hbmcgee Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 what are your views on the stalling calls during the match? i know what conseco thought of them. i am just curious, i was neurtal on that match, im not saying it was bad reffin- im just wondering. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maninblack11 Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 although i was pulling for wright, it was a tough call about the stalling calls. on one hand, it is an advantage to the guy on the bottom to get to restart. but on the other hand, if a wrestler is coming up and out and you put a leg in, its an easy way to get back in control. it was a great match between two great wrestlers and this year, it was eppert's turn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2016GrecoGold Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 How did the scoring and stall calls take place? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xgamehoss Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 As an impartial observer, I thought Eppert already the legs in the first two times Wright stood up (Wright should have received a caution on the first, and Eppert given a point on the second). The third time it happened, Eppert didn't put the legs in until Wright was already up (and he should have been cautioned). The fourth time, Eppert had the legs in and should have been awarded another point. The stalling call on Eppert was not a good one, the ankle he grabbed was the only thing he could to try to maintain control at the time. He wasn't constantly on it to kill clock. But then again, I'm no expert and certainly not a referee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoilerUp Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 I thought the legs were used as a pinning combination so stalling isnt usually called if you keep working. Didnt seem like the ref gave him enough time to set something up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xgamehoss Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 I thought the legs were used as a pinning combination so stalling isnt usually called if you keep working. Didnt seem like the ref gave him enough time to set something up Wasn't a matter of referee giving enough time to work. It is potentially dangerous when top man has the legs in and bottom man is standing. So, ref has to stop the action. It then becomes a matter of when legs were put in. If legs are in and bottom man continues to stand, it is stalling on bottom. If bottom man is on his way to his feet and top puts legs in, it is stalling on top man. At least that is my understanding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wrestler.by.design Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 As an impartial observer, I thought Eppert already the legs in the first two times Wright stood up (Wright should have received a caution on the first, and Eppert given a point on the second). The third time it happened, Eppert didn't put the legs in until Wright was already up (and he should have been cautioned). The fourth time, Eppert had the legs in and should have been awarded another point. The stalling call on Eppert was not a good one, the ankle he grabbed was the only thing he could to try to maintain control at the time. He wasn't constantly on it to kill clock. But then again, I'm no expert and certainly not a referee. the first time when he stood up he had the legs in first completly me n my friends went crazy when we saw the stallin call it was insane Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XCard Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 So what is the bottom man to do? Is it not his job to make every effort to work for the escape? Is it not the top man's job to work for the turn? It was a tough call against Eppert but if you are asking my opinion, I guess I would say I agreed with the call. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hbmcgee Posted February 22, 2009 Author Share Posted February 22, 2009 just to let everyone know, im not questionning the refs judgement; i just wanted to get a general consensus of peoples view of the calls Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dwright10 Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 Never should have went OT. congrats Eppert. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcwrestling Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 i didnt think that it should have been stallin call..... but you have to give it up to both wrestlers.... it was one heck of a match. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lefthanded Headlock Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 So what is the bottom man to do? Is it not his job to make every effort to work for the escape? Is it not the top man's job to work for the turn? It was a tough call against Eppert but if you are asking my opinion, I guess I would say I agreed with the call. Standing up to your feet when someone has the legs in is not the best way to get an escape. He should have done one of many leg counters. The second stalling call was even worse than the first one. The ref should have stalemated that a couple seconds after Camden dropped to the leg and sat him on his butt. If the ref is good you shouldn't even notice that he is there. So I guess that ref was borderline terrible in that match. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old School Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 The second stalling call was definitely worse than the first one. The first one was questionable but not a bad call. If Eppert had flattened Wright out on the mat a few times and just laid there, it would have definitely been stalling - using the legs for riding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xgamehoss Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 So what is the bottom man to do? Is it not his job to make every effort to work for the escape? Is it not the top man's job to work for the turn? It was a tough call against Eppert but if you are asking my opinion, I guess I would say I agreed with the call. Standing up to your feet when someone has the legs in is not the best way to get an escape. He should have done one of many leg counters. The second stalling call was even worse than the first one. The ref should have stalemated that a couple seconds after Camden dropped to the leg and sat him on his butt. If the ref is good you shouldn't even notice that he is there. So I guess that ref was borderline terrible in that match. Lefthanded headlock...I agree completely. Since ref didn't stalemate it, that gave Wright a chance to head up and out when Eppert's only recourse was to grab the ankle and he hits him with the stalling point. Which is why I made my earlier comment about Eppert not being constantly on the ankle to kill clock. It was his only chance to maintain control. Bottom line is... The wrestler that ended up with the title, absolutely deserved it. And I agree with the poster that said you could see in Eppert's eyes, he was not going to be denied. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
williams2012 Posted February 23, 2009 Share Posted February 23, 2009 after the match when eppert was putting up 3 fingers and breaking them was he meaning wright wont be a 3 timer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ontherise219 Posted February 23, 2009 Share Posted February 23, 2009 I also caught that. Holding up 3 fingers and breaking them and shaking his head no. So was he more happy to win the title or was he more happy he beat Wright? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XCard Posted February 23, 2009 Share Posted February 23, 2009 maybe he meant i was in the finals 3 years and won 2 titles with a runner-up in between? ;D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
williams2012 Posted February 23, 2009 Share Posted February 23, 2009 I also caught that. Holding up 3 fingers and breaking them and shaking his head no. So was he more happy to win the title or was he more happy he beat Wright? i think he was more happy to beat wright cuz wright and him have faced each other in the finals 3 years in a row now. and now he can say he won 2 and wright only won 1 on him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
williams2012 Posted February 23, 2009 Share Posted February 23, 2009 maybe he meant i was in the finals 3 years and won 2 titles with a runner-up in between? ;D i think he meant wright cant have 3 titles now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoilerUp Posted February 23, 2009 Share Posted February 23, 2009 Ill give the benefit of the doubt and assume he meant his own 3 finals with 2 championships Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtv2112 Posted February 23, 2009 Share Posted February 23, 2009 Ill give the benefit of the doubt and assume he meant his own 3 finals with 2 championships You interested in any undeveloped ocean front property in Oklahoma? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mhomburg Posted February 23, 2009 Share Posted February 23, 2009 As an impartial observer, I thought Eppert already the legs in the first two times Wright stood up (Wright should have received a caution on the first, and Eppert given a point on the second). The third time it happened, Eppert didn't put the legs in until Wright was already up (and he should have been cautioned). The fourth time, Eppert had the legs in and should have been awarded another point. The stalling call on Eppert was not a good one, the ankle he grabbed was the only thing he could to try to maintain control at the time. He wasn't constantly on it to kill clock. But then again, I'm no expert and certainly not a referee. I cant believe what I have been reading about people wanting Wright to be hit for stalling. It is the bottom wrestler's duty to work for an escape or a reversal. It is the top wrestler's responsibility to work towards a pin/nearfall. Stading up is a way to escape and therefore there is no way Wright should have cautioned or given a stalling call. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ontherise219 Posted February 23, 2009 Share Posted February 23, 2009 I thought they were going to hit Eppert for another Stall when wright shot like 4 shot in a row and it seemed as if Eppert was backing up. In the End Eppert rode Wright like it was a job he clocked in for a 9-5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xgamehoss Posted February 23, 2009 Share Posted February 23, 2009 As an impartial observer, I thought Eppert already the legs in the first two times Wright stood up (Wright should have received a caution on the first, and Eppert given a point on the second). The third time it happened, Eppert didn't put the legs in until Wright was already up (and he should have been cautioned). The fourth time, Eppert had the legs in and should have been awarded another point. The stalling call on Eppert was not a good one, the ankle he grabbed was the only thing he could to try to maintain control at the time. He wasn't constantly on it to kill clock. But then again, I'm no expert and certainly not a referee. I cant believe what I have been reading about people wanting Wright to be hit for stalling. It is the bottom wrestler's duty to work for an escape or a reversal. It is the top wrestler's responsibility to work towards a pin/nearfall. Stading up is a way to escape and therefore there is no way Wright should have cautioned or given a stalling call. Then you need to take a look at a Rules book. Go to the "Ask the officials" forum and ask them. Standing up when someone has the legs in is a way to keep from getting turned, and therefore stalling. As one poster mentioned, there are better ways to counter legs than standing up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ugotstuck Posted February 23, 2009 Share Posted February 23, 2009 The stalling call on Eppert was ridiculous. He should have won in regulation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts