WrestlingRasta

Leaving the mat is not a requisite for fleeing the hold, nor is a warning before a point is given. In the USWOA webinar it discusses three options to evaluate for negative wrestling. The second one categorizes fleeing the hold, and a caution 1. It clearly states that if there is sufficient time in the match a warning can be given first, but if insufficient time remains a caution and one should be offered. It’s important to understand that it goes beyond the black and white reading of the rule book, because the rule book is interpreted into however many different languages. The concept is key, and the concept here as it relates to this match is she was avoiding wrestling, at the very end of the matcha caution and 1 is warranted…..

Actually neither guilty nor not guilty, as it was not a criminal trial. It was a defamation lawsuit, for him saying she was lying and crazy when she claimed he sexually assaulted and raped her in an interview. The jury in the defamation lawsuit had to first answer if sexual assault and rape was proven, because if not, then there’s no grounds for the defamation. They found for sexual assault, but could not find for rape, because they could not prove whether it was just his finger or his penis that he injected into her. But, having found LIABLE for sexual assault, they then found him LIBALE for defamation. As a side note, post verdict the judge explained that the statute for proving rape was very thin and must include a sexual organ, hence not being able to tell if it was just his finger or not disallowed them from being able to find for rape. The judge then explained by all societal norms, rape is precisely what took place. Just wanted to clear up a few details from the trial that you won’t find on Hannity and Tucker.

We'll try it a little clearer: You mentioned "fondled her boobs, or something like that" (which, notably, leaves out the more vile act committed in that incident) You also mentioned 20 or 30 years to come out. BUT--here's the catch-- you only stated having a problem with one of those issues...not the other. So, again, you said what you said. Instead of trying to slippery out of it, admit it, and do better.

I have And Rousey does not have one sinlge boxing match of record.

Rousey is not, nor never was, a pro boxer.

Speaking of the twisting, I too, did not say you said. I brought out that you implied his actions were no big deal (which was sexual assault at a minimum) which is why I used words like "seem" and "apparent". Not going to go back and forth with you on a word play. You said what you said. That's an issue for you to deal with.

I did a step better, I quoted it, so there was no confusion.

You may want to look at series events that took place in between the sexual assault (at minimum) took place, and when the suit was filed.......particularly at a law that was not in place until recently, the passing of which allowed her to sue at the time she did. (Hint, they won't be talking about it on Hannity or Tucker). On a side note....you may also want to look at your apparent stance that it is more okay to sexually assault a woman than it is to come forward within your permissible timeline. Great stuff. MAGA!!

Well played...

nah....I noticed it awhile back talking to a buddy who's currenlty in the international scene, brought it up, noticed an uptick over last couple years. Pipeline through the coach or something like that can't remember exactly what it is.

I wonder if the fact that a man was killed after threatening the President and pulling a weapon on the FBI, and another woman arrested now for threatening to kill the judge in DC......will have any impact on the judge in GA when it comes to arraignment?

In a boxing match, Rhonda Rousey would not hold much of an advantage over any male who has done some boxing training. Striking was absolutley her downfall in mma. Now.....a grappling match....

You seem to brush it off and be okay with that. Wow. Disappointing.

Where do you read your news???

related to the last two letters in the last name of more and more athletes representing France.

If they are sponsored/part of the Russian military, I agree with you. If they are not, the athletes should not be punished, particularly in a venue promoting peace and goodwill. The vast majority of Russian are not in favor of how their government operates.

France has steadily been building a roster full of ev’s and ov’s over the last few years.

It’s a surf and turf Hump day…

They both got an awful lot of attention, which is part of the purpose of protest. Another part is breaking some eggs to make an omelette.

He’s getting a lot of play lately

Yeah, can agree to not necessarily like the call, but more so I see three different things she could have done at the end, any one of the three finishes off the match. So that said I’m not going to put the loss on a correct call at maybe a bad time. Feel very confident that everyone who is up in arms, if it was precisely reversed and she won in that manner, it would be absolutely deserved and we’re glad they went to review to get it right. (Many may not admit it but it’s the truth)

That is not all you hear, at all. What you hear are people whose job it actually is to investigate these things is they did not find level of fraud that would change the results of the election. There’s fraud by both parties committed in every election. Anyone with any level of sense knows that. Not to mention it’s just amazing to me that MAGA keeps crying about a stolen election.

Unfortunately for Mr. Trump, the Jan6 speech and 'beliefs' are completely irrelevant to all 91 of the felony charges against him. They are going to have to come up with a better defense.

They challenged for fleeing hold on that last five seconds. Tough way to make that kind of call......but she was on her bicycle.