Freestyle and Greco used a new rule for out of bounds this year, similar to the "Real Pro Wrestling" of last season. The rule basically is if while on your feet if a wrestler goes out of bounds (any part of the body touches out of bounds) then the wrestler forcing the other out of bounds is awarded a point. When wrestlers are down on the mat I dont think it applies unless possibly a very obvious fleeing occurs.

I personally liked the rule and thought it made for alot more exciting wrestling and most people I talked to liked it also. It forces the wrestlers to center while wrestling and enables more action and more moves completed without going out of bounds and no points awarded as is the case now. I dont know if it is being considered for NHSCA Rules but it wouldnt surprise me to see it at least tested.

Does anyone know if it is being considered?

Any opinions on this rule, pro or con?

E'ville DAD,

I totally agree. :wink:

It forces you to wrestle in the center and not work the edge (stalling).

If you go to (any move) and they step out you get rewarded 1pt for trying.

Think about how many matches out come would have possible change with that rule.

It would be interesting to hear the logic why this is a bad rule and shouldn't be adapted.

The only reason it won't be is because the National High School Association won't change it because college hasn't.

Once college does then national high schools will follow, my opinion.

my son went to his first freestyle tourney this summer.  i haven't stayed up on freestyle rules over the years but i thought i'd be fine to coach him.....boy did this rule change things!  i like the rule a lot....once you're used to it.  his first match he lost (and kept him from making the top 2) because the kid was keen to this rule and as my son was circling the mat...he came close to the out of bounds line and the kid lunges at him and knock him out of bounds for an easy 1 pt.  before either of us could realize what had happened......5 seconds later, he lost another pt.  he lost that period, and therefore the match.  

anyhow, i think it's a great rule and really adds another level of strategy to freestyle.  kind of like making them wrestle above a pit of alligators or something.  very cool stuff!

E'ville DAD,

I totally agree. :wink:

It forces you to wrestle in the center and not work the edge (stalling).

If you go to (any move) and they step out you get rewarded 1pt for trying.

Think about how many matches out come would have possible change with that rule.

It would be interesting to hear the logic why this is a bad rule and shouldn't be adapted.

The only reason it won't be is because the National High School Association won't change it because college hasn't.

Once college does then national high schools will follow, my opinion.

it definitely keeps a kid from riding the out of bounds line...but even more than that....if you happen to be scrambling and not neccessarily intenitionally riding the line....you are in jeopardy of losing a point.  the really cool thing about this rule is you can pretty easily reverse this....IF a kid lunges at you to push you out....if you react quick enough and use his momentum to turn it around on him....you can actually take the point.  i seen a lot of kids doing this at our 1 freestyle tourney.

anyway, it's a cool added dimension to freestyle i think.  i'd like to see it in h.s.  we'll see what happens.

it was really cool in greco when a kid would be on the edge with his back to line, it encouraged alot of desperate throws, whether the throws were completed for full set of points didnt really matter, it was as much a war for out of bounds points as anything.

This is the first that I have heard of this rule other than in Sumo wrestling.

It seems that, while it would make for more interesting matches, you could have a strong, short, stalky kid with a low center of gravity take advantage of this rule.

I do, though, think it would be a fun change and add a whole nother level of technique to the sport.

I'm not sure where I stand on this topic, but I can think of one or two negatives.

1.  Wrestlers may play the edge more often, for the same reason they do now.  They can try a move at the edge if their opponent goes out of bounds now they score a point.

2.  Once again wrestling is getting away from the main objective of wrestlers. PINNING your opponent.  Wretling is becoming a sport where a mat is almost not needed any more.  Very few wrestlers wrestle on the mat anymore.  IMO this is where the most exciting wrestling occurs.

Other than that it makes it easier on the official because they will no longer have to call stalling for playing the edge of the mat.

it was really cool in greco when a kid would be on the edge with his back to line, it encouraged alot of desperate throws, whether the throws were completed for full set of points didnt really matter, it was as much a war for out of bounds points as anything.

eville dad, this is where i got a little confused on the rule.  my son scored a point in 1 match where he was near the edge, the kid was driving into him...and he made like a desperate effort to throw like you said.  my son actually hit out of bounds first.....i asked the ref after the match why my son was awarded a point....and he said that even though my son's back hit out of bounds first, that because he was trying to throw the kid (after the other kid was trying to push him out) that my son was awarded the point.  if this ref's interpretation of the rule is correct, this is the only problem i have with the rule.  a wrestler can be getting pushed out of bounds, and at the last second, turn his hips enough to make it appear he's attempting a throw, then he scores the point.  i think this will cause a lot of controversial decisions.  it could have just been this one ref's interpretation of the rule, but if he was correct....it's a very split second judgement call in my opinion.  imagine losing a sudden death match because of that!!!  WOW!

Plee,

good example of interpretation coming into play, its not perfect, there s still room for mistakes.  I think there is some consideration of a thrower being able to complete his move as they are going out of bounds. Im not 100% clear on this but I believe the thrower is allowed some continuation of the throw as they go out of bounds, but I would think if the continuation results in a successful throw then their would be a takedown awarded.

Another example of confusion with this is kids dropping to their knees to avoid out of bounds costing them a point. Its not perfect but better than the stalling calls we see now!

Overall what I saw of this rule it worked well!

eville dad, this is where i got a little confused on the rule.  my son scored a point in 1 match where he was near the edge, the kid was driving into him...and he made like a desperate effort to throw like you said.  my son actually hit out of bounds first.....i asked the ref after the match why my son was awarded a point....and he said that even though my son's back hit out of bounds first, that because he was trying to throw the kid (after the other kid was trying to push him out) that my son was awarded the point.  if this ref's interpretation of the rule is correct, this is the only problem i have with the rule.  a wrestler can be getting pushed out of bounds, and at the last second, turn his hips enough to make it appear he's attempting a throw, then he scores the point.  i think this will cause a lot of controversial decisions.  it could have just been this one ref's interpretation of the rule, but if he was correct....it's a very split second judgement call in my opinion.  imagine losing a sudden death match because of that!!!  WOW!

Based off all the summer matches we saw, it only happens from your feet.  Doesn't matter who start or finishes the move.

The first one to touch out of bounds: elbow, hand, knee, foot, head anything loses the point.

Tact's does become a factor and you have to be aware of your postion and his.

If you score the takedown and he your opponent goes out of bounds you DON'T get the extra point.

Coach Smith, has this every been discussed at the National level?

Plee,

good example of interpretation coming into play, its not perfect, there s still room for mistakes.  I think there is some consideration of a thrower being able to complete his move as they are going out of bounds. Im not 100% clear on this but I believe the thrower is allowed some continuation of the throw as they go out of bounds, but I would think if the continuation results in a successful throw then their would be a takedown awarded.

Another example of confusion with this is kids dropping to their knees to avoid out of bounds costing them a point. Its not perfect but better than the stalling calls we see now!

Overall what I saw of this rule it worked well!

Yea, i agree it worked well in the tournament i was at.  But everyone at that tournament (Harrison Ohio) that I asked about the rule (coaches & wrestlers) were still getting used to it...it was very new to most people there....i think as people get used to it...and like we've said use it strategically....it'll become somewhat controversial....oh well, it's not like there aren't other controversial judgement calls in our sport.  Ahhh....I can't wait.  How many more days until wrestling season?  ;-)

This year at the BigTen's at IU one wrestler would be completely out of bounds and the wrestler trying to score the td would, at some points, be on his belly working with his toes in bounds and until one of his 2 feet were out wrestling continued. It seemed to work. 

Based off all the summer matches we saw, it only happens from your feet.  Doesn't matter who start or finishes the move.

The first one to touch out of bounds: elbow, hand, knee, foot, head anything loses the point.

Tact's does become a factor and you have to be aware of your postion and his.

If you score the takedown and he your opponent goes out of bounds you DON'T get the extra point.

Coach Smith, has this every been discussed at the National level?

There has been no discussion at the national level. As Stated in this forum "It's to new" But it would be a good change to the rules.

This year at the BigTen's at IU one wrestler would be completely out of bounds and the wrestler trying to score the td would, at some points, be on his belly working with his toes in bounds and until one of his 2 feet were out wrestling continued. It seemed to work. 

You make a good point in college only one point of contact (foot) from either wrestler needed within the circle and they wrestle on.  It creates a larger wrestling mat.

Their lie the difference, how much space do you want to have.

Wow, I am actually a little disappointed that no one has said this is a bad idea, however, I respect all of your opinions. Look at the big picture, less actual movement on the mat, less space to wrestle, and more controversy.

I think this rule would be a VERY BAD change for wrestling. Here's why:

• More matches will be decided upon 'technical violations' as it would now be against the rules to step out first, even if you are attacking. There's no excitement there. Sorry. Boring.
  
• Who wants to see a state championship decided because someone stepped out of bounds? Please, give me a break. I'd rather see two guys in the circle fighting for a takedown, not shoving them accross the mat.
  
• Points could be awarded even though neither wrestler has really gained an advantage or performed an action.
  
• YOU ARE ADDING MORE POWER TO THE REFEREE. I'm sorry, I don't like the referee being the deciding factor of the match.
  

Why should my opponent be awarded a point if I am scrambling out of a takedown. Anyone remember watching Cooper/Metzker... these guys were all over the mat. One of the most exciting matches I've ever seen. This rule would have added a sour taste to the match... I'm pretty sure everyone will agree with me on this one. (However, the difference between scrambling and fleeing is not always so obvious.)

A wrestler could easily circle step one foot out of bounds but be setting up a very nice shot. Why penalize someone for trying to set up a takedown?

Do you know what a downblock is? Why penalize someone for taking a shot and being pushed out?

Controversy.Who actually hit out of bounds first? Why would you want the referee to have to make such a controversial call.. especially when you have such quick attacks and movements in wrestling. The eye can be deceiving.

Then why can't we use the collegian rules?

One foot with in the circle mat?

Considering we use alot of 32 ft mats and not all 40-42 footers.

Wow, I am actually a little disappointed that no one has said this is a bad idea, however, I respect all of your opinions. Look at the big picture, less actual movement on the mat, less space to wrestle, and more controversy.

I think this rule would be a VERY BAD change for wrestling. Here's why:

• More matches will be decided upon 'technical violations' as it would now be against the rules to step out first, even if you are attacking. There's no excitement there. Sorry. Boring.
  
• Who wants to see a state championship decided because someone stepped out of bounds? Please, give me a break. I'd rather see two guys in the circle fighting for a takedown, not shoving them accross the mat.
  
• Points could be awarded even though neither wrestler has really gained an advantage or performed an action.
  
• YOU ARE ADDING MORE POWER TO THE REFEREE. I'm sorry, I don't like the referee being the deciding factor of the match.
  

Why should my opponent be awarded a point if I am scrambling out of a takedown. Anyone remember watching Cooper/Metzker... these guys were all over the mat. One of the most exciting matches I've ever seen. This rule would have added a sour taste to the match... I'm pretty sure everyone will agree with me on this one. (However, the difference between scrambling and fleeing is not always so obvious.)

A wrestler could easily circle step one foot out of bounds but be setting up a very nice shot. Why penalize someone for trying to set up a takedown?

Do you know what a downblock is? Why penalize someone for taking a shot and being pushed out?

Controversy.Who actually hit out of bounds first? Why would you want the referee to have to make such a controversial call.. especially when you have such quick attacks and movements in wrestling. The eye can be deceiving.

Bravo Mathound:

I was thinking on similar lines when I posted my opinion.  Since eveyone was positive about this change I thought it was just me being oldschool and not wanting change (I've been acused of this many times).

I agree that the negatives that you listed outweigh the positives of this rule change.  One of the things I like about folkstyle/high school wrestling over freestyle is that there is not as much stopping of the match.  No slip throw restarting, no restarting after 15 seconds on the mat, and now stopping when someone steps one foot out of bounds.

Wow, I am actually a little disappointed that no one has said this is a bad idea, however, I respect all of your opinions. Look at the big picture, less actual movement on the mat, less space to wrestle, and more controversy.

I think this rule would be a VERY BAD change for wrestling. Here's why:

• More matches will be decided upon 'technical violations' as it would now be against the rules to step out first, even if you are attacking. There's no excitement there. Sorry. Boring.
  
• Who wants to see a state championship decided because someone stepped out of bounds? Please, give me a break. I'd rather see two guys in the circle fighting for a takedown, not shoving them accross the mat.
  
• Points could be awarded even though neither wrestler has really gained an advantage or performed an action.
  
• YOU ARE ADDING MORE POWER TO THE REFEREE. I'm sorry, I don't like the referee being the deciding factor of the match.
  

Why should my opponent be awarded a point if I am scrambling out of a takedown. Anyone remember watching Cooper/Metzker... these guys were all over the mat. One of the most exciting matches I've ever seen. This rule would have added a sour taste to the match... I'm pretty sure everyone will agree with me on this one. (However, the difference between scrambling and fleeing is not always so obvious.)

A wrestler could easily circle step one foot out of bounds but be setting up a very nice shot. Why penalize someone for trying to set up a takedown?

Do you know what a downblock is? Why penalize someone for taking a shot and being pushed out?

Controversy.Who actually hit out of bounds first? Why would you want the referee to have to make such a controversial call.. especially when you have such quick attacks and movements in wrestling. The eye can be deceiving.

Mathound

Good Post, this is a good discussion about this rule, good and bad!

You make some very good points but I dont agree that all are the way it would be. I liked the rule and to your points heres why:

This rule actually reduces the decisionmaking by the referee, it reduces the judgements calls for fleeing the mat and the stalling calls from the refs, which is probably the most poorly applied call in HS wrestling.

The OOB's call is not a hard call to make as it may seem, sure there will be some close calls that are  hard to make, but for the most part its usually obvious if someone stepped out of bounds or not, of course this was used in freestyle and having 3 refs to depend on, it would undoubtedly be tougher with just one ref as is the case in most HS matches. 

This rule actually creates alot more action and results in fewer stops, because the wrestlers are so aware of staying in bounds to avoid giving up points.

Scrambling out of bounds (a form of fleeing the mat) is minimized, there are still plenty of scrambles but wrestlers have to be much more aware of where they are on the mat and they try to scramble inbounds. You can still scramble out of bounds but you will be giving up a point, (better than giving up two) and the wrestler initiating the action for the takedown is awarded a point for his efforts encouraging more aggressive wrestling, which I like alot. Thats probably the best aspect of this rule is it encourages aggressive wrestling and discourages passive wrestling.

How many times have you seen a close match get really boring because the wrestler with the slight lead only blocks and avoids wrestling. This rules forces the kids to wrestle alot more.

As for a downblock, you can still do it of course and you will see more of it to avoid being moved by your opponent, but you better know where you are on the mat. This rule also really keeps the defensive wrestler from just sprawling and holding on, it forces action to score or at least circle to stay on the mat. Again awarding the wrestler initiating the action to push his opponent out of bounds or force movement and creating action to force the defense to stay in bounds.

Well now we have the pros and cons. I think the more it is used in Freestyle and Greco the more it will become obvious if its a good idea or not.

This is a great thread topic and both Mathound and Eville Dad have posted some very solid arguments.

I'm, however, going to have to agree more with Mathound due mainly to the fact that the more rules there are the more the referee comes into play, which causes more contreversy.

Lets keep it simple :-D

well i rember one time the out of bound rule came in good fo ozzy parker he went out of bounds practically ran out from howard and got the call so it helps and huts there would be a differnt state champ at 130 pounds if not for that one

    like any new rule (if it becomes a rule) it will take time to get use to it.  Being the ancient one I have trouble with change.  Heck I still don't like the option of picking neutral in the second and third period.  :?

    I do side with Mathound however before I could pass full judgment on this rule I would need to see it in action.  But I am bias because I've never liked freestyle either and anything that makes folkstyle/high school wrestling close to freestyle I'm against.

I am actually yet to see this rule implemented, even in the freestyle form. I would obviously want to see it, these are just my initial thoughts. I'm not closing the door completely and saying its a terrible thing before I ever even see it, but I immediately see how it could DRASTICALLY affect the outcome of the match.

I would like to see how wrestlers react near the edge of the mat and how much more action there is when they are about to step out.

I am actually yet to see this rule implemented, even in the freestyle form. I would obviously want to see it, these are just my initial thoughts. I'm not closing the door completely and saying its a terrible thing before I ever even see it, but I immediately see how it could DRASTICALLY affect the outcome of the match.

I would like to see how wrestlers react near the edge of the mat and how much more action there is when they are about to step out.

i can totally see where you are coming from....this is an interesting thread.  i think if i had read about it before i seen it my reaction would be exactly like yours and grappler-of-old.  i hated this rule when my son lost 2 quick points, and therefore a match because we were not prepared for this aspect of freestyle.  it just seemed like such a cheap way to score 1 point.  it's still too new for me to say I LOVE this rule.  but it took 1-2 matches before my son got the hang of it.  it really did seem to encourage more action near the lines.  AND....a kid who lunges at someone to score that easy 1 point by pushing his opponent out of bounds, will be off balance and is therefore vulnerable to a wrestler quick enough to throw them...or to use their momentum to take the point.  i think once you get past the initial shock of these quick and easy points....it just adds a little more flavor to the match.  in my own experience with this rule...my son was pushed out of bounds twice in the first period, and lost the period 2-1.  he then lost the match, 2 periods to 1.  when he was pushed out of bounds, his opponent was stronger than him...and he was backing up towards the lines so he could scramble out of bounds if he was in a tight spot.  the other kid just made a good "head's up play" as most coaches in other sports would say....by the 2nd period, my son realized he couldn't get away with that anymore, and he wrestled harder, and kept the match in the center of the mat.  that's really what the rule is for if you ask me.  it would be very interesting to me to get a ref's opinion on this rule.

I'll give my 2 cents as a part-time official.  I personally like to see matches with what I'll call flow.  I don't like constant stopping and starting.  Do you stop the match to award the point?  If so, I can see a lot more of the stopping and starting.  And kids pulling up kneepads or adjusting headgear.  I also think you would have a lot of coaches teaching techniques that don't encourage wrestling, but playing the line and scoring on over-aggressive opponents.  Which is not the direction that I think we want to go with the sport.

And along the lines of what Mathound says, would we want to see a Courtney/Banks rematch decided by one pushing the other off the mat?  I don't think so.

I'll give my 2 cents as a part-time official.  I personally like to see matches with what I'll call flow.  I don't like constant stopping and starting.  Do you stop the match to award the point?  If so, I can see a lot more of the stopping and starting.  And kids pulling up kneepads or adjusting headgear.  I also think you would have a lot of coaches teaching techniques that don't encourage wrestling, but playing the line and scoring on over-aggressive opponents.  Which is not the direction that I think we want to go with the sport.

And along the lines of what Mathound says, would we want to see a Courtney/Banks rematch decided by one pushing the other off the mat?  I don't think so.

i completely agree i wouldn't want to see courtney/banks decided by one pushing the other off the mat...come to think of it, that's a lot like Tommy Storms getting pushed back by Roy Gibbs and getting called for stalling in OT to lose in the state finals.  ;-)  that one stunk (IMHO). 

however, i really don't believe you would see more match stoppages...the reason is, right now kids have very little incentive not to scramble out of bounds.  if it's very obvious, they can get called for fleeing the mat.  but with this new rule, i think you would see wrestlers fighting to stay AWAY from the out of bounds.  especially in tight matches.  i think the impact of this rule would be that both wrestlers would work harder to stay in bounds more and to circle in the middle instead of hanging out near the line and when they get in trouble, sprawling out of bounds.

as a ref, don't you tell wrestlers to "work towards the middle"?  this rule would help enforce this.

that's a lot like Tommy Storms getting pushed back by Roy Gibbs and getting called for stalling in OT to lose in the state finals.  ;-)  that one stunk (IMHO).

Plee:  This seems to be a sore topic for you. :evil: :-D

I remember the match myself.  I'm not saying I agree with the call, but I knew it was going to happen. C'mon the past aint gonna change 

JK I couldn't resist.  :evil:

Plee:  This seems to be a sore topic for you. :evil: :-D

I remember the match myself.  I'm not saying I agree with the call, but I knew it was going to happen. C'mon the past aint gonna change 

JK I couldn't resist.  :evil:

I considered referring to the same match myself as I knew it would find a special place for a lot of northern Ky guys out there.  FYI, I was okay with the call myself, but was a bit biased.

I also was bias. 

Sorry pee, but I was rooting for Gibbs also.

Great kid, and had a bum shoulder in the finals. (That is if my memory is correct, remember us old guys sometimes have memory loss) :-o

I also was bias. 

Sorry pee, but I was rooting for Gibbs also.

Great kid, and had a bum shoulder in the finals. (That is if my memory is correct, remember us old guys sometimes have memory loss) :-o

You are correct.  He had a separated shoulder.  It happened in the semis when he spanked Pat White, prior year state champ from Hopkinsville.

Plee:  This seems to be a sore topic for you. :evil: :-D

I remember the match myself.  I'm not saying I agree with the call, but I knew it was going to happen. C'mon the past aint gonna change 

JK I couldn't resist.  :evil:

grappler-of-old, i can't believe you were rooting for a non-nky guy.  i used to like you.  i knew it was going to happen too....in all honesty, tommy stalled a bit in that match, no question.  i think the warning was the right call...but in the end, gibbs shot, tommy sprawled and maybe backed up 6 inches...and got nailed for stalling.  terrible call.  BUT....gibbs charged at him, because he knew storms had a stalling call...and tommy should have anticipated that.

since we're bringing up gibbs sore shoulder, tommy was a natural 125, and could have easily, easily cut to 119....and most likely would have won either of those weight classes without breaking a sweat...but stayed up for the good of the team.  Gibbs was a big 130 lber.  not taking nothing away from him, he was a great wrestler and beat another great wrestler.

I also was bias. 

Sorry pee, but I was rooting for Gibbs also.

Great kid, and had a bum shoulder in the finals. (That is if my memory is correct, remember us old guys sometimes have memory loss) :-o

Ahhhhh Yes, the OLD I had a bum shoulder excuse.....a classic...if you lose, it was because you dislocated your shoulder....if you win, you are a legend!!  ;-)  I think Gibbs was just fine in the finals.  I can't take anything away from either of them.  It ended up being a great match, it just didn't have the end result I was hoping for.

Grappler-of-old, can't believe you broke ranks and rooted against a N. Ky guy. 

Man how could you not root for a kid who's mother was into the matches so much?  I can still hear her "C'mon Rooooy" in that Southern drawl.  :-D

Plus Tommy beat up on one of my boys the year before.  :x

All kidding aside, Tommy and Roy were both great kids.  I just wanted Roy to finally get a title. Tommy already had 2.  To bad they had to be in the same wt. class.

Man how could you not root for a kid who's mother was into the matches so much?  I can still hear her "C'mon Rooooy" in that Southern drawl.  :-D

Plus Tommy beat up on one of my boys the year before.  :x

All kidding aside, Tommy and Roy were both great kids.  I just wanted Roy to finally get a title. Tommy already had 2.  To bad they had to be in the same wt. class.

yes, very true....i can't feel too sorry for tommy after he won it twice.

Soooo, yes, I'm glad we are all on agreement that an automatic out of bounds point is a bad idea.

:evil:

hang on now mathound, thats a might big "we" in your last post!

I happened to like it and would be in favor of at least trying it at the high school level to see how it works out.

In all honesty until you see a few matches using the rule you just cant appreciate how it helps the integrity of the match by making the wrestlers maintain an honest effort to work hard for points and reduces stalling and going out of bounds to stop the clock and to avoid giving up points. I really think once you saw it in action you would like it too. Most coaches I talked to at the tournaments this summer liked the rule.

I respect everyones opinion pro or con and if used on a trial basis I may not like it for HS folkstyle afterall,  but I would be voting "yes" for at least giving it a try.

I've been holding my comments about this subject, But I agree with Eville dad, I also Refereed over the summer with the new rules. In Freestyle you had very little OOB calls. They stayed to the center. Now greco was a different story. Many matches were decided by going OOB. I think it just makes a wrestler more aware of where he is on the mat.

Another negative I can see is some teams taking huge advantages of this rule. 

Woodford (Whom in my opinion already plays the edge of the mat) would take full advantage of this rule and continue to play the edge, just come up with a technique of sending their opponent OOB. I would also think that Wayne would also take advantage of this.  This may sound like I'm ragging on these teams but it is actually a complement.  There coaching staff will take this rule break it down and come up with ways to use it in their favor.

Think of this 10 seconds left in the match up by 2 points.  Go to the edge of the match allow your opponent to charge you.  You either gain another point by using his momentum or you step OOB and give him 1 point.  Kinda like locking hands when your up by 2 with 3-5 seconds left on the clock.

What is next? slip throws?

I've been holding my comments about this subject, But I agree with Eville dad, I also Refereed over the summer with the new rules. In Freestyle you had very little OOB calls. They stayed to the center. Now greco was a different story. Many matches were decided by going OOB. I think it just makes a wrestler more aware of where he is on the mat.

Eville Dad & kdsmith27....EXCELLENT points.  kdsmith, that's exactly what I think would happen if they put this in place in h.s.  Wrestlers would avoid the out of bounds lines.  They would wrestle in the center.  I'd be interested in seeing how it would work.

I think of this debate as if let's say there was not a "locking hands rule" currently.  If someone came out and said, you shouldn't be able to lock hands....i think the top guy should be penalized 1 point for that.  Of course there would be some resistance.....people would bring up how bad it would be if you lost a state finals by that.  Well, wrestlers rarely lock hands because...it's against the rules.  Wrestlers & coaches will adapt.  The natural adaptation in my mind would be to stay in the center of the mat when on your feet.

Grappler,

I understand your comments but isnt that what wrestling is about learning to overcome your oppenent and think of how exciting those last 10 seconds will be when both wrestlers are scrambling to score or not give up points. But honestly I dont remember that it was much of an issue in the last seconds of a match because the kids quickly learned not to get beat by it.

Interesting discussion, if you want to see the rule in action I think it will be utilized in the Real Pro Wrestling season.

Evile:

It was used in Real Pro wrestlings 1st season.

I wasn't sure I liked it then.

I was trying to get it back on topic.  :roll: Glad to see it worked.

Now... I don't think the problem here is the fact that people are not wrestling in the middle of the mat. The problem is, wrestlers aren't given enough space on the edge and its a bad habit of high school wrestlers not to fight the takedown but work out of bounds (and this is really easy to hide and do in high school).

I like the college rule... you're in bounds until no single body part is in the circle. You get more fluid motion. You can't flee that mat. You'll be called for even thinking about it. Referee's need to be strict on this and coaches need to educate their wrestlers in these situations. Even in a defensive position you need to attack and fight the takedown and not just turn away out of bounds. This should cost you a point... You don't see this type of reaction in college wrestling. The fact that you cannot simply get two feet out of bounds for a restart in college is a huge difference...

Then again, I'm still yet to see it...

I like the push-out rule.....And I'll admit that we have in the past and still do teach our wrestlers to work the edge...What I like best about the rule is .....the aggressive wrestler is given more opportunities to score points....From our stand-point the rule has worked in our guys favor alot more than it has worked against us......as for having it used in folkstyle I'm neither for or against it right now....I feel if stalling was called more consistently you really don't need the push-out rule.....Just my humble opinion....

i would love this as a rule i hate when guys stall up on me