The Wrestling Rules Committee is recommending that 2 experimental rules from this past season be made permanent.
All rules proposals made by the committee must be approved by the NCAA Playing Rules Oversight Panel, which will discuss the wrestling recommendations via conference call June 24.
You can read more about this at THIS LINK.
What was more interesting to me from the article is some of the rules that they are considering. These include:
1. Standing neutral rule calls:
when wrestling is stopped in the neutral standing position for going out of bounds, the referee can make one of the three following calls:
3. Experimenting with a rule in the National Wrestling Coaches Association All-Star Classic that would award three points for a takedown. (I'm not crazy about this, either. I think points should be rather precious, so that majors and TFs have some meaning. There's been discussion of awarding 3 points for the 1st TD, and while I'm not crazy about that, I could live with it.)
4. Separating the “control of mat area” and “questioning the referee” penalties in the penalty chart. If a coach leaves the restricted area, the penalty structure would be: a warning on the first offense; loss of a team point in the event standings/score on the second offense; and loss of two team points and ejection on the third offense. (That would be a good change, IMHO.)
5. When wrestlers interlock fingers in the neutral position, the referee would stop the action and call it potentially dangerous, and any subsequent offenses would require the referee to call stalling on the wrestler who initiates the fingers interlocking. (Hmm, my immediate reaction is 50/50)
6. Eliminating the four team points awarded for a technical fall if the winning wrestler fails to score a near fall. (I don't care for this. A TF is a reward for dominance. What's the rational for only being able to attain it via one pathway? Seems that there should be a path for those that put on a TD clinic, and combine that with an esc or reversal.)
7. When the offensive wrestler gets set in the referee’s position, the referee would wait a minimum of one second after saying, “set,” before sounding the whistle for wrestling to begin. (This makes some sense, but it makes it more of a challenge for the refs, in that good ones will vary the time after set when they blow the whistle, so that neither wrestler can try to time the start and get a jump. A ref could still do that, but to do so they'd have to take additional time over the course of the dual.)
8. The committee had a thorough dialogue about using dual meet scoring in individual tournaments instead of tournament scoring. Committee members feel a move to dual scoring would be fan-friendly and easier to follow. The committee will study the issue further to make sure there are no unintended consequences, if a change is made in the future. (Hmm, that would make it easier for fans to project tournament scoring. However, unless advancement points are modified, a switch to this could make it more advantageous, team points wise, if a wrestler were to lose in R1 of a tourney, and then go on a tear in the wrestlebacks.)
All rules proposals made by the committee must be approved by the NCAA Playing Rules Oversight Panel, which will discuss the wrestling recommendations via conference call June 24.
You can read more about this at THIS LINK.
What was more interesting to me from the article is some of the rules that they are considering. These include:
1. Standing neutral rule calls:
when wrestling is stopped in the neutral standing position for going out of bounds, the referee can make one of the three following calls:
- Stalling on one or both wrestlers for leaving the wrestling area.
- Stalling for pushing or pulling the opponent out of bounds.
- Wrestling action is taking place. (It should be noted that a tie-up, including an under hook with no attempt to initiate an offensive move, is not considered an offensive or defensive attack.) (This seems like a lot to evaluate for the ref, especially on something that could be rather subjective.)
3. Experimenting with a rule in the National Wrestling Coaches Association All-Star Classic that would award three points for a takedown. (I'm not crazy about this, either. I think points should be rather precious, so that majors and TFs have some meaning. There's been discussion of awarding 3 points for the 1st TD, and while I'm not crazy about that, I could live with it.)
4. Separating the “control of mat area” and “questioning the referee” penalties in the penalty chart. If a coach leaves the restricted area, the penalty structure would be: a warning on the first offense; loss of a team point in the event standings/score on the second offense; and loss of two team points and ejection on the third offense. (That would be a good change, IMHO.)
5. When wrestlers interlock fingers in the neutral position, the referee would stop the action and call it potentially dangerous, and any subsequent offenses would require the referee to call stalling on the wrestler who initiates the fingers interlocking. (Hmm, my immediate reaction is 50/50)
6. Eliminating the four team points awarded for a technical fall if the winning wrestler fails to score a near fall. (I don't care for this. A TF is a reward for dominance. What's the rational for only being able to attain it via one pathway? Seems that there should be a path for those that put on a TD clinic, and combine that with an esc or reversal.)
7. When the offensive wrestler gets set in the referee’s position, the referee would wait a minimum of one second after saying, “set,” before sounding the whistle for wrestling to begin. (This makes some sense, but it makes it more of a challenge for the refs, in that good ones will vary the time after set when they blow the whistle, so that neither wrestler can try to time the start and get a jump. A ref could still do that, but to do so they'd have to take additional time over the course of the dual.)
8. The committee had a thorough dialogue about using dual meet scoring in individual tournaments instead of tournament scoring. Committee members feel a move to dual scoring would be fan-friendly and easier to follow. The committee will study the issue further to make sure there are no unintended consequences, if a change is made in the future. (Hmm, that would make it easier for fans to project tournament scoring. However, unless advancement points are modified, a switch to this could make it more advantageous, team points wise, if a wrestler were to lose in R1 of a tourney, and then go on a tear in the wrestlebacks.)
