Top 3 (in order)
Push out point
Reversal = 3 points
Lose challenge lose a point and your brick
Push out point
Reversal = 3 points
Lose challenge lose a point and your brick
Disagree on 3 but I love 1 and 2Top 3 (in order)
Push out point
Reversal = 3 points
Lose challenge lose a point and your brick
I love all 3 and especially 3. Too many bricks are thrown as lungers.Disagree on 3 but I love 1 and 2
Especially in tournamentsI love all 3 and especially 3. Too many bricks are thrown as lungers.
It's not so much attacking stalling as it is attacking edge wrestling which is a form of stalling.I don’t love rewarding just pushing a guy and trying to score by pushing someone.
You should score on an offensive move IMO but I understand needing to get action and penalize inactive wrestlers. I think the currently stall rules aren’t bad in college.
Love 1 and 2, but what if instead of a lost point with a lost challenge it was something like giving opponent choice of position?Top 3 (in order)
Push out point
Reversal = 3 points
Lose challenge lose a point and your brick
Don’t hate it.Love 1 and 2, but what if instead of a lost point with a lost challenge it was something like giving opponent choice of position?
It's not so much attacking stalling as it is attacking edge wrestling which is a form of stalling.
Top 3 (in order)
Push out point
Reversal = 3 points
Lose challenge lose a point and your brick
I agree on the idea, but honestly it’s still too subjective and has too much variance depending on the ref.I think the currently stall rules aren’t bad in college.
So why forever were takedowns and reversals the same value?3 point options from bottom shouldn’t exist.
If you wanted 3 points, should’ve executed a TD.
I like the push out and challenge deal.
Why was it changed?So why forever were takedowns and reversals the same value?
to create more offense which actually didn't happen. It actually allowed the first guy to get a TD to coast more.Why was it changed?
Agreed. A point is just too big of an edge. If I trusted refs to get it right on review then that would be one thing but I don’t. Coaches could be right on the review and still lose the challenge. That would put the kid at an huge disadvantage and could lose him the match.Don’t hate it.
That was the point of my post.to create more offense which actually didn't happen. It actually allowed the first guy to get a TD to coast more.
The law of unintended consequences.