swain358 Posted March 4, 2009 Share Posted March 4, 2009 Awood or any other person who feels it is the top mans fault when potentially dangerous is called when legs are already in before the bottom wrestler stands up, this is a serious question and I am wanting to know what you think about this situation which i think is the same as the Legs in stand up situation that continually occurred in the Eppert vs. Wright Match. What if the top wrestler is running a serious half nelson but is unable to advance his position to near fall because the bottom wrestler has a trick shoulder that has the ability to rotate in a way that would be called double jointed so the referee is forced to continually call potentially dangerous.. Do you penalize the top wrestler for continually going after the half nelson that he will never advance because before the bottom wrestler will go over for near fall, his shoulder will cause a potentially dangerous call? I see the Eppert vs. Wright "legs in stand up" situation as pretty much the same situation that I just explained.. If the top wrestler has in legs and is attempting to turn and the bottom wrestler stands up forcing a potentially dangerous call, you cannot penalize the top wrestler.. Standing up when the top wrestler has in legs is not the way to defend legs.. End of story.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g-townBandit Posted March 4, 2009 Share Posted March 4, 2009 The entire Wright vs Eppert match. And series of matches over the last few years for that matter. boring match no offense at allll just legss got real boring Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cadet130 Posted March 4, 2009 Share Posted March 4, 2009 I'll have to agree with Swain on this one. If the offensive wrestler was throwing the 2nd leg in after the defensive wrestler stood up (to cause the stoppage) then I would understand the stalling call on the offensive wrestler. I'd propose getting rid of the potentially dangerous in that situation and let the wrestlers wrestle. If the defensive wrestler slams the offensive wrestler to his back, it's an illegal slam and he has potential to lose the match. Maybe? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Midwest Wrestling Fanpage Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 By far Keiffer vs. Hawkins, Justin Kieffer's 1 and 2nd matches on sat. of H.S state, Tonte and McGinley, McKinley and the Castle kid knowing what had to be done Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedTights7 Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 HAHAHAHA Swain are you serious? You are going to compare Eppert not working for any type of move on top except to ride a claw ride and legs with a guy being able to dislocate his shoulder out? Seriously? Do you read what you type? What if Wright could dislocate his knee out and did it everytime Eppert shot and he was never able to get a takedown. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mickswife Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 That really is a punk move on their part. You can't even claim it is the natural or comfortable way to hold it. Everyone else has their whole hands on it. Really lost respect for them. Did you lose some respect for the seventh placer at 125? My guess is you never had any respect for them in the first place. No kidding. All of the following (non-Cathedral kids) are holding the posters with 1 finger and/or thumb - so no, "Everyone else" does not have their whole hand on the board: 4th, 5th and 8th place finishes in picture #4 1st place finisher in photo #13 2nd and 6th place finishers (and Steven came darn close to letting one of his fingers slip off - oh no!) in photo #20 5th place finisher in photo #29 6th place finisher in photo #32 4th place finisher in photo #36 2nd place finisher in photo #38 3rd place finisher in photo #39 7th place finisher in photo #42 So can you put this to rest already? It was not some conspiracy. If you don't think these kids have the utmost respect for the sport of wrestling as to not do something so disrespectful, then you are crazy. These kids have worked hard all their lives in this sport, and I'd guess they stand up there with a mixture of pride and disappointment, but I'm guessing disrespect was not on their minds. I can only speculate though, because I've never stood in their shoes. Maybe someone else can enlighten me though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcarter Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 Eppert never got a chance to run any offense when he had his legs in. As soon as he would throw his legs in Wright would stand up right away, so IMO there never should have been any stalling calls on Eppert. And, I understand what you saying about throwing the 2nd leg in as the other wrestler stands up but from my point of view it looked like Eppert always had both legs in before Wright stood up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swain358 Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 Yes I am serious.. Gave you an example.. If someone dislocates their knee when you shoot the referee will not call the offensive wrestler for stalling.. You cannot stand up when the top wrestler has legs in.. Talk about it as long as you want.. Again you cannot stand up when the top wrestler has legs in and expect the top wrestler to get hit for stalling.. End of story... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
former130 Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 If the top guy has the legs in and is not working for a turn then yes he can get called for stalling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcarter Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 But he shouldn't if the other wrestler stands up right after the top man throws his legs in. There would be no time to work a turn. Which is my point about the Eppert v Wright match. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swain358 Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 jcarter just give up trying to explain the rule to these guys.. They just dont want to grasp that IF THE TOP GUY HAS LEGS IN AND IS IN THE PROCESS OF WORKING A TURN, THE BOTTOM MAN CAN NOT STAND UP AND EXPECT THE TOP MAN TO GET HIT FOR STALLING...They just dont understand that.. Watch any college match and I guarantee you the referee would call the bottom man for stalling since he is forcing a potentially dangerous situation.. People just cant seem to grasp it.. Im done explaining it to you guys.. The match is over.. It was a phenomenal match.. Enjoyed every second of it.. Eppert won.. End of story.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lefthanded Headlock Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts