I will try to keep this short. I think I could write a 2000 word essay on stalling. I started wrestling in 1967 when it was considered good wrestling to bar an arm, hook a leg and ride till the cows come home. They were still using riding clocks. They never called stalling. It was BORING! This year I lost track of the number of times I saw kids on bottom, one or two points behind in the third period, called for stalling! These weren't situations where the kids were just trying not to get pinned. They were still in the match with a chance to win. They were just being rode tough and they couldn't get up. Saturday a kid on top was two points behind with less than 30 seconds left and he was called for stalling for not trying to turn his opponent. I guess the official thought he just wanted to lose by two points. I think we've gone too far. We are asking our officials to be judges instead of referees. I don't want their opinion. I want them to interpret rules that should be black and white. This thread is a perfect example of what happens when we ask our officials to be judges instead of referees. Westfahl and someoldguy were watching the exact same match as I was. However, I saw it completely diffrently. I thought the official blew the call at the end of regulation, and I thought he missed it at the end of overtime. I could care less who won, but when he blew his whistle I thought he was going to call the kid on the bottom for crawling off the mat. While the man on top wasn't working for a fall, he wasn't blatantly stalling. If I understand the rules correctly, they are diffrent in a sudden death period than they are during regulation time. I agree with Westfahl about the referee in this match. I remember him from the kids wrestling and he is a very good referee. We asked this official to decide who won this match, and it shouldn't happen. We need to come up with some concrete rules as to what is stalling and what is not.