Possible Rule Changes

I also think that if you don’t have an independent ref to review challenges, get rid of the challenge or plead case and let ref decide if he wants to review it. Not sure I saw the ref overturn one of their calls
 
I also think that if you don’t have an independent ref to review challenges, get rid of the challenge or plead case and let ref decide if he wants to review it. Not sure I saw the ref overturn one of their calls
I remember seeing Cael win one and the announcers said he has a very high rate of winning challenges.
 
Mandate bigger mats to better control the boundary wrestling. Maybe have a 5 foot 'warning circle' within the mat similar to an outfield warning track. Require wrestlers in the warning circle to work toward the middle or get a stall call.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VeloClone
I also think a 1 minute or 90 second ride is enough. After that return to neutral position.
 
Once riding time is over a minute, you have 20 seconds to turn him from top. If nothing happens you get a neutral restart with no escape point. I could live with saying you can ride out the last minute of the match to secure a win.

Also, the trap the ankle, grab the wrist ride (aka the Cassiopi, Woods ride) gets a 10 count and then a stall. The amount of times that results in a stall warning on the bottom man is maddening.
To be fair...David Carr is as good as anyone in the country when talking about your second paragraph. And I love DC...like everyone else
 
Mandate bigger mats to better control the boundary wrestling. Maybe have a 5 foot 'warning circle' within the mat similar to an outfield warning track. Require wrestlers in the warning circle to work toward the middle or get a stall call.
Less diving out of bounds = more points = more excitement = more fan interest
 
Ankle rides and double boots with no intention of tilting should be top stalling.

Below is just a random steam of thoughts. Not all of these together, necessarily.

What about riding time accumulates, but only awarded if back points are secured?

I like @crablegs idea of no escape point.

Radical thought…stalling only for top wrestler. If a guy turtles, let him up (no escape point) and take him down again.

I’m not sure about 3 point takedowns. Would that make guys who are already hesitant to shoot that much more so?

At the end of the day…as has been mentioned above and throughout the year, something has to be done about stalling universally.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4theheckofit
Ankle rides and double boots with no intention of tilting should be top stalling.

Below is just a random steam of thoughts. Not all of these together, necessarily.

What about riding time accumulates, but only awarded if back points are secured?

I like @crablegs idea of no escape point.

Radical thought…stalling only for top wrestler. If a guy turtles, let him up (no escape point) and take him down again.

I’m not sure about 3 point takedowns. Would that make guys who are already hesitant to shoot that much more so?

At the end of the day…as has been mentioned above and throughout the year, something has to be done about stalling universally.
Like a lot of ideas. Stalling on only top guy, would probably limit nearfalls, because bottom guy would put head down & elbow in.
 
Removing the wording where the top guy does not have to attempt to turn was possibly the worst rule change I can recall. I would much rather see the days of old where the referee makes a judgement call on whether or not the top guy is working to turn. I would assume 99% of the officials have wrestled in the past and know whether the top guy is working to turn or the bottom guy is working to get out. They NEED to go back to this regardless of riding time points or scoring for escapes.

We might have to put up with the occasional "homer" calls or officials not having the balls to make calls. However, I would much rather deal with that than watch the style of wrestling that the latest rules caused. You can certainly see that some teams (Penn State) coached to the new rules.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4theheckofit
Maybe force the ref to call stalling on someone if no score after 1st period. Kind of goes along the line of the freestyle passivity rule.

Wasn’t there something like that years ago?
 
Maybe force the ref to call stalling on someone if no score after 1st period. Kind of goes along the line of the freestyle passivity rule.

Wasn’t there something like that years ago?
Yes, I recall it in early 2000s. Not sure how long it was around but I liked it.
 
Call me stupid, because i totally might be... but

Why not start every period in neutral position regardless of how the prior period ended?

No choice, just goes back to neutral every time. It's like "guys have at it again". Go!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Stevetasker
Or if you are wrestling form your knees you get a stall call.

This was a major issue maybe 10 years ago. Not so much today.

Covering the hips/riding parallel with no turn after a reasonable amount of time used to be stalling but somehow it isn’t anymore. Let’s go back to that. So simple.
 
This was a major issue maybe 10 years ago. Not so much today.

Covering the hips/riding parallel with no turn after a reasonable amount of time used to be stalling but somehow it isn’t anymore. Let’s go back to that. So simple.
I'm not talking about being on top and wrestling from your knees. You have a bunch of wrestling from your knees in the neutral position. I would like to see more on a stall call when you can tell that is what is going on wrestling from their knees.
 

Help Support Us

Become a patron