Vito Arujau And Michael McGee's INTENSE Back And Forth Battle 

Yeah it sure didn’t look like it to me either.

Definitely wasn’t should’ve gone to overtime

It college there’s no reaction time on rear stading. Once a hand touches it’s a takedown right away.

in that scenario the control comes before the takedown when Vito attained the rear-standing neutral control position and when he brought McGee to the mat he had to cut him loose by unlocking his hands per folkstyle rules at which point the 2 points for control+taking opponent down can be awarded but everyone is used to the reverse which happens 99% of the time where the takedown comes before controlling your oppenent

It wasn’t.

Just wrong timing for Vito honestly, RBY, Fix, Glory, and Lee are all blocks for him

@@jt519 feel like he does better in freestyle

@@jt519 Wouldn’t say Glory is a block

@@jt519 he can probably beat fix. We’ll see in the semifinals

@@jt519 not anymore

Mcgee walked or crawled backwards the entire first period. Should've been multiple calls

I think that's garbage I feel like you have to establish control and Vito didn't but anyways I like both wrestlers great match

Thanks for explaining that, I was seriously confused. Dumb rule but great match.

I believe, but I'm not certain, that the exception for reaction time is to prevent a defending wrestler from reaching down to briefly touch the mat every so often for balance while being controlled from behind. It also keeps it consistent with rising INTO the position from down on the mat, where the top wrestler maintains control (i.e. no escape awarded) as long as their hip lock remains. If the rear-standing neutral were not an offensive control position, it could be argued that the standing wrestler escaped. But hey, edge cases are edge cases for a reason.

There was no control at all. Bad officiating on the Refs part. Even the last takedown was too quick. He let Vito slide with several head starts.

@@lorenzomaddox8494 Again, you can think that hand touch takedowns are a bad rule, but the ref absolutely called this correctly. There's no doubt with how the rules are written.

*Should* have been 2 and 2. Lift and return takedowns from rear standing don't require control. As soon as the hand touches the mat, it's a takedown. Same situation between Dean and Laird. It's a new rule (either this year or last year), but that's the rule. I think it was adopted so guys can't just stall from rear standing. But, yeah.

@@cornprices1718 bah that was a bs call, so a person can’t roll out of rear standing?

@@professorxaviour3649 it wasnt a bs call. according to the rule, that was the correct call. you can call the rule bs, but the call was technically correct here. you can roll out of rear standing provided your hands dont touch the mat

Flo sponsored dual!

I could see Vito beating Fix there...and with RBY feeling like he's only about 90% in, I wouldn't write off Vito in that one either(and...frankly, wouldn't shock me to see McGee win the title...he's got ALL the tools).

@@scourge8097 McGee has it tough because he’s lost to all three multiple times. Fix and vito better stay on the same side of the bracket opposite RBY. Vito can definitely beat fix he’s a freak, but daton is a phenomenal wrestler. Vito vs RBY is a dream matchup in the finals

@@jbrowne9357 yeah vito is looking forward to wrestling them. I want to see fix vs vito in the semis, but we might actually get rby vs vito in the semis because vito just lost to sam latona. This will probably mess up his ranking. Vito is dangerous though and I won’t be surprised if we see him in the finals

MD against fix from vito and SV-1 from rby against mcgee

@@RU-vidpremiumgroupacct I’ve been saying Vito is a freak. My dream matchup in the finals came true! Haha Vito beat the piss out of Daton. McGee is clutch he beat him too, very legit

Fr

no, it's a logically consistent rule and without it the "rear-standing neutral control" position would count for nothing it would break Folkstyle

@@BasicGestalt what about a front headlock if you are one top and you end up in a front head lock you don’t give up a escape until they break it but if I do a front headlock from neutral and roll someone I don’t get the takedown

@@sethzimmerman4538 Control can occur before a takedown, such as in a headlock or read-standing neutral. If you enter into those positions from top-bottom, the offensive wrestler will maintain control with no escape. The difference is that by NCAA rules, reaction time is not afforded to the defensive wrestler in the rear-standing situation, where it is afforded to them in the front headlock. If you get a front headlock from neutral and stick em, you'll get 2 for the takedown and the swipes will start. But since the reaction time is afforded to the defensive wrestler from all other positions than rear-standing, a roll through will be permitted with no takedown awarded for flashing over his back. It's the exception to reaction time that allows for hand-touch takedowns to work under NCAA rules.

@@sethzimmerman4538 good question... when bottom is escaping your control but in transition you're able to hold onto him with a front headlock or even by his foot he hasn't fully escaped. And unlike the rear-standing neutral control, if from neutral you grab onto a front headlock you haven't fully controlled him yet... he might still even have your leg if he shot in doesn't matter how much you roll around while holding front headlock position it's a 50/50 scramble, your not getting your 2 until you prove that you have control with your front headlock by exposing his back for a count or pinning him with it but you better bridge hard lol

@@CrashAshes43 And it's logical too that reaction time is not afforded to the defensive man since the offensive man in a way has to cut him loose by unlocking his hands when he takes him down

Hey man I love your channel but I disagree with you here because if you attain rear-standing neutral control you have to unlock your hands when you take the defensive man down effectively cutting him loose that's why it makes sense that the defensive man isn't afforded reaction time because the offensive man has to let go of him upon taking him down. Imagine if rear-standing neutral control counted for nothing but it was still legal, can you see how that would allow for an indefinite limbo scenario? It would break folkstyle because there's no stalemate in that scenario, the only way to keep the action going is to reward the offensive wrestler for his control after he gets the takedown because that's when he has to let go of it anyways, but the defensive man knows ahead of time that when he hits the ground he will be released from the lock so his next move can be decided beforehand so his reaction time isn't needed and so it is not afforded to him in the rules. And if it's not a hand touch takedown then that would also allow for the defensive man to stall out the time by tripoding from a completely defensive position which couldn't otherwise be stalemated.

No

Possibly

The refs beat McGee

@@traviswillis1953 thank you!

Vito did have control by attaining the "rear-standing neutral control" position, he even showed off his control by hoisting McGee into the air but per folkstyle rules to keep the action going he had to cut McGee loose by unlocking his hands upon taking him down which McGee took advantage of beautifully

@@BasicGestalt it’s too fast to even tell the refs can’t even tell if anything touched!

@@professorxaviour3649 too fast?

The more I see it the more I am disappointed by the refs. With this no reaction time rule it should cut both ways. If McGee is truly taken down then where is the locked hands call? This is silly. They had a chance to correct a simple mistake with a correcting challenge and they doubled down on crap. I didn't care until 12 minutes ago and now I am livid. I hate the internet. Why do I do this?

as many of us have learned from the dean vs laird match earlier on in the season, a mat return from rear standing, even if it’s just a hand hitting the mat, is considered a takedown, and no reaction time is needed in that scenario. it didn’t make sense to me when i first heard about it, but the more i mull it over, the more it makes sense. the offensive wrestler should be rewarded for achieving rear standing from the neutral position, because it’s too easy for the defensive to bail out from rear standing

@@alovesupreme I personally don't feel like its just that easy bailing out of a TD, certainly without reaction time these days, yet awarding a TD to someone who can just fall to the side like that welcomes a wrestler to just lock hands when you are meant to look for control. Might as well cut someone as soon as you get behind them.

@@trevoraspinall9 i don’t disagree with you, it’s not a hill i’m dying on. i just mean i can see where the rule makers are coming from

@@alovesupreme i feel you. another point i have against these refs is that if the defender falls to their back like IMAR at 8:55 why would it not be a TD? I personally think it's not a TD but with how they were officiating Cornell v ASU it should follow through. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-K2mxTtDXFi0.html

how is that?

it worked because Vito had to unlock his hands upon taking McGee down thereby releasing his control that's why it's a no reaction takedown if you know your opponent has to let go of you when he takes you down you don't need to rely on your reaction time when determining your next move that's why it's not afforded in that situation, get it?

Definitely not

Vito's "standing-rear neutral control" allowed him to lift McGee into the air and take him down to the mat does that count for nothing? Per folkstyle rules, Vito had to cut McGee loose from his control as soon as he took him down by unlocking his hands, control position plus a takedown equals 2 points albeit usually it's in the reverse order of this scenario