The coach is an idiot for coaching that strategy. Obviously coached the kid did it ON purpose. Case book comment is correct. 1E 2TD, warn the wrestler for stalling, and warn the coach for misconduct.We must get rid of these BS tactics, wrestling must be aggressive not try to work the rules, cheap and unsportsmanlike BS.
Joe Williamson » Escape and takedown
The video you are looking for has not finished processing.
Please check back in a few minutes.
Get notified with every new Joe Williamson Video.
Escape and takedown
After making your selection, copy and paste the embed code above. The code changes based on your selection.
The rule book doesn't say that he has to turn ... 'It just states that he must be able to DEFEND ....'The bottom wrestler has WELL beyond reaction time to"turn and DEFEND'... he opts not to turn.at this point he is free from his opponent, and has had oportunity to DEFEND.1 escape...He Continues to act like and idiot.. and opt to not try to wrestle..'2 TD..Good call Jodie...
stalling on the bottom wrestler for avoiding wrestling, classic case of wasting time, if kids dont wanna waste time like this then just cut the kid before the clock starts
Whether right or wrong, as a coach you have to left your wrestler know that the escape was awarded and be ready to wrestle.
This is a no-brainer. Why would anyone say the ref made the wrong call? Holy cow, kid, turn and face your opponent or you deserve to be taken down!
Wrestle aggressively at all times, attack,defend and be consistent in attack, offensive minded,in every position. Wrestler-offense conceeds lossof control,does not follow and on commandof official verbalizing to wrestler-defense at 5 feet out escape-1pt. Its on The defense to defendand attack upon verbal signal, at that pt. offensive wrestler then attacks aggressively and awarded2 pts . takedown. Lets roll at all times!
Clear escape then takedown to me, the kid on bottom had about 3 or 4 seconds clear of the top man, with no pressure at all, that is more then enough time for the escape to be awarded, and the ref did the proper thing by doing it. You can never relax in a match like that
I think it wsa the right call. There was obviously a loss of control for a significant period of time. If the criteria is tht the escape isn't awarded until he faces him then it's atleast a point for fleeing the mat as he was not making an attempt to wrestle.
kid pretty much flee'd the mat. Most likely a stall warning or a fleeing call. If the kid on bottom is going to approach this match the way he just did, he deserved to have 2 called against him.
yes 1 then 2... if the top wrestler DID NOT allow separation between he and opponent... i.e. if he was stalking/pursuing him then 1 or 0 pts should have been awarded... 1 then 2 is correct in this case...
I think 1 and 2. I don't think the offensive wrestler should be punished because the bottom guy gets up slow and lazily walks toward the out of bounds. He waited as long as he could and right before he has no room, he shoots. I think the refs nailed it.
Went back and watched that Metcalf match and seeing it again that was a bad example. Still agree with the call in this match though.
As a second point I see a lot of guys on here using the argument that he never faced his opponent as the problem with the escape. I can find no where in any rule book that that condition has anything to do with an escape being scored. This may be an assumption but is not a rule. Look back at the escapes given to metcalf opponents when he does his little "hands up dance" behind them when he cuts them. Specifically find the Jake Patacsil match at Midlands about three years ago, maybe metcalf's sopre year I think. they gave that escape and takedown several times. Patacsil couldn't even get to his feet let alone face Metcalf.
Bottom Man never did turn and face Top, so is not an escape by definition. Therefore, takedown should not have been awarded.I think if he would have let him walk out of bounds, then you could have awarded the escape because he did not have control when he went out.
He takes five steps without turning around, and no contact from either wrestler. That's an escape. The same kid would be livid if he needed one to get away and he had that much separation when time ran out and no escape was given. He just didn't want to wrestle. one then two. No question.
bad call....an escape doesn't occur until the bottom man faces his opponent. i agree that the bottom wrestler didnt make initiative or the most sportsmanlike attempt to wrestle, but technically there was not an escape. therefore, there should not have been any points awarded to either wrestler.
Obviously a takedown. he escaped and just because he had his back to him doesnt mean he cant be takedown if that was the case everyone would stand backward against a great takedown wrestler
1 then 2..he didnt want to wrestle.maybe he left the iron on in the motel and was going to get it before a fire started. theres gotta be a better explanation for him.pooor fella.live an learn
call was right...top man lost control when u hit a stand up the point is to turn and face him so u dont get taken down...walsh clearly didnt do that which is why he was taken down
i think it was a great call... there was a loss of control, they were in neutral position (no matter if he is facing his opponent or not shouldnt matter... if at the start of a match your opponent turns his back and you take him down to the mat you will surely be awarded the two... the point that there was loss of control is obvious)... i like the call, more knowledgeable refs would make that call
I hate to say it, but it was a bad call. I wish I could agree with it, but he didn't turn around. I don't agree with not turning to face your opponent either. Although, the official did make the escape call. It doesn't matter if it is a good call or a bad call, the bottom wrestler should have immediately turned to resume wrestling when the call was made. The only argument could be that he did not know he was awarded an escape... You Make The Call is good for the sport just like the Dirty Flo Scramble and Dirty Flo Takedown sections. Thanks FloWrestling!
take down. the bottom wrestler had enough time to turn around. plus the escape call was made, and the point was awarded
It's not two. Although you do have to take into account the time he took to face him, once let up from a optional start I'm not sure if there is a time limit you have to face your opponent. If there is said time limit than it's probably the refs discretion, in which case he could call for a take down, stall or possibly fleeing the mat.
Thats not Two.. The bottom wrestler must turn and face the wrestler to get an escape. This happened to Jamie Franco (MW) at the eastern states a few years back, he ran away not turning back then by the time he turned around he got the 1PT and won the match.
definitely cheap... do you let your wrestlers take other guys down with there back is turned? Or even better should you start a fight when someone back is turned. Let him up, let him face you so you can beat the crap out of him.also i agree, if the ref makes the 1 escape, it really doesn't matter about anything else.
Forget about it. Call is good. If he wont turn around and wrestle, give the guy who cut him the 2. I almost agree with the fleeing the mat comment!
1pt and then 2 pt is correct. The wrestler must make the effort to turn and face - the spirit and intent of the rules must be upheld. Poor coaching.
i heard the ref award the 1 point escape, and at that point both wrestlers should understand that they are neutral. the guy walking out of bounds should have known to turn around and wrestle and the guy that cut him is then given the go ahead to attack and attempt to score a takedown. good call.
I think bad call.Your given an optional start, the offensive wrestler kept walking foward not giving him the opportunity to face him. I've seen it where you have an optional start, the kid faces and the guy takes him down right away. Every time the ref will say no takedown no escape, never loss of control. As a coach, you'll teach your guy not to face him if the opponent continues to stalk. If the offensive wrestler wants to give the escape he needs to give the escape.... and come on its cheap.
i see this playing out 2 different ways, the 1st is the way the ref called it. The other is that the kid on top is given a point bc the bottom guy was fleeing. either way the kid on top is up a point so the right call was made either way.But in terms of criteria i would have called the kid on bottom for stalling and fleeing
That was totally 2. The kid should've turned right away. As far as I'm concerned contact was broken for long enough.That's what you get for being a bum
Clearly a good call.If the top wrestler truly has to wait for the bottom wrestler to face him, couldn't the bottom wrestler theoretically just keep his back to the top wrestler forever without the escape being awarded?