Wrestling Rutgers Dual Thread 1/16

CJFisJoePaII

Well-Known Member
Sep 6, 2019
2,359
2,477
1
Sorry, not sorry, but you have failed my reasonable person rule, so I'll not be responding fyi. Doesn't happen often, KK was the last.

So, we get your interpretation and opinion on everything else..... but not as to whether this falls within YOUR same interpretation of the same concept, "reaction time", made by the same Ref.... go figure! LMAO. Got news for you, that situation at the end of SV1 is a TD for Bartlett anywhere-&-eveywhere except Rivera's magic kingdom, but was absurdly called "reaction time" by Rivera again. LMAO - a complete joke call just like his first one.
 

PSUbluTX

Well-Known Member
Feb 7, 2018
1,291
3,320
1
So, we get your interpretation and opinion on everything else..... but not as to whether this falls within YOUR same interpretation of the same concept, "reaction time", made by the same Ref.... go figure! LMAO. Got news for you, that situation at the end of SV1 is a TD for Bartlett anywhere-&-eveywhere except Rivera's magic kingdom, but was absurdly called "reaction time" by Rivera again. LMAO - a complete joke call just like his first one.
Me eagerly awaiting the "deep whizzer" copy/paste proof.


Please hurry @CJFisJoePaII. I have important work to do!
 

jmadden1998

Well-Known Member
Jan 26, 2017
1,427
2,392
1
So, we get your interpretation and opinion on everything else..... but not as to whether this falls within YOUR same interpretation of the same concept, "reaction time", made by the same Ref.... go figure! LMAO. Got news for you, that situation at the end of SV1 is a TD for Bartlett anywhere-&-eveywhere except Rivera's magic kingdom, but was absurdly called "reaction time" by Rivera again. LMAO - a complete joke call just like his first one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mcpat and slushhead

El-Jefe

Well-Known Member
Jul 27, 2012
25,635
53,350
1
Just say when, and I can take over with the yardstick.

yardstick-vC8BOn.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: slushhead

matter7172

Well-Known Member
Nov 14, 2012
3,412
4,117
1
Gibbons just said PSU's schedule has been soft so far. I seem to remember them wrestling ASU and Cornell before the conference schedule, who else should they have matched up with?
Yeah, they should have wrestled some D3 schools and very weak programs like their opponents. https://scarletknights.com/sports/wrestling/schedule/2021-22

Jim Gibbons is, in a word, an ass.

Btw, BB needs to start wrestling in the neutral position. Until he starts doing that, he will have many MVB kind of matches. Can't blame the referee(s) for Beau's failure to launch.
 

dicemen99

Well-Known Member
Nov 15, 2005
5,135
5,803
1
So, we get your interpretation and opinion on everything else..... but not as to whether this falls within YOUR same interpretation of the same concept, "reaction time", made by the same Ref.... go figure! LMAO. Got news for you, that situation at the end of SV1 is a TD for Bartlett anywhere-&-eveywhere except Rivera's magic kingdom, but was absurdly called "reaction time" by Rivera again. LMAO - a complete joke call just like his first one.
There is no "interpretation" going on here. Roar understands the appropriate application of the rule book. You don't and you don't wish to learn more about the way the sport is officiated.

You're not alone. I've got friends that have watched alot of wrestling with IQs that are assuredly above average that react the same way when a call goes against their rooting interest but don't care to explore the application of the rule. They're not interested and they'll ignore it in a situation that benefits their team and recite the same bitch the next time it doesn't.

If you want to disagree with Rivera's definition of reaction time then just state that. That is subjective and open to interpretation. But your argument misrepresents the application of the rulebook in this situation.

I've watched alot of the matches he refs and in my opinion he does allow more reaction time than you typically see at the NCAA level. It frequently results in criticism leveled by fans whose team is on the wrong side of it. But he's pretty consistent in his approach. Which is all you can ask from a referee.
 

slushhead

Well-Known Member
Mar 10, 2014
3,048
7,195
1
What are the odds, a Jason Nolf, and Jaon Nolf ??
I know @dunkej01 loves his OtterBox, but I can’t stand mine — have to peck so hard through this plastic that I’m either hitting the wrong letter repeatedly or else not hitting hard enough for it to register. Anything at the margin of the screen is impossible to make contact with.


HastyLongHarlequinbug-size_restricted.gif
 

PSUer1989

Well-Known Member
Feb 6, 2017
1,477
2,372
1
I don’t think the decision to go neutral is something Cael & Co would make in a dual meet. It seems to be the opposite of the mindset to use each match as a learning opportunity for the wrestlers. My guess is they dissect everything that happened with Bartlett and help him improve. The decision to go neutral may be made in BIGS or the NCAAs. Just my impression of how the coaching staff approaches things…
 

Jplions4

Well-Known Member
Apr 22, 2021
48
43
1
Yeah, they should have wrestled some D3 schools and very weak programs like their opponents. https://scarletknights.com/sports/wrestling/schedule/2021-22

Jim Gibbons is, in a word, an ass.

Btw, BB needs to start wrestling in the neutral position. Until he starts doing that, he will have many MVB kind of matches. Can't blame the referee(s) for Beau's failure to launch.
Gibbons sucks on Iowa and the Brands brothers so much its disgusting!!!
 

El-Jefe

Well-Known Member
Jul 27, 2012
25,635
53,350
1
I don’t think the decision to go neutral is something Cael & Co would make in a dual meet. It seems to be the opposite of the mindset to use each match as a learning opportunity for the wrestlers. My guess is they dissect everything that happened with Bartlett and help him improve. The decision to go neutral may be made in BIGS or the NCAAs. Just my impression of how the coaching staff approaches things…
Guess it depends on the circumstance.

IMG_3507cc_ws_ja_x.JPG
 

Shot of Espresso

Well-Known Member
Jul 25, 2008
1,484
116
1
So basically with the new OT rules if you have choice and defer you can ride your guy out and then stall for the final 30 seconds and win? I like the 2 minute SV but they should make both guys go down in the OTs. It's too easy to win if you just have choice.
Or they should make the deciding factor of these OT matches the full aggregate of all riding time (the whole match) not just OT riding time. If you have 45 seconds of riding time during the 1st 3 periods that should count. Then if Van Brill rides him for 30 seconds in OT he is still behind in overall riding time and he would need to choose down to try to get the escape point.
 

CJFisJoePaII

Well-Known Member
Sep 6, 2019
2,359
2,477
1
Or they should make the deciding factor of these OT matches the full aggregate of all riding time (the whole match) not just OT riding time. If you have 45 seconds of riding time during the 1st 3 periods that should count. Then if Van Brill rides him for 30 seconds in OT he is still behind in overall riding time and he would need to choose down to try to get the escape point.

Really the whole criteria is absurd. Folk's fascination with "riding time" and "riding for no purpose but to accumulate riding time" (i.e., none of it oriented toward scoring) is ridiculous - VB winning without scoring an offensive point is a classic example of why Folk is mocked by wrestling purists. If the wrestlers are tied after SV2, highest scoring move should be the first criteria (followed by # if both have same highest scoring move). In this match, VB's highest "scoring move" was 0.... and folk rules award him the match - pathetic.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Shot of Espresso

mcpat

Well-Known Member
Mar 13, 2021
1,867
3,941
1
Really the whole criteria is absurd. Folk's fascination with "riding time" and "riding for no purpose but to accumulate riding time" (i.e., none of it oriented toward scoring) is ridiculous - VB winning without scoring an offensive point is a classic example of why Folk is mocked by wrestling purists. If the wrestlers are tied after SV2, highest scoring move should be the first criteria (followed by # if both have same highest scoring move). In this match, VB's highest "scoring move" was 0.... and folk rules award him the match - pathetic.
I'm going to regret engaging with you on this, but when they award a point at the end of a match if your riding advantage is a minute or more, then riding, by definition, is oriented toward scoring.
 

Chickenman Testa

Well-Known Member
Jan 4, 2003
21,770
33,468
1
Really the whole criteria is absurd. Folk's fascination with "riding time" and "riding for no purpose but to accumulate riding time" (i.e., none of it oriented toward scoring) is ridiculous - VB winning without scoring an offensive point is a classic example of why Folk is mocked by wrestling purists. If the wrestlers are tied after SV2, highest scoring move should be the first criteria (followed by # if both have same highest scoring move). In this match, VB's highest "scoring move" was 0.... and folk rules award him the match - pathetic.
Freestyle purists = men who wear Capri pants