You Make The Call: Did Marsden Reverse Gingrich? ...
- Thread starter Tom McAndrew
- Start date
Of course he did not have a reversal. At no point did the okie state kid attempt to secure gingrich's second leg, let alone ever have both legs. He secured the right leg with both arms and proceeded to belly down. Objectively, just an incorrect call. No need for any subjective speculation.
One of the people commenting said Mardsen originally had both legs with Gingrich on his butt and when he was awarded the reversal, he switch to one leg. He claims the camera was at a bad angle. If that was the case, then I believe it was a reversal. However, I could not see it in the video.
It was really close and it doesn't look like it at all in that video, but in the video of the match posted in the other thread you can see Marsden has the right arm on Gingrichs hip and switches to one leg. Is it a reversal? I don't know, but it is a better view than this one.
from the rule book ...
2.8 Reversal
A reversal occurs when the defensive wrestler comes from the bottom/defensive position and gains control of the opponent, either on the mat or in a rear-standing position. For the purpose of awarding reversal points at the end of the wrestling area, points shall be awarded when control is established while any part of either wrestler remains in bounds. (See Illustration Nos. 57 and 58.)
[My note: the aforementioned illustrations deal exclusively with edge of the circle determinations, which were not a issue in the Gingrich - Marsden match.]
From the Wrestling Interpretations section of the rule book:
RULE 2
Definitions
Rule 2.8 Reversal
SITUATION: Wrestler A, who is the defensive wrestler, stands up and does a standing switch and subsequently grabs Wrestler B's leg up and off the mat in a single-leg position. QUESTION: WHat is the referee's call? RULING: At this point, no change is made. Wrestler B continues to receive riding time, and no points are awarded. Wrestler A can release Wrestler B's leg and receive one point for an escape, or Wrestler A may retain the single leg and attempt to earn two point for a reversal by putting Wrestler B on the mat. A single-leg position is not enough control to justify a reversal. An escape cannot be awarded because Wrestler A could put Wrestler B to the mat for two more points for a total of a three-point move. If the period ends or both wrestlers go out of bounds while Wrestler A has Wrestler B's leg up, the referee should award a one-point escape because Wrestler B lost control.
Tom
2.8 Reversal
A reversal occurs when the defensive wrestler comes from the bottom/defensive position and gains control of the opponent, either on the mat or in a rear-standing position. For the purpose of awarding reversal points at the end of the wrestling area, points shall be awarded when control is established while any part of either wrestler remains in bounds. (See Illustration Nos. 57 and 58.)
[My note: the aforementioned illustrations deal exclusively with edge of the circle determinations, which were not a issue in the Gingrich - Marsden match.]
From the Wrestling Interpretations section of the rule book:
RULE 2
Definitions
Rule 2.8 Reversal
SITUATION: Wrestler A, who is the defensive wrestler, stands up and does a standing switch and subsequently grabs Wrestler B's leg up and off the mat in a single-leg position. QUESTION: WHat is the referee's call? RULING: At this point, no change is made. Wrestler B continues to receive riding time, and no points are awarded. Wrestler A can release Wrestler B's leg and receive one point for an escape, or Wrestler A may retain the single leg and attempt to earn two point for a reversal by putting Wrestler B on the mat. A single-leg position is not enough control to justify a reversal. An escape cannot be awarded because Wrestler A could put Wrestler B to the mat for two more points for a total of a three-point move. If the period ends or both wrestlers go out of bounds while Wrestler A has Wrestler B's leg up, the referee should award a one-point escape because Wrestler B lost control.
Tom
Re: from the rule book ...
"Gains control of the opponent" being the key phrase.
There is absolutely no way Marsden "gained control." One can argue Gingrich lost control (hence the scramble), but that's insufficient for a score.
The ref was out of position and made a bad obstructed-view call from behind Gingrich's back. Of course that doesn't explain why the call wasn't overturned by replay ... maybe the Pokes used the same system the B10 did for the PSU-Ohio State football game.
"Gains control of the opponent" being the key phrase.
There is absolutely no way Marsden "gained control." One can argue Gingrich lost control (hence the scramble), but that's insufficient for a score.
The ref was out of position and made a bad obstructed-view call from behind Gingrich's back. Of course that doesn't explain why the call wasn't overturned by replay ... maybe the Pokes used the same system the B10 did for the PSU-Ohio State football game.
Between 4 and 5 seconds you can see Marsden's right arm around Gingrich's thigh and calf. Marsden doesn't control any further than the front of Jon's left leg. Gingrich's rear never touches the ground. Marsden switches to a single and has the single when the ref's arm goes up.
Ref clearly had a mental delay (probably saw the arm, when he was running made a judgment call). That being said, I can't see how that's a takedown by any sense of the imagination after video review. Unless, as The Jefe said, there was a 'video malfunction'
Is this really what it's come to? Takedowns based on technicalities? I feel like it's a cop-out for the refs, honestly speaking.
And THAT being said, I'm glad this happened now and not March
Ref clearly had a mental delay (probably saw the arm, when he was running made a judgment call). That being said, I can't see how that's a takedown by any sense of the imagination after video review. Unless, as The Jefe said, there was a 'video malfunction'
Is this really what it's come to? Takedowns based on technicalities? I feel like it's a cop-out for the refs, honestly speaking.
And THAT being said, I'm glad this happened now and not March
No reversal in that viedo.
Just another reason I personally dislike the way the replay viedo is used or even used.
If gonna use should have a partial reff doing it not the one that makes the call..Just saying.......
Just another reason I personally dislike the way the replay viedo is used or even used.
If gonna use should have a partial reff doing it not the one that makes the call..Just saying.......
Similar threads
