Well, the NFHS has recently released their new rules for my main passion recently. Here are my comments to these rules changes.
The time sequence for the offensive wrestler in assuming the offensive starting position was standardized with the addition of a note to Rule 5-20-5. First, the wrestler must set the knee(s) and feet. Second, the wrestler must place the palm of one hand on the navel. Third, the wrestler must place the palm of the other hand on or over the near elbow. Fourth, the referee shall pause momentarily before starting wrestling. This rule change is meant to provide consistency for coaches, wrestlers and referees. While each action is currently standard practice, there has not been a written sequence of those events in the NFHS Wrestling Rules Book.
This new procedure now mirrors the same NCAA procedure for assuming the offensive starting position, colloquially known as “referee’s top.” First, this should eliminate most cautions given by the referee due to improper starting position, with the obvious exception of the top wrestler forgetting to cover in the correct order, which I have seen happen even in the collegiate level. This is where the referee needs to be proactive in quickly reminding the top wrestler of the order in which to cover before he/she assumes referee’s top.
Second, this also eliminates most potentially advantageous (and unfair) starts for the top wrestler, such as doing the quick bump on the opponent’s hips before the whistle – a commonality at the collegiate level before they instituted this new rule two years ago.
This is a good rule to have, and it should help make life easier for the wrestlers, coaches, and wrestlers.
With an emphasis on sportsmanship, the committee approved two rules changes meant to encourage sportsmanlike conduct by wrestlers and coaches. An addition to Rule 6-7-1c6 states that an unsportsmanlike act that occurs at anytime during the match shall take precedence over the first points scored in the regulation match in determining choice of position in the ultimate tiebreaker. So the wrestler whose opponent has received an unsportsmanlike conduct penalty at any time during the match will now have choice of position in the ultimate tiebreaker.
THIS should be interesting. When I think about it, though, it seems to logically follow from the tie-breaking procedure for dual meet scores. My questions are, what happens if multiple unsportsmanlike conduct infractions occur during the match? For example, what if both wrestlers have committed the same number of unsportsmanlike conduct infractions during the match?
In light of the new rule’s implications, does a coach’s unsportsmanlike conduct infraction (a team penalty) carry the same weight as if a wrestler committed one during a given match?
Finally, does this include coach misconduct committed during a match?
In addition, a change to Rule 5-31-1 removes the penalty for coaches whose wrestlers report to the scorer’s table not in proper uniform, not properly groomed, not properly equipped or not ready to wrestle.
Make up your mind, NFHS!
The addition of Rule 7-1-5w makes a back flip from a standing position an illegal maneuver. The rule was added as an effort to minimize risk to all wrestlers.
I have already heard many people construe this as the backflip sometimes done by a winning wrestler after winning a big championship, say a state championship for instance. However, this is placed under “illegal holds” in the rules. Hence, the said backflip wouldn’t have any bearing on the match. What the NFHS should’ve done was to make this not as an illegal maneuver, but as unsportsmanlike conduct (even though this still wouldn’t have any bearing if done in a meet where team scores are not being kept).
The committee also addressed the issue of skin conditions. A revision to Rule 4-2-3 allows an on-site physician to examine a wrestler with a particular skin condition without a physician’s release form immediately after the weigh-in. A new Rule 4-2-5 allows a physician’s release form for a non-communicable skin condition, such as a birthmark or eczema, to be valid for the duration of the season, with some stipulations.
I’m not going to say much here as Wisconsin does their own thing altogether.
Rule 4-2-1 will state that a wrestler’s hair in the front, in its natural state, shall not extend below the eyebrows.
Hopefully, the “too much hair in the front” issue will now be put to rest.
A change to Rule 5-15-3 gives referees the option to stop a match if there is no action at the edge of the mat and to restart wrestling in the center of the mat.
This is also already followed at the collegiate level. As long as referees do not abuse it, and coaches don’t allow for this new rule to be abused, this should help keep the action in the center of the mat where it belongs.
A new addition to Rules 5-25-6c and 7-6-6c provides rules support for the interpretation of stalling as “repeatedly creates a stalemate situation to prevent an opponent from scoring.”
Well, most everyone in the wrestling community infer this specific interpretation of stalling. I suppose this was added as the result of some blokes who try who argue around and past this inference to get off the hook after a controversial stalling call or lack thereof.
In Rule 6-6-1, when the wrong wrestler is given choice of position at the start of the first 30-second tiebreaker in overtime, the opponent will be given the choice at the start of the second 30-second tiebreaker. Previously, this would have been considered bad time.
This has also been inferred and made more clear in the rules for the same reason as the last one.
In Rule 7-4-1, the committee further defined unnecessary roughness by including “. . . a forceful slap to the head or face, and/or gouging or poking the eyes.”
This still needs more clarification. So ANY poke to the eyes, even unintentional, is now considered unnecessary roughness? Of course, “forceful,” being a qualitative word, is always going to be argued and, ultimately, comes down to judgment.
