I have a question for discussion and clarification. I was "very kindly expressing" to an official (who did a great job this weekend, by the way!) that the top wrestler was hooking and sitting on our ankle (my wrestler was on bottom). He did this for a large majority of the period. My claim was that this should be considered a stall tactic and called similar to holding on to the ankle with a hand. I have seen it called this way before, but not always.

So, I just wanted to know what other thoughts were on this situation. Should this be a stall warn? Opinions...

Another situation, my wrestler was on top in a spiral ride. The bottom wrestler was in a tripod. Neither wrestler was improving or moving, but top man was busted for a stall warning.

I think top wrestlers too often are nailed for stalling when really the bottom wrestler is not "wrestling aggressively" or legitimately hitting scoring attempts either. I find this unfair, especially when top man is out to side, hitting scoring attempts, making good efforts to: a) be off hips and give opportunities, and b) trying to lock up and turn scoring holds. I see this happen a lot. It is a recurring gripe I have.

I would like to see officials ask themselves one question on a stall, which wrestler is guilty of not working to score. If neither, then stalemate. A very good college ref from Kansas (Mr. Jim Ramirez) once gave me some great advice....he said if one wrestler CAN improve and is choosing to not, he is stalling. If neither wrestler can improve, then it is a stalemate. I thought that was a very good rule of thumb to look for.

Thoughts.....

This is for healthy discussion only, I mean no disrespect or to call anybody out. I think all officials do a great job, even when us coaches are yelling at you! Keep up the great work. Discussions like this help us ALL learn.

Kit:

I've wrestled, read the rules, bought the books, watched tapes, studied the sport, talked to coaches, talked to officials, and studied it all some more. You know what conclusion I came to? Stalling is in the eyes of the beholder. Its never called enough or its always called too much. Depends who's ox is getting gored. Is hooking the ankle stalling? Sure it is, unless the guy is working for the fall. Is a spiral ride stalling? Of course it is, unless he's working for the fall. Is tripoding stalling? Absolutely, unless its an effort to escape. My view is that most wrestlers stall as much as they can as often as they can and some are masters at faking action. If a ref called "stalling whenever it occurs" my guess is that it would be rare for a match to be decided by anything other than a disqualification. Probably the same result if fleeing the mat got called according to the rule, too. You figure out how to get stalling consistently and routinely called, and how to get the coaches to accept stalling calls without the bawling, you have my vote as Coach/Official of the Century. I have one idea...base post-season assignments for officials on the number of stalling points awarded during the regular season....

Defref,

Good points in your post.

Stalling is subjective, true, but perhaps not as much as you imply. If it all comes back to the simple question, "is this wrestler making legitimate scoring efforts"...then perhaps more stall calls would be issued in some situations, and less in others. And perhaps the stalemate could be used more to stop "non-wrestling" situations.

But because of its potential subjectivity, and because of its crucial importance in many matches, it is a great situation to discuss, isn't it?

If our hope is for all to have calling stalling perfected, then maybe discussing may be waste of time. But if the goal can be for improvement of determining stalling situations, then discussions like this can be extremely worthwhile. At least I hope so, anyway.

And I disagree with this comment: "My view is that most wrestlers stall as much as they can as often as they can and some are masters at faking action. If a ref called 'stalling whenever it occurs' my guess is that it would be rare for a match to be decided by anything other than a disqualification."

I believe most wrestlers are out there truly attempting to win matches and score points. Perhaps some of us as we get older forget how difficult it actually is to score/finish points against quality opponents. Your view seems very pessimistic in regards to the effort the kids are giving.

I don't think stalling should be completely "in the eyes of the beholder." I think we are all better off if we have some good guidelines to use. And I propose one, be it good or not, and offer another another ref shared with me. Whether they are good or not, I don't know, seeking feedback.

I am not looking at a Coach/Official of the Century award, just wanted to discuss a stall situation to see what some other thoughts were. Perhaps some good points could convince me otherwise and I am missing a good point of view, that is all. Or maybe some officials could see a point of view and take it into consideration.

Perhaps it was inappropriate for me to post the question, if so, I apologize. My intentions were good. I tried to be clear that I didn't mean to call anyone out and I am supportive of the job refs do. I have officiated and I very much appreciate (but don't always "enjoy") hearing thoughts on calls I made or didn't make, the feedback helps me get better. I often seek them out, as do many refs I know, and this is good.

Moderators, please delete my post if out of line.

Stalling is to wrestling as is the block vs charge call in basketball or the offensive vs. defensive pass interference in football.

Couple things to keep in mind:
Is the bottom man able to do anything: base up, sit out, stand up, etc. or is he being overpowered by the top guy.
Is the top guy really working for a fall?

Those are the two questions I ask myself when I'm looking at them wrestle...

I also look for other things such as:
Does one wrestler keep looking at the clock vs. working?
What exactly is the wrestler trying to do with a move?
Do I know the move he'd throwing and why it's being applied?

I look at the action and I look at the spiral ride as doing, but not limited to, breaking the bottom guys down the throw other pinning combonations on him for the fall, twisting straight into a NF situation (since a 1/2 nelson is part of the move), trying to load them up for a possible stack??? I've seen some teams use the spiral as a ride/stalling and never move towards anything else, but when I pop them for stalling, I get the ol' "but he was off the hip..." excuse!

Riding the ankle does, in my opinion, two things:
Prevents the bottomman for getting away and could very easily become stalling,
Used in a 3/4 nelson stack.

Now you get into the whole discussion of an earlier thread of "coaching" if you use a general comment of "Action" or "Improve your position", etc. Any ref that being going to the KWOA clinic for the last few years has heard this approach of general comments said by the ref to stimulate wrestling/prevent stalling suggested by NCAA refs, evaluators, etc. in the spirit of preventative officiating.

Stalling is judgement. They key is consistency. If you're consistant in how you call it yourself, coaches and wrestlers will get used to it and know how to wrestle according to your interpretation of stalling.
In tournaments/duels when there's multiple refs,I usually ask the others how they call it or will call it so there some "levelness"/consitancy amoung the "crew" for the day/tournament.

I like the post, I wish more officials would post! I learn best through dialog and watching/listening from others.

"As soon as you think you know everything about something, you're dead and need to move on."

There is an excellent tape by Dave Frisch, an NCAA official, on stalling. It covers the topic well and gives lots or tips and suggestions on how to recognize, prevent, and call stalling. Every official should get a copy. I think its available through the Colorado Officials Association. But his suggestions are mostly universally recognized and quite well-known. If you follow his guidelines, the coaches around here go nuts. I know, I tried it for a year. I had clear criteria, consistently applied it, and it cost a lot of kids points, in their coaches' eyes. My calls made them shoot, stay in bounds, attempt escapes, and risk losing control because I required them to work for a fall. I thought the matchs were much more exciting but I think most coaches thought I was controlling, and perhaps deciding, the matches. It was not uncommon for me to have 2 or 3 stalling points in every match. And I am 100% certain that I was still not calling it enough but got tired of the bawling. So I gave up on calling stalling "whenever it occurs" and now, honestly, probably call it mostly "whenever it doesn't matter" which I think is the prevailing approach by most officials--they'll call it, but only if it isn't going to really affect the outcome of the match...pessismistic...for sure. Honest? I think so.

I know most kids are trying to win and score points. But I don't think that means they don't understand the value of stalling. Once a lead is secured, it really doesn't make much sense to keep putting yourself at risk, regardless of position. A three point lead can evaporate pretty quickly for an offensive wrestler if he allows an escape trying to pin his opponent. But its going to take a while to lose three points through stalling calls, particularly if he can make it look like he's trying something. "Good" wrestlers might not stall. But there are a handful of "good" wrestlers in any league that will put the coals to it and try to score falls for the sake of doing so, but there are a whole lot of average wrestlers that want to win and don't mind coasting to victory...and that's not a criticism. Most other sports reward stalling...you see it in football, soccer, basketball, and almost all other sports. Once in the lead, protecting the lead is a viable option. In wrestling, in theory, you are expected to continue to put yourself at risk despite building a lead. There was an article a few year's ago in the Quarterly discussing this very topic for wrestling.

But here's a tip...there is rarely a situation where if the wrestlers go out of bounds that stalling should not be called, given the emphasis in the rules to stay within the 10 foot circle and "make every effort to stay in bounds." If the action is going to the edge and then out of bounds, it is by definition stalling, almost in every situation. For me, it is an easy stalling call if the action stops because of an out of bounds. And its not an excuse that the action took them out, unless that action was pretty spectacular which is rare. They get to the edge by 1)leaving the 10 foot circle and 2)not returning to it. That is stalling, almost by definition. I have no problem with calling stalling in this situation and it usually puts an end to going out. It also keeps me from having to call fleeing...which really gets the coaches sqeaking....

Well I can't speak for other officials, but I must say that the stalling call is one of the easiest calls for me to make as an official. Through the thousands of matches I have officiated thus far I can't seem to recall any one situation where it was difficult for me to decide when and who to call for stalling.

In my opinion there is VERY little reason for a wrestler to be "sitting on an ankle” just by the very nature of its description it shouldn't be too hard to tell that that wrestler is trying to keep the other wrestler from moving. Somehow I don't think that keeping a wrestler from moving has anything to do with working for a fall. The only move that comes to mind where sitting on the ankle is effective in a pinning combination is the 3/4 nelson, where it is almost essential to have the ankle covered.

When I am looking for stalling here is how I assess it. I first look at the offensive man ( aka the top man ). Is he using a pinning combination move? Examples: Half Nelson, Power Nelson, Tilt, etc. Or is he is using a move that is not likely to score near falls or falls. Examples: Two on One Wrist rides without even moving off the hips to put pressure on the arm. Being off the hips doesn't automatically qualify the top wrestler for stalling, but there aren't very many moves you can turn a wrestler with without being off the hips. You can't get the leverage you need to turn someone without being off the hips which is why this is most often associated with stalling.

After that I look at the bottom wrestler. First is he lying on his stomach? Well if he is, is he being held there and overpowered, or is he just content to lie on the mat? Does he make an attempt to reverse or escape?

Now that I have looked at both then comes the decisions. If the top man is riding and the bottom man isn't making an attempt at reverse or escape, then a stalemate call is probably going to happen. At the same time I might verbally tell both wrestlers that they are not aggressively wrestling and that any further inaction is going to result in a stalling call. This is not "coaching" this is informing both wrestlers that they are skirting the rules and that penalties are forthcoming. Now if the top man is working for a fall, off to the side, etc. And the bottom man isn't attempting escapes or reverses, lying on his stomach and so on, and then a stalling call for the bottom man is probably going to happen. And the call comes regardless of the score. I don't care if the bottom man is down by 14 points, if he isn't moving then by definition he is stalling. The only exception to this is if he is being overpowered as Shane said. The obverse is this; if the bottom man is attempting escape or reverse and the top man continues to simply stop the move break him down and go straight to a rising technique aka Spiral Ride, Two On One, Arm breakdown, the most likely he is stalling and will be penalized.

So you see the call itself is really quite simple. The reason it seems the top man is called for stalling more often than the bottom is because as an official looks at the action it looks like the bottom man simply can't make any meaningful moves because the top man is executing moves which are, by design, meant to keep them from doing so, hence the name "ride". There is no riding time at this level of wrestling so there really isn't any reason to do it. Tell your wrestlers to keep moving and they shouldn't have any problem with stalling calls.

I won't go into the details about whether a wrestler who is winning a match should be trying to protect that lead. It makes perfect sense to do that, and there are ways to do it without looking like you are stalling. Unfortunately not too many kids at this level know how to do it, so they end up getting called. Fake shots, spiral rides, and things like that are the most effective means of thwarting a stalling call.

Sorry for the long response but it seemed necessary to explain what shouldn't be a difficult subject.

I thought the top guy needs to work to improve his position. Whether that be working for a break down or near fall points.
Sitting on the ankle to me is like throwing in the legs when the guy stands up and is looking for a stalemate. Do it once stalemate do it twice stalling. If neither wrestlers position improves when sitting on the ankle call stalemate or stalling. 30 seconds in the same position for me as a spectator is boring. It should be called the same all match not just in overtime. I see more officials who tend to make these calls quicker in overtime and they should have called it earlier in the match. Which in turn would have forced continued action in regulation - possibly eliminating overtime. Use the move to your advantage or lose it - change it up. On the other side of this coin - the guy on the bottom let his foot get hooked - do not blame the officials for that. I would suggest to my wrestlers if the official doesn't see it that way you had better find the edge and get a fresh start so the clock doesn't keep ticking. Be sure after a fresh start do not let him hook your ankle again. There are a few techniques that will definitely deter an ankle rider (sitting on it) from doing it again. Some of which can be extremely painful.

I wasn't trying to imply that Stalling is a hard call to make! I've called FB and BB and I've never had a tough time throwin the flag of PI or calling a foul, but I did have to study the rules, study the game and work on getting into position as well as trying to put myself in the position of the athlete and interpret their reasoning of the action (in this case, misaction)

Stalling is easy to spot and SHOULD be called more. Fleeing the mat is the same way. [Which, Jim Ramirez taught me that you decide who's avoiding wrestling/fleeing if there is space or not between the wrestlers. If there's space = bottom/front guys pulls the other out. If there's none = top/back guys pushing the other out...]

Refs that don't want to get the coach's feathers ruffled are the ones that make it hard on the refs that don't care and call it as they see it. If more refs would do the job they're hired to do and not worry about the politics or if they'll lose a post-season vote, I don't think the discussion of inconsistency would be there.

"Call what you see. See what you call!" Great advise I got from a real veteran when I first put on the stripes/target...

Stalling is one of those things that can drive a coach crazy.

I am all for getting the action moving and keeping the wrestlers moving for better position. I do have problem with how and why it is called sometimes. I noticed more then once this past weekend that the wrong wrestler was called for stalling. In one case their was a wrestler that was sitting on an ankle and had a tight waist and ankle ride- both ankles were tied up and the bottom man was dinged for stalling. Another case was in the Heavyweight bracket were a kid was sitting on the hips of his opponent and waiting for him to move- Honestly I felt the kid on bottom couldn't move because of the weight- of course I was not seeing what the official was seeing because the kid on bottom got called. There were plenty move but no reason to go on. I tihnk Stalling needs to be called and needs to be called on the wrestlers not trying to better his position. Everyone calls it differently- and that is the problem I see.

I think I know what stalling is and I think the other person feels they know what stalling is but when we see the outcome one of us is going to be surprised. If you question the official then all heck break loose and you are a bad person. I find it best to never question calls just realize you are never right - they are or they hold it against you and the kids forever. I wish they was a way to come together after the season and have coaches and officials get on the same page- better the sport for the kids

Well here is an idea. Why don't Kids Wrestling coaches attend the officials clinics and the KSHSAA rules meeting. That would give you a much better understanding of why officials call things the way that they do. As coaches you have no business trying to negotiate what is and isn't a rule in the rule book or how it should be interpreted. If that is what you would like to do then I suggest you become a certified official and officiate about 5 tournaments. I believe your tone will change real quick.

sitting on the ankle and looking to break bottom man down to his belly, looking for 3/4s, I think it depends on what the both of them are doing with their hands, while the top man is hooking or sitting on the ankle.

Kit, have your bottom man = outside stand up and elbow back into his chest to knock top man off balance and scramble from there.

As for stalling, acting like you are doing something is an art form, but working to improve can't do nothing but help you. I think we need to teach kids to wrestle or do more to get from position to position to hit moves. Moves are moves but the scrappers that get physical to get into position to hit moves are usually called dirty wrestlers, but then they are usually the ones that go to College because they know how to wrestle not just hit moves.

just a thought.

Tom Peterman

In regards to sitting on the ankle, if the bottom man begins kicking and crawling with purpose the top man will not be able to keep up to look for turns. In this position the top wrestler will only be showing that his efforts are in maintaining control while riding the ankle and not for setting up a turn/fall. In my opinion this should be called a stall.

If the top man is leaving the hips looking for openings and trying to create angles with either tilts, turns, or getting arms or holds then in no way should there be a stall. The top wrestler should be given the advantage of time in creating the turn if they are constantly looking and not just chasing the bottom wrestler. I think it also depends on how hard the top wrestler looks like they are working, their body language (do they look at the clock?), and any strange thing that a kid may do or say when they are on the mat to determine if there is a stall warranted.

But then what do we do with leg riders who "Cowboy" ride (ride with both legs)? Generally called a stalemate when there is no turn made.

Kit, I really like the "rule of thumb" on stalling that Official Ramirez told you. Thanks for passing that on. I do not envy the job of the official in making stalling calls and I appreciate that they do their best. There is no way I will always be satisfied while I am mat-side, but I will always respect that they have a tough job to do with "judgment" calls.

In the Spiral Ride/Tripod Stand-up situation I believe that the Spiral Ride has lost most of its effectiveness by the time the bottom wrestler has raised his hips. With exception of a few powerful moves from the Spiral on your feet (which are lower percentage than taking shots...i.e. step-through w/half) there are very few Spiral Ride advantages from riding it up on your feet. It now becomes the duty of the top man to bring the escaping wrestler back to the mat. In my opinion it is no different than the bottom man standing up and the top man riding around the waist from the side or behind.

Coaches "bawling"????? Jaded we are, mmmh? (input yoda voice)

I didn't mean for there to be a tone in my reply just voicing my opinion. It is my job to understand the rule to it full meaning and what ways some my interprete it. I free very strong that all coaches should know the rules and understand them.

I am sorry if I offerend anyone- wasn't what I was trying to do.

ok, how about this one. 2nd period, our wrestler chooses bottom tries several things to get away of course top guy just follows. They go off the mat and need to go back to the middle. Our wrestler stands up and the top guy latches on to the ankle and balls up. Our wrestler turns and is trying to get away but time passes and the ref calls stalemate. this happens 2 times in the second period. In the third period we were on the bottom and my wrestler starts out by standing up. The top wrestler latches on the ankle again and does nothing but ball up holding on. stalemate is called again in fact 2 times alone in the 3rd period. Finally after 2 period and 1 min 36 seconds the refs call a warning for stalling. Wow I was amazed at how this ranked wrestler could get away with doing nothing but holding on tight to an ankle for 3 periods and only getting warned with 24 seconds. Yes we were a little upset it was the semis and yes the other kid was seeded #2 we were #3 but come on why does it always have to be within the last 30 seconds of the match before they make them wrestle? The ref even yelled at me because I kept yelling out that the top guy needs to work. What else can we do. I did by the way tell the other 4 refs that the did a good job on calling stalling they really did call it on their mats. I guess my question is what can we do if a \ref allows this to happen. Our kid did lose the match 2-0.


Mel

Not much you can do- you have to play by the officials you have and an obvious answer would be to get on top early. First takedown works very well against stalling opponents-

Not the answer you wanted I understand but its a fact of life you deal with-

TheTiger, while you have good intentions I don't think that is a great idea. Stalling is not discussed in depth at any KSHSAA meeting and it will never be called the same as long as you have human involvement. It is judgement which requires interpretation. Honestly, stalling is too complex to really explain to kids under 10 years of age and unless completely blatant it should not be an issue. I have always hated the idea that officials think coaches don't know what they are talking about and vice versa. The simple fact is we have to have both or there will be no wrestling. I think a better idea would be to have kids clubs sponsor high school kids by paying their fees to become registered and to attend clinics. Our sport is in dire need of good young officials. Your post has a tone which I feel is detrimental to the sport. Every coach, wrestler, and official can read and interpret the rule book. Going to a few meetings and being on the mat doesn't make an official any more educated than a coach who goes to practice five nights a week, attends tournaments every weekend, and studies film to improve his wrestlers. Officials are the only paid professionals at a kids tournament so they should honor the coaches inquiries as attempts to learn and understand. At the end of the day the questions or debates will not change the outcome of the matches so be a patient listener, collect your check, practice and return another day.

Will,

I understand what you are saying. I also like your idea about having clubs sponser high school kids getting certified. What I won't change my opinion about is having coaches attend not just the rules meetings but the clincs. You are correct stalling is not an issue that is discussed in detail at the KSHSAA meeting, it is mostly to discuss rule changes and updates. HOWEVER the area rules meeting do and will. If you have ever go to one of the series 1 or 2 rules meetings you will almost always learn something that you didn't know or hear others opinions about topics. Even I learn something new everytime I go so I make it a point to attend. When you go to these area meetings its kind of a free flowing atmosphere and you are encouraged to ask questions. That would be the perfect time to bring stalling up and ask all the questions you can. Obviously these meetings are limited to an hour or two so you can't get everything in but at least its a start.

My hope is that maybe sometime in the next couple of years we could get the USAWKS board to sanction or at least sponsor a series of rules clincs, maybe 1 in every district, once or twice a year much like KSHSAA does. A few senior level officials would volunteer to conduct these in each district. Coaches and officials would attend and have an opportunity to discuss rules and how they are applied and interpreted. While I don't know if it would be possible or advantagous to require attendance it would be well worth the time. The people that attend could then take this knowledge back to their clubs and spread it to their other coaches. I believe this would exponentially decrease the amount of false assumptions that happen at tournaments as I see it. I know this happens alot because every time I referee I hear coaches say things like "Well his knee came down first" When their wrestler is called for a slam. And maybe other things like this. When I hear things like this I just can't believe that someone told them this and they believed it. The fact is that many coaches at the kids level have never actually read the NFHS rule book in its entirety much less own one. Perhaps USAWKS could start including these in the cost of the coaches card so that everyone has one.

I believe that if coaches in USAW had to take the NFHS test this would encourage them to read the rule book and explore it for themselves. I know that even as long as I've been officiating I still have to go through the book and look up answers at the beginning of the year to refresh myself. I also know there aren't very many officials no matter how long they have been in that can take the test, get all of the answers right, without looking in the book at least once. That is the point of the test and why it is open book, its not about how much you can recall from memory but to challenge you to come up with the right answer based on the rules.

I also believe that if USAW coaches would get themselves certified and officate some tournaments they would gain a HUGE appreciation for what officials do out on the mat. They would understand what its like to have coaches mad at you and why its annoying to have coaches at the table questioning a judgement call usually with no factual rule knowledge. You may not want to officiate another tournament as long as you live after the first one, but I bet you'll be a lot more quite the next time you go out to coach.

No Will, I don't mean to have a detrimental tone, my ideas are meant to spark curiosity in those that particpate in our sport and ultimatly make it better for all of us. I know that no official is perfect, myself included. I also know that sometimes coaches are right in the things they say because an official may just have made a mistake. But once its happened the only thing you can do is move on and hope that you coached your wrestler well enough to overcome adversity. Call me crazy but I honestly believe in my heart that there isn't one official who honestly goes onto a mat hoping to cost a wrestler a match. Even officials at the division 1 NCAA tournament make mistakes. The more we know as competitors,officials,coaches, and even fans will be better for all of us.

TheTiger,

EXCELLENT POST!!!