|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Matt Stephens over Ian Miller
Roe Fox added to this discussion on March 6, 2011
|
Anyone have any insight on how this went? Obviously Stephens is an excellent wrestler but Miller seemed a step above.
Really impressed with his win over Martin at Medina. Great addition to KSU next year.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Matt Stephens over Ian Miller
Ben Golden added to this discussion on March 6, 2011
|
|
Quote from Roe Fox's post:
|
|
"Anyone have any insight on how this went? Obviously Stephens is an excellent wrestler but Miller seemed a step above.
Really impressed with his win over Martin at Medina. Great addition to KSU next year."
|
It was a bit controversial.
Miller had called injury time twice because of his shoulder--really a shame, hope it's not something that haunts him for his whole college career.
So the match was tied 0-0 at the end of OT.
Stephens got in pretty deep on a body lock, but Miller is comfortable enough up there that he made the best of it. The two were locked for about 10 seconds before they finally went to the ground, Stephens was on top right away, but in my opinion (and a lot of peoples that I heard), there was not control. However, the ref awarded the takedown, thus ending the match. In the mean while, Miller rotated off the bottom and almost forced Stephens over on to HIS back.
At that point, I think Miller saw the ref with his two fingers in the air and conceded. Now, Stephens did have the advantage in that scramble, but I felt like he definitely didn't have control until well after the ref called the takedown.
With that said, my view was not great. That was how I interpreted it from across the arena. I'll be interested to watch the video on GOhioCasts to see a better view.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Matt Stephens over Ian Miller
Roe Fox added to this discussion on March 6, 2011
|
"In the mean while, Miller rotated off the bottom and almost forced Stephens over on to HIS back."
He did this to Martin at Medina at the end.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Matt Stephens over Ian Miller
Brian Nicola added to this discussion on March 6, 2011
|
I really wanted Miller to win, but I saw it this way. We were on the "D1" end, so the wrestlers' heads were facing up.
I saw Stephens take Miller to his back and stop the momentum of the roll. He was locked around the body and covering the hips. Miller still had the head trapped but all other criteria was met.
As the ref awarded 2, Miller started the motion to reverse Stephens. Did Stephens ease up?
I think the fact the momentum was stopped and Stephens held him there, meeting other criteria, points towards an accurate takedown call.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Matt Stephens over Ian Miller
Brady Hiatt added to this discussion on March 6, 2011
|
|
Quote from Brian Nicola's post:
|
|
"I really wanted Miller to win, but I saw it this way. We were on the "D1" end, so the wrestlers' heads were facing up.
I saw Stephens take Miller to his back and stop the momentum of the roll. He was locked around the body and covering the hips. Miller still had the head trapped but all other criteria was met.
As the ref awarded 2, Miller started the motion to reverse Stephens. Did Stephens ease up?
I think the fact the momentum was stopped and Stephens held him there, meeting other criteria, points towards an accurate takedown call."
|
I was on the DIII end -- looked different from that view. Have watched it on film from "your" side, and now agree with you.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Matt Stephens over Ian Miller
Dan Ransick added to this discussion on March 6, 2011
|
From my vantage point on press row I agree with Ben that it looked like it wasn't two until Miller stopped wrestling.
I thought it looked like a td at first but Miller kept moving until the ref had awarded 2.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Matt Stephens over Ian Miller
Pat Costilow added to this discussion on March 6, 2011
|
I don't know for sure, but there might be an in bounds/out of bounds issue with whether or not Miller would have had points. It was close- I will have to watch the video.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Matt Stephens over Ian Miller
Ben Golden added to this discussion on March 7, 2011
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Matt Stephens over Ian Miller
Lou Demas added to this discussion on March 7, 2011
|
This is one of those subjective calls that happen when two great wrestler's wrestle each other, it would be nice if a Ref could clarify why the Ref's choose to call it 2. Was is it that the Ref's just felt Stephen's had established control long enough for 2 or was there something more defining that only someone who has been refereeing for years would seen that made both ref's call it 2?
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Matt Stephens over Ian Miller
Roe Fox added to this discussion on March 7, 2011
|
Lou:
Afte wattching it I agree with you it would be nice to having someone clarification on the rule in this instance. I saw Miller taken to the mat while he had the head and overhook of Stephens arm.
It looks to me like the ref gave the two when they hit, not after Miller stopped and rolled over. Little doubt Stephens was in the better position but I would like to know if what Miller had negated any superior control of Stephens.
I would think the prudent thing to do would have been to let them wrestle a few more moments to let them clarify the situation.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Matt Stephens over Ian Miller
Jim Behrens added to this discussion on March 7, 2011
|
I will weigh in but just with some rambling general observations. I have watched the OT take down probably a dozen times and , from this camera angle, a case can be made both ways.
Let me start by saying that the official on the mat is a friend of mine and, IMO, is a very good official. He was selected for this very high profile match because the state rules interpreters believe in him and his ability. I do NOT want to speak for him or what he was seeing/thinking at that moment. I can assure you that every official knows the stage they are on and wants to get it right.
Also, we (as fans) have the advantage of video and replay. He did not have that luxury.
It looks to me as though Miller's motion was momentarily stopped and then he rolled through. Was this enough for control? In the eyes of the official, it was.
Every official has had situations where they threw up two only to realize there was something that showed them that control was not there beyond reaction time OR that the wrestler "threw" it away. There are times you can still wave it off (I saw Pat Fitzgerald do it yesterday at the Big10's) but sometimes not.
If you assume control was there, waiting longer (for more wrestling to occur) is unfair to the wrestler who had the control even if it went away. IOW, to not make a decision is to make a decision.
Roe wrote "Little doubt Stephens was in the better position but I would like to know if what Miller had negated any superior control of Stephens". Notice that he used the term "superior control"? If Stephens had control, then it was a take down.
I hope the fact that the two officials on the mat agreed on the call means something. OTOH, it would have been hard to wave this one off. Assume control was achieved, waving it off would be unfair to Stephens.
Many times fans and coaches want two points awarded right NOW. Here it was awarded instantly and people complain about that. Welcome to our world where we can't get it right either way!
With all this said, I realize that I haven't answered your questions. I am sure that I have have similar calls but never when so many people were watching. It isn't fun, believe me.
This is just one of the matches where both wrestlers are so equally matched that a call either way alters the outcome. The difference here is that the stakes were so high.
Bottom line, a tough match and a tough call. I respect the man who made the call. He saw it, believed it, and called it.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Matt Stephens over Ian Miller
Casey Talbott added to this discussion on March 7, 2011
|
good match between two very good wrestlers.
tough way for it to end, difficult call, but as jim said, refs on mat only get to see it once, and at full speed.
miller appeared to have the momentum heading into the third, after a strong second period on top, and of course needed to get out to win.
i was bit surprised he was never able to stop the left boot from coming in.
this allowed stephens to totally dominate the third, just pounding him with the power half, and very nearly turning him.
quick question for jim or another ref:
miller leaves the mat at about the 10:57 point on the video, while his coaches are still arguing the call (meaning before the call has been confirmed, and before stephens has been declared the winner).
what would have been the ramification of this, assuming the refs had decided to wave off the takedown?
would miller have been allowed to return to the mat, in order to continue?
i seem to recall that in the old days, once you left the mat you were done.
not of critical import, but i was just wondering if you could clarify.
thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Matt Stephens over Ian Miller
Leo Zimmer added to this discussion on March 7, 2011
|
I was also on the DIII end of the arena, and even after watching the video dozens of times, I cannot tell if it was a takedown or not.
My problem with the call is simply this. If it had been the middle of the second period, I am not sure a referee makes that same call. He would have called it OB and stood them up.
Having said that, refs feel pressure too. I would NOT have wanted to be responsible for making that call.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Matt Stephens over Ian Miller
Hank Kornblut added to this discussion on March 7, 2011
|
Tough call to make. Stephens momentarily had control but lost it just as quickly. Otherwise, it was a very well reffed match. I think Miller was the aggressor. I also think that first period take down should have counted. But Miller had no answer for those legs in the third period.
I do want to give credit to the ref for not calling stalling. Both wrestlers rode well and the ref allowed it. Many refs would have called stalling on top. The official recognized this was a collegiate caliber bout and allowed the action to dictate the outcome. I would have preferred that Stephens not receive the two. But at least it was a judgment call off action that decided the outcome. Much better than penalty points being awarded.
Miller is an excellent wrestler and I look forward to watching him at Kent. Aside from his leg defense, he's very well rounded. That quick ride he employed to finish off the third period was a smart piece of wrestling. Stephens is a quality competitor as well. He'll fit in well at Virginia Tech.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Matt Stephens over Ian Miller
Lou Demas added to this discussion on March 7, 2011
|
I think what good should come this is a push for there to be a better understanding of criteria in this position. I have argued with many a ref that my wrestler shoulder have received 2 after holding his a opponent to back after a throw for longer than what happened here, only to be told no, because the ref said there was no control because the other wrestler scramble out or reversed my wrestler, from off his back. So was this the right call and many just are upset due to the lack of consistency made in regards to other calls in this situation.
Jim, wrote this., Roe wrote "Little doubt Stephens was in the better position but I would like to know if what Miller had negated any superior control of Stephens". Notice that he used the term "superior control"? If Stephens had control, then it was a take down.
I think this is what ref's need to be consistent on and the criteria for 2 points, should be clear. Does superior control give you 2 point's?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
