Ok I could not sit back and let this misinformation get posted, this may be two of the most ridiculous statements make on this board this year. Seriously people if you don't know the rules then please don't come on this board spouting them off! Secondly you can't make up your own rules to fit your purpose. That being said let’s examine these two lovely posts by two unnamed individuals.
1.
This brings up another screw up involving a ref. The Salina kid should have been disqualified because when you lift an opponent off the ground you have to take them to their side you cannot take them frontwards. Whether it is accidental or on purpose that is the rule.
The NFHS rules book makes NO mention of a wrestler having to return a wrestler, who has been lifted off the mat, back down to the mat on "their side". There is NO SUCH RULE in the rule book. What the rule book does say is
A slam occurs when either wrestler lifts his/her opponent off the mat and returns him/her with unnecessary force
Now would you please tell me where in that very simple rule straight from the NFHS rule book itself, does it mention that a wrestler may not return his opponent to the mat in a forward manner? Obviously if you drop a guy on his head on purpose that would be illegal because that is unnecessary force, but the simple act of a wrestler landing on his head incidentally is most certainly not illegal.
Wrestler1086, please don't post again unless what you say matches the NFHS rule book.
Moving on...
2.
To bad none of you guys know what happened and if you watched the tape I am pretty sure you would all say that the other kid should have been kicked out for the stuff he was doing and in the rule book it says that a wrestler has to have 4 unsportsmanlike conducts during the match and one after the match the ref had no power to get kicked out of a tournament.
In this situation, wrestling797 you were at least very partially correct in your assertion. Unfortunately most of what you said was wrong. First of all 4 unsportsmanlike conducts DURING a match in progress would result in a wrestler’s disqualification from THAT MATCH, not the tournament itself. So you are wrong there. Also a wrestler need not get 4 conduct calls on them to be DQ'd from the match. The DQ comes after the 4th penalty in the penalty sequence happens. SO in this case wrestler A could have had 3 locked hands, and then he shoves his opponent as they go out of bounds. He is then given an UC which would effectively terminate the match. That wrestler would be DQ'd from the match but not the tournament.
Now UC's NOT DURING THE MATCH are different. In this case once again you are wrong because it takes TWO UC's by the same wrestler to be DQ'd from the tournament, not 1 as you asserted.
Now let’s take this a bit further to completely iron out the situation. NFHS rule 7-4-2 states...
Unsportsmanlike conduct involves physical or nonphysical acts and they can occur before, during or after a match. It includes, but is not limited to, such acts as failure to comply with the direction of the official, pushing, shoving, swearing, taunting, intimidation, baiting an opponent, throwing headgear or any other equipment, spitting and the clearing of the nasal passage in other than the proper receptacle, repeatedly dropping to one knee to break locked hands, indicating displeasure with a call, failure to keep shoulder straps up while on the mat and failure to comply with the end-of-match procedure.
Now as it relates to this situation IF the wrestler who was ejected (Fisher) was committing any of these acts, which has been proven that he did (taunting, intimidation, and baiting were all mentioned). Then he was in fact being unsportsmanlike and would get the call on him. However here is the last sentence of the above rule that is the MOST important part.
Continuing acts of unsportsmanlike conduct or any unsportsmanlike conduct may be construed as flagrant misconduct.
WHICH MEANS, that if the wrestler continued to act in an unsportsmanlike way after being called for UC then the referee has the discretion to call such acts FLAGRANT, which as you know means automatic ejection from the tournament on the first offense.
Putting this all together... In this situation it was not necessary or required for the official to sit there and give 4 UC's to the kid when he would not desist his actions after being cautioned. He was given a FLAGRANT misconduct for continuing his actions after the initial event and THAT is why he was ejected.
So after that long explanation for something that is really actually quite simple I hope that you have all gained a better knowledge of the actual rules and not the ones you want to skew to your side.
On a personal note...
Where was the Goddard coach in this whole situation? Please let me state first that I am not placing any blame on him for this situation, because I know him and respect him. Ultimately it should have been him out there controlling his kid. He should have been the first person to let his guy know what he was doing was not acceptable. I know that my high school coach would have pulled me out of the tournament himself if I had ever performed an act like that. In fact he almost did my junior year at state and I gained even more respect for him after that, and it never happened again. This was an ugly situation for sure, and as usual people on here are quick to blame the officials for something that happened. I wouldn't have a problem with people being critical of officials IF they were actually stating real rules and if they actually knew what the rule was and how it’s interpreted.
In the future please be mindful of the things you post on here, because it looks foolish when you make erroneous posts.