Teen required to cut his dreadlocks before wrestling match.


ronntaylor

macrumors regular
Jan 16, 2004
185
1,447
Flushing, New York
Under the rules, wrestlers whose hair extends below their shirt collar are required to wear a hair covering. They are not required to cut it.
And he had a hair covering that this particular ref -- a ref with a racist history -- would not allow. I fault the coaches for making the teen decide in the face of this racist ref. They should've stood their ground and appealed the *******'s ruling.

Rules, when enforced arbitrarily, becomes tools for biased persons. He wrestled with his locs several times before this match. And if the style was truly in violation, the ref should have said so during the weigh in, not at the start of the match.
 

mgguy

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Dec 26, 2006
478
1,022
And he had a hair covering that this particular ref -- a ref with a racist history -- would not allow. I fault the coaches for making the teen decide in the face of this racist ref. They should've stood their ground and appealed the *******'s ruling.

Rules, when enforced arbitrarily, becomes tools for biased persons. He wrestled with his locs several times before this match. And if the style was truly in violation, the ref should have said so during the weigh in, not at the start of the match.
Two other refs agreed that the dreads as such were in violation of the rules governing the wrestling competition. The kid should have known what the rules regarding hair were beforehand and made sure that his hair, covered or uncovered, were consistent with those rules. If he did not agree or is unable to follow existing rules that apply to all competitors, he should not compete. I think that claiming racism in this situation is a bit much, wouldn’t you agree?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: jkcerda and raqball

OLDGUYWITHAHIFI

Suspended
Nov 14, 2018
235
345
It's my understanding that he did, but the ref insisted that he cut it or forfeit. I'm actually amazed that there are people posting here who are not on the kid's side. This story is horrific.
You are talking about political correctness very hot topic these days. Nobody really was there so they can’t say for sure what was said but they can sure offer opinions and depending on which side of the aisle you sit will depend on how horrific this story will appear.
 

ronntaylor

macrumors regular
Jan 16, 2004
185
1,447
Flushing, New York
Two other refs agreed that the dreads as such were in violation of the rules governing the wrestling competition. The kid should have known what the rules regarding hair were beforehand and made sure that his hair, covered or uncovered, were consistent with those rules. If he did not agree or is unable to follow existing rules that apply to all competitors, he should not compete. I think that claiming racism in this situation is a bit much, wouldn’t you agree?
Two refs that weren't at the event. And there is no rule demanding a hair cut instantly. He competed in several matches with the same hair style without issue. He had a covering in compliance with the rules. His coaches argued with the racist call. If this ref can't apply rules in an unbiased manner, he shouldn't be allowed to be a ref. The fact that he's banned now is a shame as he should have been banned already as he was known to harbor racist animus towards a peer.
 

yaxomoxay

macrumors 68040
Mar 3, 2010
3,606
24,516
Texas
Strange news, on both sides.
I remember talking to the son of one of my former coworkers, he was a state champion, and he told me about all the rules, including shaving, cutting hair... and showering! He told me they were very strict. However, if it’s true that the headgear was in compliance well, the kid might have a strong case.
I just would not choose a side automatically without knowing more.
 

mgguy

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Dec 26, 2006
478
1,022
My understanding from what I have read is that a head covering, if used, must fit tight and smoothy and not be to bulky or lumpy. My guess, from looking at his dreadlocks before they were cut, is that they could not be covered in the manner required.
 

JayMysterio

macrumors 6502a
Apr 24, 2010
665
12,027
Rock Ridge, California
Two other refs agreed that the dreads as such were in violation of the rules governing the wrestling competition. The kid should have known what the rules regarding hair were beforehand and made sure that his hair, covered or uncovered, were consistent with those rules. If he did not agree or is unable to follow existing rules that apply to all competitors, he should not compete. I think that claiming racism in this situation is a bit much, wouldn’t you agree?
Sigh.

As I've covered this elsewhere, it's interesting that this rates it's own separate thread about it. As I covered elsewhere, the issue was that throughout the season the young man's hair was NEVER an issue. It was only when this match came up, and THIS referee decided that the young man's hair was an issue. The young man did or did not have to agree to anything, because it wasn't an issue until suddenly at that very moment, even though he had headgear on. Headgear one would wear, because it has a cap for his dreads, to comply with existing rules. It's the referee's application at that particular instance that was NOT consistent with previous matches.

Where the racism part comes into play if any research had been done, is in the history of the referee. As he supposedly had a well reported incident that of using a racial slur at another official. This referee of course has caught a convenient case of amnesia because he claims alcohol was involved. Unfortunately for him, the reason it was well documented was because there were several eyewitnesses who remembered him getting body slammed from said official for using the racial slur, the offended official did report the incident, and both were considered to be suspended for their actions. They appealed & were not suspended.

So no, the racism angle isn't based solely on having the young man's hair being cut for no reason, it's aided by the man's own previous history, AND the seeming randomness of suddenly deciding that NOW that ONE time he took it upon himself alone to enforce a rule that hadn't been, despite having headgear. By placing the young man in a situation where he had to choose forfeiting a match & possibly hurting his team, or his hair which maybe tied to his identity, is the reason why so many have reacted they way they have to this situation.

Also as far there being two other refs agreeing, I've yet to see such a thing posted anywhere. In all the articles I've read no other referees have been mentioned, let alone agreeing at the time with the referee's decision.
 

yaxomoxay

macrumors 68040
Mar 3, 2010
3,606
24,516
Texas
Sigh.

As I've covered this elsewhere, it's interesting that this rates it's own separate thread about it. As I covered elsewhere, the issue was that throughout the season the young man's hair was NEVER an issue. It was only when this match came up, and THIS referee decided that the young man's hair was an issue. The young man did or did not have to agree to anything, because it wasn't an issue until suddenly at that very moment, even though he had headgear on. Headgear one would wear, because it has a cap for his dreads, to comply with existing rules. It's the referee's application at that particular instance that was NOT consistent with previous matches.

Where the racism part comes into play if any research had been done, is in the history of the referee. As he supposedly had a well reported incident that of using a racial slur at another official. This referee of course has caught a convenient case of amnesia because he claims alcohol was involved. Unfortunately for him, the reason it was well documented was because there were several eyewitnesses who remembered him getting body slammed from said official for using the racial slur, the offended official did report the incident, and both were considered to be suspended for their actions. They appealed & were not suspended.

So no, the racism angle isn't based solely on having the young man's hair being cut for no reason, it's aided by the man's own previous history, AND the seeming randomness of suddenly deciding that NOW that ONE time he took it upon himself alone to enforce a rule that hadn't been, despite having headgear. By placing the young man in a situation where he had to choose forfeiting a match & possibly hurting his team, or his hair which maybe tied to his identity, is the reason why so many have reacted they way they have to this situation.

Also as far there being two other refs agreeing, I've yet to see such a thing posted anywhere. In all the articles I've read no other referees have been mentioned, let alone agreeing at the time with the referee's decision.
Racism or not, was the player following the rules or not????
 

JayMysterio

macrumors 6502a
Apr 24, 2010
665
12,027
Rock Ridge, California
Racism or not, was the player following the rules or not????
Evidently up until this point he was. He, his coaches, and his team were surprised that he was SUDDENLY not following the rules according to this one ref. A rule that seems to be applied when it wants to be, as women are now allowed to wrestle and some have long hair and NO reported incidents.
 

yaxomoxay

macrumors 68040
Mar 3, 2010
3,606
24,516
Texas
Evidently up until this point he was. He, his coaches, and his team were surprised that he was SUDDENLY not following the rules according to this one ref. A rule that seems to be applied when it wants to be, as women are now allowed to wrestle and some have long hair and NO reported incidents.
Very interesting. I guess we’ll see how the investigation ends.
 

JayMysterio

macrumors 6502a
Apr 24, 2010
665
12,027
Rock Ridge, California
Very interesting. I guess we’ll see how the investigation ends.
Yup, until then the ref is sidelined.

If something had been mentioned in the first two meets, there'd be a stronger case that this wasn't a random application of the rules. On top of that it's been reported that there are other wrestlers with long hair in the other meets and no mention of infractions then.

It was the way the ref handled the whole situation by placing the young man in that spot, followed by the humiliation of having his hair cut then, winning his match, and the ref caught on video seeming to not be terribly interesting in raising his hand in victory, is what many have been reacting to.

The whole thing just was not handled very well, & the ref's history isn't helping.