Question for folkstyle rules experts: is this technically a locked hands violation by Scott?

Here is the locked hands rule. You generally cannot lock hands when in top position, but there are exceptions when the defensive wrestler is on both feet or the defensive wrestler's positioning meets near fall criteria.

Here is the near fall criteria

Here is the position where I don't think you can say any near fall criteria is met and the locked hands are thus a violation. I realize in practice this is probably never or at least rarely called, but by the book it seems like a violation.

Seem likely a missed locking hands call. Not entirely clear if the referee was in position to see it and it happened fast. But the hands were definitely locked prior to NF criteria being met.

In my interpretation: The locked hands started from a legal position on feet, then stayed locked through: -Near fall situation -borderline near fall situation -back to near fall situation I don’t know what the rule is supposed to be, but this feels like it should be fine

If you look at article three of the first screen shot, it says "reaction time exists except when down on the mat". Clearly they were on the mat, and initially the bottom man was out of near-fall criteria. The locked hands allowed him to force the bottom man into criteria.

He went to nearfall criteria right away, then came through before a count could be made then went right back to criteria. I think no call is a good call.

Looking at this there was probably a point where BA rolled through far enough that it was technically a violation but in terms of calls going against BA at NCAA’s I think the 1st period against Haines is going to be the one people remember

I would think that is a pinning combination, so no locked hands. Also, the bottom man's movement caused the penalty situation and the top man would have been allowed reaction time to change his grip, if it didn't immediately going into near-fall.

Reffing is the worst job on the planet. That’s a tough one.