again from a bad angle. Actually, it changed my mind. Burroughs may have gained a good enough angle to score if he had not been slowed by singlet grab. No way could I see it in real time.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Retherford v Berger
Jim Behrens added to this discussion on June 11, 2023
|
Rex,
It sounds like we are pretty much in agreement on this.
For a long time, I have maintained that I will not lose control of a match, There are a whole range of things that can be done to address situations like this. It is up to me as to how to best address it.
While I would not blame the official quite as much as the competitors, it isn't too far apart.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Retherford v Berger
Jim Behrens added to this discussion on June 11, 2023
|
|
Quote from Rex Holman's post:
|
|
"Watched the singlet grab again from a bad angle. Actually, it changed my mind. Burroughs may have gained a good enough angle to score if he had not been slowed by singlet grab. No way could I see it in real time."
|
I found it odd that FLO really did not discuss it much, IMO.
I never saw a replay that told me, definitively, that it occurred. I have seen stills since then.
Did it affect the match? Certainly not at that time but none of us were in a position to even see it much less know what it might have affected. Heck, even the mat official did not see it but that could easily be just a positioning issue.
From what I read, it seems to have happened with about 15 seconds remaining. IMO, if they are going to review it and award a point, everything after that should have been null and void. For us, that would have been called bad time as wrestling occurred after a penalty which should have stopped the clock. I have no idea if this is the case in FS. However, putting 15 seconds back on the clock would have allowed Marsteller the chance to overcome the point. As it was awarding it after the conclusion of wrestling took any opportunity away from him. IMO, that is wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Retherford v Berger
Brady Hiatt added to this discussion on June 12, 2023
|
|
Quote from Jim Behrens's post:
|
|
"From what I read, it seems to have happened with about 15 seconds remaining. IMO, if they are going to review it and award a point, everything after that should have been null and void. For us, that would have been called bad time as wrestling occurred after a penalty which should have stopped the clock. I have no idea if this is the case in FS. However, putting 15 seconds back on the clock would have allowed Marsteller the chance to overcome the point. As it was awarding it after the conclusion of wrestling took any opportunity away from him. IMO, that is wrong."
|
I was told that no re-wrestle of the time because that would benefit the person who committed the foul. Not sure if that is the rule, but just what I was told.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Retherford v Berger
Jim Behrens added to this discussion on June 12, 2023
|
|
Quote from Brady Hiatt's post:
|
|
"
|
Quote from Jim Behrens's post:
|
|
"From what I read, it seems to have happened with about 15 seconds remaining. IMO, if they are going to review it and award a point, everything after that should have been null and void. For us, that would have been called bad time as wrestling occurred after a penalty which should have stopped the clock. I have no idea if this is the case in FS. However, putting 15 seconds back on the clock would have allowed Marsteller the chance to overcome the point. As it was awarding it after the conclusion of wrestling took any opportunity away from him. IMO, that is wrong."
|
I was told that no re-wrestle of the time because that would benefit the person who committed the foul. Not sure if that is the rule, but just what I was told."
|
Fair enough but what would they do if the official on the mat (or either of the other two) saw the infraction when it occurred? Would the same "logic" apply?
Would they stop the match, award the point and wrestle out the remaining time? Would they let wrestling continue, as if nothing happened, until the end of the match?
I want to stress that I am asking as I have no clue.
I get it the Marsteller committed an infraction but it was with time remaining in the match. Since it was worth a point, should he not have an opportunity to regain that point?
To wait until the match was over just seems wrong on so many levels.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Retherford v Berger
Brady Hiatt added to this discussion on June 12, 2023
|
I don’t know. I thought it was or should have been re-wrestled. Just sharing what I was told.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
