West Semifinal: 2W Rocky Mountain Holds Off 6W Rat City, 117-107
PORTLAND, OR -- In a bout that may be remembered best for its lack of skating rather than actual play, Rat City used delayed starts and three jams in which the jammers were never released to come within ten points of beating the defending WFTDA champion Rocky Mountain, 117-107. Rocky's win guarantees them a return trip to Championships in November; Rat City still has an opportunity to advance if they win Sunday afternoon's third-place game.
On the first jam, Rat City’s blockers lined up directly in front of Rocky jammer Deranged, who busted through the pack but had Rat City jammer Carmen Getsome hot on her tail. She was forced to call it off after picking up a 1-0 lead. Primp Daddy grabbed lead jammer for Rat City on the next jam and was able to put up three points to give Rat their only lead of the bout 3-1. After the bout’s first of many slow starts, Rocky jammer Frida Beater grabbed lead jammer and put up ten points when Rat City jammer Missile America was injured out-of-bounds when Rocky blocker Deranged landed on her. Missile America would return to play a few jams later. The following jam saw Rocky jammer Triple Shot Misto collecting the lead jammer nod and scoring a 4-0 jam after another delayed release.
With 21 minutes left in the half, and Rocky leading 15-3, Rat City and Rocky played the bout’s first jam in which the jammers were not released. The boos from the crowd only let up when Rocky jammer Deranged distracted them with some “booty-shaking” dancing. Deranged and Rat City jammer Carmen Getsome kept their spots on the jammer line for the next jam. Getsome promptly collected lead and called it off. The jammers were released with only fifteen seconds left in the following jam. Rocky jammer Urrk’n Jerk’n earned lead but did not have time to score before the jam time ended.
After three scoreless jams, the scoreboard operator finally got some business when Rocky‘s Urrk‘n Jerk‘n scored a 20-0 jam with Rat City‘s jammer Missile America in the box for a forearm major. Rat City didn’t like those results, so they stalled for the entire two minutes on the next jam, and again, the jammer whistle never sounded.
With eight minutes to go and the score 44-10, Rat City posted a 15-0 jam when Rocky jammer Frida Beater was sent to the box along with a constant stream of her blocker teammates. The full box, coupled with tight walls from Rat City’s Hard Cora, ReAnimateHer, Jalapeno Business, and Killah Kelly, allowed Primp Daddy to score with as much ease as a jammer can against Rocky. Carmen Getsome cut into the Rocky lead by four more points on the following jam. Then, the teams decided to stall for another jam. Jammers Triple Shot Misto for Rocky and Primp Daddy for Rat stood on the jammer line for the entire two minutes while the crowd howled with displeasure. In the final jam of the half, Rat took a knee right before the starting whistle catching Rocky off guard. Triple Shot Misto was able to get lead jammer but was sent to the box giving Rat City’s Primp Daddy another power jam. With the Rocky box full, Rat was able to pick up a 10-4 jam to head into the half with a 48-39 deficit.
The second half was all Deranged. The Rocky skater jammed 9 of the 17 second-half jams and scored 62 of Rocky’s 69 second-half points. Rocky’s blockers took a knee to start the first jam of the second half quickly. This allowed Deranged to score a 20-0 non-power jam. Deranged kept the jammer panties on the next two jams but Rat’s tight walls stopped her as Rat City’s jammers Carmen Getsome and Ann R. Kissed gained lead and put the score at 68-43. Rocky jammers Deranged and Urrk’n Jerk’n then worked the track and took full advantage of power jams to give Rocky their biggest lead of the bout at 97-53 with 17:30 left in the bout.
When Rocky star-wearer Deranged was fingered off for her fourth minor, Carmen Getsome outscored Rocky 12-0 on the following jam. But Deranged got seven of those points back on the subsequent frame once released from the box.
Rat City fell back on their first half delayed start strategy with 14 minutes left. Jammers Carmen Getsome and Triple Shot Misto hung out on the jammer line until the jam clock was almost down to zero; Getsome picked up lead but there wasn’t enough time to score any points. Deranged next pushed Rocky’s lead to 113-65 with 8:30 left with a power jam.
That was the point where Rat City came back. They claimed lead and put up a 26-0 run over the course of four jams, and Rat City was able to whittle down the lead of a very rattled and penalty-happy Rocky to 113-91 with 1:30 left. On the final jam, Rocky jammer Deranged quickly earned lead jammer and started celebrating. She knew she could just skate the clock down to victory -but her competitive spirit got the best of her, and as she came up on the pack for a second scoring pass she was sent to the box. Rat City’s Ann R. Kissed seized the opportunity to get Rat within ten before earning her own box time. The bout ended with Rocky victorious 117-107.
Rocky plays in the Championship at 5:30pm on Sunday against the winner of tonight’s Oly-Rose City bout. Rat City plays in the 3rd place game on Sunday at 4pm against the loser of the Oly-Rose City bout.
Comments
Most.
Most. Boring. Bout. Ever.
If anyone, ANYONE finds a reason to justify this game...
...please read this article on my blog. If you read it, understand it, and STILL think that there was any value or sense in the Rat/Rocky game, then I give up.
http://wp.me/p1tLVh-7F
Positional Blocking - This year's tournament needs an asterisk *
4.4.1 - The pack begins rolling on a single whistle blast from the Official.
5.1.1 - Blocking is any movement on the track designed to knock the opponent down or out of bounds or to impede the opponent’s speed or movement through the pack. Blocking includes counter-blocking. Blocking need not include contact.
Positional Blocking A.K.A. Body Blocking, Frontal Blocking, and Passive Blocking is blocking without contact. A skater positioning herself in front of an opposing skater to impede her movement on the track is positional blocking. Positional blocking need not be deliberate and/or intentional to be illegal, e.g. if the blocking skater is not aware of the Jammer’s position behind her.
5.1.1.3 - Only players who are stepping and/or skating in the counter-clockwise direction may execute a block. It is illegal to block while at a standstill and while moving in the clockwise direction—this includes positional blocking.
6.9.1 - Skaters must be skating and/or stepping in the counter-clockwise direction when executing a block. Skaters may not skate in the opposite direction of normal counter-clockwise game play when executing a block. In other words, skaters may not skate clockwise when executing a block. Skaters may not block while stopped on the track. These illegal blocking techniques include positional blocking. Clockwise movement is measured by the skates moving past a line perpendicular to the track boundaries.
6.9.4 - Skaters are permitted to stop on the track provided they do not block, assist or otherwise engage teammates or opponents. (edited to add: Blocking need not include contact 5.1.1)
Major Penalty
If the illegal block causes a skater to fall, or has a measurable consequence for the game it is a major penalty.
Michi: Preventing or delaying a jammer from moving to even start the jam is surely IMHO a measurable consequence for the game.
Every knee drop at the jammer line in this tournament and at the Eastern Regionals should have been assessed major penalties under 6.9.4 as the skaters in front of the jammer line were engaged in positional blocking.
As far as all of these tournament bouts go, they need to go into the record books this year with asterisks as the rules were not being properly officiated.
DIY derby was founded to distance themselves from the theatrics of it's predecessor versions of the game. After watching the last two tournaments, the theatrics are back.
with derby love...
Michi-chan
Positional blocking
Let's be honest here. I'd say refs call positional blocking less than 2% of the time, and I think I'm being extremely generous. This is not new. I don't know if they're not being trained properly or if it's just too different from the other things they need to watch for for a human brain to properly process, but that is not new at all.
As for if taking a knee is positional blocking, there exist ways to do it without breaking the rules. If they can get back into skating or stepping* fast enough then they definitely make a legal block... assuming that the pack has been reformed. That's the time that I see the most positional blocking not being called. There seems to be a sort of "well, she can't move out of the way fast enough NOT to positionally block, so we'll let it go" sort of feeling. This is in all no pack situations, not just the start line ones like this.
*An aside, I want to hear the person that designed the "stepping in place" rule and hear why they think it's a good rule. The rules already assume a ref can tell the difference between stepping in place and stepping clockwise, so let's make them tell the different between stepping in place and stepping counterclockwise. There is nothing at the start of the whistle that requires being allowed to step in place that couldn't be replaced with stepping counterclockwise. I find nothing more embarrassing for the sport of roller derby than watching a bunch of athletes stand in place and do the stupid stomp dance. Either let them block from a standstill or don't.
A few simple ideas
I posted this to WindyMan's blog comments but then thought about the small chance many people would make it to the end of his impressive and lengthy treatise on changing the pack definition rules and reach the comments section, so I decide to post it here also. If you think this post is long you definitely have not read his blog. :)
-------
What better time to read and comment on your rules proposition then day 2 of Western Regionals??
While I think what you suggest has merit, my impression is that it is much too drastic a change in the overall game to have any chance of being adopted by WFTDA. I do, however, have some alternative suggestions that are relatively simple and not change the gameplay and strategy much at all, except to significantly reduce slow packs, slow/stopped starts and, just as important, the frequency of blow-outs.
1) The first idea addresses slow packs and blow-outs. I can’t take credit for it. A derby-involved, hockey-fan friend mentioned it off the top of his head:
-> When one jammer is sent to the box, she is released after serving her penalty time, as per current WFTDA rules -OR- when the opposing jammer scores a ghost point on her, whichever comes first.
Think about it. When does nearly all of the slow/stopped pack play take place? During power jams. What makes it easy for sudden large point swings? Full length power jams and stopped packs.
Here’s the real problem with power jams: They’re not a direct reflection of the skill level of the opposing teams. They have more to do with random, unlucky timing of penalties. One blocker gets a 4th minor, another slips and trips someone, the jammer misses a juke and suddenly you have a 2 on 5 power jam and a 15-30 point swing.
Points should always be a direct reflection (as much as possible) of the skill, heart and effort of the teams competing with each other.
This rule would be extremely simple to implement and would have little to no impact on any other part of the current ruleset.
2) The second idea is one that I constructed after watching derby today. This is to address the somewhat trickier problem of the strategic fight for the back wall (excellently dissected by WindyMan) and the ensuing slow and non jammer starts. As he said, penalizing an action is not likely to be effective. Making another action strategically more appealing is how you change a sport and allow it be even more dynamic and competitive.
The larger issue here is that there is no provision in WFTDA derby that establishes a neutral advantage start to each game period (jam). This probably has a lot to do with there being no ball, puck or goal, like other team sports. A playing field that is an endless loop isn't helping either. Having such a provision is, I think, absolutely necessary for derby to ever hope to achieve recognition as a “real” sport.
Can you imagine an Olympic sport where the teams crawl around on the floor and around each other’s ankles in a free-for-all, jockeying for position before every play period starts?
I see this solution in 3 parts:
I) One whistle to start all skaters.
II) A 10-foot buffer zone in front of the jammer line that blockers are not allowed to line up in.
III) At the start of every jam, each teams’ Pivot MUST be touching the pivot line.
While not making it impossible to fight for the back wall, now 20 feet behind the pivot line, having no more than 3 blockers who can do so drastically reduces the advantage gained. A track-wide 3 wall is much easier to break through than a 4 wall.
The only additional rule change this would require is that there is a Pivot on the track at the start of every jam. This would require a rule that a Pivot in the penalty box at the end of a jam becomes a blocker and the team fields a new Pivot to start the next jam. I don’t see this as being likely to make a noticeable difference anywhere else in the game.
3) Another, just slightly more complicated approach for jam starts, would be to truly equalize the starting positions of the pack:
I) One whistle to start all skaters.
II) A 10-foot buffer zone in front of the jammer line that blockers are not allowed to line up in (optional)
III) The 20 foot pack starting zone behind the Pivot line would be divided lengthwise down the middle by a line.
IIII) Each team would alternate each jam lining up their blockers in the inside or outside rectangle of this area.
Voila! No pre-jam fighting for back walls at all! To take control of the track they would have to move!
Finally, if we take a page from the no minors beta rules (or end up adopting them) every stopped or CW block is a major penalty. Remember all the dozens of times this weekend in EACH GAME we saw the refs signalling a direction of gameplay penalty? You can bet that if every one of those meant someone was going to the box, the pack minimum speed would increase dramatically and stay that way. CW skating would also be much more risky, and therefore much less advantageous. If the skaters WANT to be skating forward because it gives them a better chance of winning, they will. It really is that simple in the end.
For the love of derby, which is so much more than the sport,
Doc
I pretty much agree with all
I pretty much agree with all of this, these are some great points! I love the idea of releasing the jammer after she is scored upon, a penalty is worth about a point, not 20..and you still have the advantage of all the time it takes for her to get to the box, get out of the box, and maybe even make another initial pass (this would make jammers be much more careful on that pass for this reason), to create a great defense and get your jammer through for maybe even more points.
Expulsion?
Someone help me out here. Why was no one thrown out when the standing-around-doing-nothing crap got too boring and people starting knocking each other down?!? I'm quite certain it was "intentional". Rulebook quoted below...
Expulsion
The following egregious acts will be automatic game expulsions, and can be punished as a multi-game suspension (see Section 7.5.2.2). Expulsions will be issued for a conscious, forceful attempt to block an opponent in an egregious manner while executing a clockwise block, whether or not the action was successful.
6.9.19 - Intentional, negligent, or reckless contact with an opponent while executing a clockwise block in an illegal manner.
6.9.20 - Intentional, negligent, or reckless contact with an opponent while stopped on the track in an illegal manner.
Expulsions
I don't think expulsions happen as much as the rules say they should. I think refs are extremely reluctant to expel anyone, and 4 out of 5 times they won't do it when it's called for.
booted
i saw a skater ejected early into the DET v DEN game on 8/6. the expulsion was the result of a nonflagrant foul by a skater that was knocked down from behind. she was spinning out of control trying to regain her balance when she was ejected. ticky tack.
ejections in sport should ONLY happen in the event of fighting, beligerent fouls or over-the-top arguing with an official ala major league baseball.
"while stopped on the track"
The blocker must be skating or stepping forward. If they made any forward motion with their feet while blocking, it's legal, even if it's only an inch.
Counter-clockwise skating
The rules do say you must skate CCW, but then they also say: "Clockwise movement is measured by the skates moving past a line perpendicular to the track boundaries."
The penalties only address CW movement, so stepping in place turns out to be a legal blocking position.
In this case, I am calling it
In this case, I am calling it a major and not expulsion (and I did review the criteria for expulsion) mainly because of the letter of the rule.
For a major penalty:
If the illegal block causes a skater to fall, or has a measurable consequence for the game it is a major penalty.
For expulsion:
The following egregious acts will be automatic game expulsions, and can be punished as a multi-game suspension (see Section 7.5.2.2). Expulsions will be issued for a conscious, forceful attempt to block an opponent in an egregious manner while executing a clockwise block, whether or not the action was successful.
Keeping in mind that a "block" need not include contact (5.1.1), in what I saw, it was not a "forceful" attempt, it was more like passive resistance similar to a political protest where a building entrance is blocked and everyone is having a sit-in singing "kum-by-ya".
While these actions have been egregious to the spirit and reputation of the game, they are not egregious to skater safety. I feel that rules should take skater safety first, experience for the fan and media second. Therefore, I would in this case reserve expulsion under this rule where the safety of the jammers or others on the track are directly threatened.
If WFTDA wants to look at a more administrative action regarding the damage to the reputation and direction of the game, then that is up to them.
I have been very vocal against the direction of WFTDA derby (blame it on my Arizona upbringing) and while these actions are administratively egregious, they are little to no threat to safety, therefore I would settle on major penalty under the currently approved rule set.
Simple rule to fix this
Why not have a new rule that simply says all blockers must skate past the start line within 10 seconds or they're sent to the box with a major. That would end all this boring silliness.
...and
and can't cross back over the line once they've crossed it.
and a skater coming in from a penalty has their own 10 seconds to cross the line.
Of course lots of people are going to debate on how long the time should be. 10 second, 15 seconds, 30 seconds. Maybe 10 seconds is a minor warning, and you now have 5 more seconds before it's upgraded to a major.
Of course, there's nothing to stop the pack from stopping beyond the pivot line again. Especially since positional blocking is never called and stomping in place is allowed.
Maybe they should allow back blocks*. Then people won't want to stay in place.
*Being facetious.
Let's agree to skate forward*
None of that will really change anything.
Before the Denver/Tucson game, Mr. Hurt Reynolds came into the textcast/SecSE chat with news that in light of the just-concluded Rat/Rocky game, both captains came to an agreement to "skate forward" during the game. He said he was optimistic. I immediately doubted it was going to happen.
The first few jams of the game, everyone was using the pivot line and skating forward. Fantastic!
Five minutes into the game, Denver used a knee start that kept a few of their blockers behind the pivot line.
In most of the second half, the pivot line was being used sporadically, with skaters from both teams knee-starting halfway between the pivot line and the jammer line, then not moving forward.
While no jam actually started right in front of the jammer line, the most ridiculous jam of the game (I think it was with 10 minutes left in the first half) had both teams roll past the pivot line, but not move further forward. When Denver's jammer made her first scoring pass, the pack was back at the pivot line. At her second scoring pass, the pack was between the pivot/jammer lines. By the end of her third scoring pass, the pack was standing right in front of the jammer line.
So despite both teams "agreeing" to "skate" "forward" (according to Hurt's report, anyway) there was one jam where the pack actually went backwards 40 feet. There were several other jams where the pack was at a dead-standstill for multiple jammer laps as well.
I wonder why people are not okay with packs that don't move from the start line for several moments, but are just fine with packs that don't move from their spot (or move backwards) during general play for several moments. It's the same inaction in the pack; just because the jammers are circulating doesn't change that.
*unless we want to win the game or score a lot of points more easily
One other simple rule
Make it illegal for blockers to hold hands. Just as pro football outlawed the flying V early on for similar reasons.
First, I think you need to
First, I think you need to outlaw all holding: hands, arms, hips, legs, jerseys, etc.
Second, I don't think that's necessary. I think you just need to remove the 3 seconds requirement for a major (what jammer is going to wait 3 seconds trying to get blocked by a multiplayer block before they attempt to go around? and then what blockers are going to continue to hold for 3 seconds without letting go and rejoining?). I also want to see a removal of the requirement that the linking portion has to be the block. And for the grasping requirements to be broadened slightly. There are lots of ways you can apply the exact same level of force without it counting as a grasp. Friction is pretty darn good.
Hmmm... maybe at this point, it'd just be easier to take your suggesting (with the addition of further levels of holding).
N8, you also want the rules
N8, you also want the rules to be revised to eliminate stepping.
it's already illegal to
it's already illegal to hold/link arms or hands when blocking another player. but there are a lot of good reasons to grab your teammate's hand/arms when playing - e.g. whips and positional blocking cycling, etc.
Not very
It's illegal, but not very illegal. In order to accrue a penalty, you must satisfy 2-3 things. You must be grasping... so the thing where people hold from the inside of their teammates thighs almost never gets called. Also, the point where the link occurs must be the point where the block occurs... so if we're linking arms we can almost booty block all we want with no penalty, effectively doubling each skater's mass. Lastly, if you link and block with the link, but the block lasts for less than three seconds, it's only a minor penalty (unless the skater falls down I suppose) because there's never any position to lose otherwise.
Three seconds is a long time.
How often does the WFTDA revise it's rules?
It certainly sounds like some experimentation is in order to find some changes that will improve the game.
Rule Revisions
I think it's every two years...a new version due out May 2012.
I learned that while watching Westerns this weekend. :)
Pro football outlawed Bob
Just as pro football outlawed the flying V
Pro football outlawed Bob Mould's guitar?
Actually, the reason football changed the rules to eliminate the flying wedge and other mass momentum plays was because those allowed the formation of a wall of humanity behind the line of scrimmage, and said human walls could then get a full running start and smash into the defense, full speed ahead, at the line -- often resulting in injury/death/dismemberment. Maybe some variant of the flying wedge is actually exactly what we NEED to break up these slow pack starts?!
Oh the humanity
Actually, the reason football changed the rules to eliminate the flying wedge and other mass momentum plays was because those allowed the formation of a wall of humanity behind the line of scrimmage, and said human walls could then get a full running start and smash into the defense, full speed ahead, at the line -- often resulting in injury/death/dismemberment. Maybe some variant of the flying wedge is actually exactly what we NEED to break up these slow pack starts?!
I don't know what you were watching, but I saw a hell of a lot of "wall of humanity" jam starts during the weekend. ("Rugby derby," as some called it.) I can't see why people like that kind of thing, because it's pretty much what the flying V formation was in football. It's ridiculous, if you ask me.
Of course, football became the great game that it is due to the forward pass, a drastic rule change that allowed the offense to get behind the defense to move things forward. So that meant the defense couldn't just swarm around the ball carrier exclusively anymore, they had to spread themselves around the field to cover all 11 players.
And yet, we have default derby defenses that ignore the four blockers on the track and just swarm around the jammer or one blocker. Is the "flying wedge" the fix for this, or the cause of it?
Forward Pass!
Of course, football became the great game that it is due to the forward pass, a drastic rule change that allowed the offense to get behind the defense to move things forward. So that meant the defense couldn't just swarm around the ball carrier exclusively anymore, they had to spread themselves around the field to cover all 11 players.
Wait, I've got it...introduce the forward (pantie) pass to derby! Put a little sandbag in the jammer pantie and allow the jammer to throw the pantie forward to the blockers. Problem solved!! :-)
Your ideas are intriguing to
Your ideas are intriguing to me and I would like to subscribe to your newsletter.
Rock that Flying V
I don't know what you were watching, but I saw a hell of a lot of "wall of humanity" jam starts during the weekend. ("Rugby derby," as some called it.)
I was actually off announcing some bouts where people skated forward instead of watching the live feed so i missed these critical cultural touchstones of which everyone speaks. I just like talking about guitars.
Flying V
Quack, quack
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-WZ0uRJOatQ
Meow
http://youtu.be/qTX3CaTWbkM
Roller Derby vs. Fans
I guess we all probably saw this coming. Derby has become and inaction sport.
All summer I've noticed people fussing with their phones during jams rather than watch what is supposed to be action. Something else I've noticed is dwindling crowds, both in person and in bout casts. I suspect that is because we can't expect fans to shell out $20 during hard times to watch what amounts to a perpetual time out.
No one buys it when the announcers awkwardly try to claim that standing around is a tactic that is much harder than it looks and it's only a matter of time before no one buys tickets either.
If fans prefer to take out their phones and check their email during 4 out of every 5 jams then the game is broken.
Tuba
To me it is like poetry. Like action chess. I'm sorry if you can't handle it, because it's the best. This game is about scoring points, not about whining.
outlawing all holding
would make it illegal to give or take a whip, too... and make it hard to call when you are touching your teammates. there are a lot of reasons to want to touch your teammates, whether you're a jammer or blocker. as a former skater, that seems like a dumb rule which is going to be impossible to officiate, and really hard to unlearn. a lot of teams make a habit of touching their teammates to let them know where they are in the pack. are you sure you want that?
Ejections
Can someone explain why ejections and expulsions aren't reported on in recaps? I saw 2 expulsions over the weekend and heard there were more that I didn't see since I didn't watch all the games. And those were expulsions, not just foul-outs.
As a Charm City fan I see a lot of foul-outs, and I know what an impact an early loss of Dolly Rocket or Holly Go Hardly or Joy Collision can have on the team. I'm not as familiar with Western teams, but I think Mercy was expelled at one point and she seems to be a pretty solid and possibly game-changing player for Rose. I'm not sure I had EVER seen an expulsion before so it was a pretty notable event for me and something I thought would be worth a mention. Similarly there are times when skaters end up with 3 or 4 majors at once which seems noteworthy.
I understand that stats are tough to get real time and there will often need to be some clarification, and I don't want to start rumor-mongering. But I would like to know if an important player isn't on the track due to penalties, just like I'd want to know if she were injured.
So, am I missing something? Is it being reported and I just don't see it? Or is there a good reason for not including it in recaps?
Yes, you're missing something :)
Can someone explain why ejections and expulsions aren't reported on in recaps? ... I think Mercy was expelled at one point and she seems to be a pretty solid and possibly game-changing player for Rose. I'm not sure I had EVER seen an expulsion before so it was a pretty notable event for me and something I thought would be worth a mention.
Not only was Mercy's ejection reported on in the Rose City / Bay Area recap, the recap also includes a totally sweet Jules Doyle picture from the exact foul that resulted in the ejection, along with a caption that says so. Not sure how much more reporting you wanted on that :)
Tannibal Lector's ejection from Oly / Jet City was also mentioned in some detail in that recap.
It is definitely true that sometimes a player is ejected or fouls out and the recapper just doesn't catch it at the time. In the past couple of years, major tournaments have gotten a LOT better at communicating with the announcers about foulouts, ejections and official challenges, which is great, but it's still possible for the reporter to not hear it when it's announced.
Thanks Justice, the couple of
Thanks Justice, the couple of games that I looked up were the games I had watched since I remembered some ejections. Apparently I had mixed up the Rose game that had Mercy ejected, so I suppose that shouldn't have been reported in the wrong game...
I definitely noticed more clarification regarding some of the official time outs. I think maybe your reporter is overworked. ;-)
You guys used the non-current
You guys used the non-current term "ejection" which will earn you a harsh rebuke from the head ref. Be prepared for that.
Roller derby != chess!
I'm sorry, but the "stop" version of derby is not appealing. While I used to play chess, I would never actually watch others play chess, as that's like watching paint dry--boring! I watch derby expecting to see some actual "rolling" around on skates! Teams just standing around (or even worse) skating the wrong direction will kill off the crowd appeal. I'm a *long* time derby fan, and it sure turns me off. You can execute strategy in derby without standing around doing nothing.
I would propose a new rule in that if skaters don't want to skate, then they must be tired and so should get a penalty so they can go rest in the penalty box until (hopefully) they regain enough energy to actually skate around the track!
Alternatively, just throw out the rule book and make derby like demolition derby with cars where skaters can skate in any direction with the sole object being to knock down skaters on the other team.
I guess no matter what WFTDA does to prevent "strategic" forfeits, or the "stop" game, folks will still try to game the system to try to ruin the game for the fans. Perhaps some teams and skaters should realize the original intent of derby was to entertain fans with action. Originally, derby was basically a speed-skating marathon, with teams of skaters trying to accumulate more laps around the track than their opponents. If that "original" derby had went to the "stop" game in the 1930s, we would have had zero memories of that today as it would have folded soon after the non-action on the track started.
For that matter, I still can't figure why WFTDA threw out some good ideas from classic derby. Why does WFTDA have to have standing starts for every jam? Do like classic derby with rolling starts. That would stop a lot of douchebaggery like "taking a knee" at the start of jams. Also, classic derby's lead jammer rules are superior--the lead jammer is whichever jammer is in front of the other jammer at any moment in time. WFTDA's lead jammer rule makes for some very anti-climactic jams.
Rusty Wheeler
Very perceptive
I am impressed that you have seen through the smoke and mirrors to determine that the true motivation of roller derby skaters is to ruin the game for the fans.
Motivations
I am impressed that you have seen through the smoke and mirrors to determine that the true motivation of roller derby skaters is to ruin the game for the fans.
The true motivation of derby players is to do what they want to do, whatever is in the best interest of their team or the individuals on the team. So if that reason is self-improvement (physical, mental, or both) or to win in a competitive environment, that's cool. Derby is like that. For the skaters, by the skaters.
However, once you start getting into situations where the players' motivations start conflicting with the goals of bettering the sport, there's a problem. Dutchland did what they did in their best interest (play and improve at their pace); derby suffered due to the way they did it (forfeit a meaningless game). Rat City (and Rocky) did was was in their best interest (win the game and go to Championships); derby suffered due to the way they did it (refused to skate or start jams).
Now that WFTDA is selling $20 HD feeds, $80 streaming packages, $100 tickets to Championships and hundreds of dollars more just for leagues to order DVDs to all the Championship games, they're going from "for the skaters" to "for the people who want to give us money." Once you do that, you're a product or service to people outside of the derby community. And like any product, if it's not worth consuming, no one will bother.
So if that's the route WFTDA wants to start going down, they're going to need to restructure a few things (including the rules, natch) to guarantee that the skater's or team's best interests always align with derby's best interests, in any and all possible circumstances.
Because if derby players can't be motivated to skate, why the hell are they playing roller derby?
Just to be clear
I wasn't trying to defend the play style at all. I was just pointing out to Rusty Wheeler that the skaters' motivation proooooobably isn't really to ruin the game for the fans. I agree with you completely that the skaters are doing what is in their best interests (i.e., they're trying to win games), and that the way to move forward from here is to make the natural methods of winning games align with entertaining and exciting sport. And that holds up and down the spectrum, from WFTDA Championships to the local league trying to get spectators into their skating rink...
Modern Roller Derby is not a
Modern Roller Derby is not a game designed for the fans. Old style roller derby, that was played by just a handfull skaters for large crowds was.
Modern Roller derby is designed to let the thousands of skaters all over the world play the game, even if for some leagues or teams, they are only playing for a handfull of fans. Criterium for rules changes should not be 'is it pleasing our fans?'. It should be 'is it still a game that is safe and fun to play?'. In the end the result will not be that different, standing still and not moving during 2 minutes is not that fun. But it's a game that should be fun to play, if people also like to come and watch that's fine, but playing is more important. After all, girls just wanna have fun.
"Criterium for rules changes
"Criterium for rules changes should not be 'is it pleasing our fans?'. It should be 'is it still a game that is safe and fun to play?'."
I think you're speaking for recreational roller derby leagues, only. And there appear to be a lot of leagues that would disagree with you.
Watch some intraleague derby and see the games that some of the big leagues play for their fans. Look at what they won't do for the hometown fans. They have big expenses and they have no choice but to keep the fans happy. And I've seen an awful lot of leagues where interleague is the undercard on the marquee.
Maybe the criterion for rules changes shouldn't be "Is it pleasing to our fans?" It should be, "Would we even want to watch this if it was on TV? Or would we feel like we're being punished by being made to watch this?"
You know, by the skaters, for the skaters, who are also watching other skaters from the stands.
Fans or Skaters first?
Maybe the criterion for rules changes shouldn't be "Is it pleasing to our fans?" It should be, "Would we even want to watch this if it was on TV? Or would we feel like we're being punished by being made to watch this?"
You know, by the skaters, for the skaters, who are also watching other skaters from the stands.
You could also ask if we feel like we're being punished by being made to play this way.
Anyway, the answer to both questions will probably be exactly the same.
3 second rule
I have to say it is getting harder and harder to play both banked and flat track derby. Flat amazes me with their strategies and we are constantly learning from it but all this not skating/ taking a knee nonsense is getting super confusing. There are things i prefer about both flat and banked and know that they will never be exactly same rules but i would love to see WFTDA adopt some of banked rules just as banked has learned from flat. To stop the no skating we have a 3 second rule, if no one crosses line in 3 seconds jammer whistle blows. I see the strategy of lining up infront of jammer line, with such fast jammers now a days it is sometimes smart to never allow them to get their speed. If this is something people want changed, flat could also use a blocker box. In banked blockers must be lined up inside this box. I promise Im not trying to get flat to look like banked, I love flat track and enjoy a strategic game. But in my opinion it has become more of a lateral game or even stop derby. And if the rumors are true of WFTDA possibly getting rid of minors I only see it getting worse. Its a struggle for some of us, we don't want to play that stop/taking a knee/splitting the pack style of derby but have realized in order to stay competitive in flat track derby we have to put our pride aside and adapt to the direction this sport is going. But I cant help feeling like a db when I play that way. I hope that someday we can all work together and learn from each others mistakes. We all just want to play roller derby but sometimes what Im watching looks nothing like the sport I fell in love with.
Am i just dumb, but 1)
Am i just dumb, but 1) couldn't these non-starts be immediately thwarted by one team skating forward, resulting in a no-pack situation, thereby springing both jammers, preventing the rearmost team/skaters from impeding the progress of the jammers, and allowing the foremost team/skaters, once they had duly attempted to reform the pack, being able to form a wall, completely unopposed by the non-starting rearward team/skaters? and, 2) aren't rolling starts actually NOT prohibited? The rules state the jammer cannot be ACCELERATING when they cross the jammer line. Couldn't you just get a full head of steam up from way behind the line, then be coasting over it when the whistle blows? ((rhetorical question: i'm pretty sure that you can)) It would take some timing to get the rolling starts right so as to not wind up with illegal procedure penalties but i'd imagine it's by no means impossible.
Maybe not impossible, but...
Am i just dumb, but 1) couldn't these non-starts be immediately thwarted by one team skating forward, resulting in a no-pack situation, thereby springing both jammers, preventing the rearmost team/skaters from impeding the progress of the jammers, and allowing the foremost team/skaters, once they had duly attempted to reform the pack, being able to form a wall, completely unopposed by the non-starting rearward team/skaters? and, 2) aren't rolling starts actually NOT prohibited? The rules state the jammer cannot be ACCELERATING when they cross the jammer line. Couldn't you just get a full head of steam up from way behind the line, then be coasting over it when the whistle blows? ((rhetorical question: i'm pretty sure that you can)) It would take some timing to get the rolling starts right so as to not wind up with illegal procedure penalties but i'd imagine it's by no means impossible.
1. Pretty sure that would be a penalty on the team skating forward for destroying the pack (which seems silly since they're not doing any more to destroy it than the non-moving team).
2. Seems pretty close to impossible given that you can't cross the line until the double-whistle...how in the world would you time that right if the other team had any brains at all? (i.e. they could stop at the pivot line just as the jammer approached the jammer line). Perhaps I'm missing your point. :)
It is not destroying the pack
"6.10.2.1.2 - At the start of a jam if one team skates forward and the opposing team remains stationary, upon a No Pack scenario the Jammer start whistle will blow and no penalties for illegally destroying the pack shall be enforced. Skaters and teams are still responsible for immediately reforming a pack."
I thought it was destroying the pack too, but then an official cited the above rule to correct me.
But still...
"6.10.2.1.2 - At the start of a jam if one team skates forward and the opposing team remains stationary, upon a No Pack scenario the Jammer start whistle will blow and no penalties for illegally destroying the pack shall be enforced. Skaters and teams are still responsible for immediately reforming a pack."
I thought it was destroying the pack too, but then an official cited the above rule to correct me.
Oh, interesting!
So it becomes a question of whether or not a team is willing to give up control of the back of the pack...which I'm guessing (?) is what would compel a team to stand there and do nothing. Especially if they have the lead.
?
Holding the back
This point was debated at length during the post Gotham / Philly ECDX brouhaha. Neither team would cede the back and skate forward, hence the development of the mixed knee start (with one skater scooting off forward, to take advantage of that rule, as no-one destroyed the pack as all the in-play skaters for one team count go forward).
hmmmm
Im going to print that one and keep it in my sports bra. We tried taking off at beginning of jam when they were on knee in front of jammer line. They continued to stay in front of our jammer and we got the destruction of pack penalty for taking off even though we slowed down as soon as no pack was called. We argued that there was no pack to destroy but still got the penalty? Since that game we have debated if it is worth the penalty to still take off and get our jammer past their backed up wall. But doesn't seem to be as with split packs the back always wins just having to speed up in front of the jammer but not actually letting her go.
Yep
But doesn't seem to be as with split packs the back always wins just having to speed up in front of the jammer but not actually letting her go.
Exactly. That's why you don't see most teams just speeding up to get it started. The back always has the advantage in those no pack situations since they don't really have to let her go.
For my in-depth, opinionated analysis...
Visit here.
Great article
And great comments on it. This one pretty well sums up the exact concern I've had with the slow game for a while now:
"If there were some way to identify the number of new and old fans lost to slow derby in the last 16 months I think we would all be in shock. I would give you odds that it's easily in the 10's of thousands, maybe even 6 digits. It's only the continued rapid growth of the number of skaters (and friends and family, etc., etc.) that has allowed derby to ignore the devastating effect these problems are creating in the long run."
Other side of the coin
Visit here.
As a coach, I wouldn't necessarily agree that it was a brilliant strategy. It was unique and semi-effective. But there's no way to know who would've scored points in the jams where the stall tactics were used. Who's to say that Rat wouldn't have generated a power jam or two and scored the 10 points they came up short or that they would've scored more than that? Rocky had plenty of penalty troubles in the tournament; so, the more they skate, the more I would expect they would also go to the box, blockers and jammers. Easier to score points in those situations (but not easy) and it also can lead to their best skaters fouling out. That is the other side of the strategic argument.
I have much love for Rat (for many reasons) and that hasn't changed because of this "controversy". But I felt that the other side of the coin should get mentioned.
Angus Con
-------------------------------------------
Derby Goatspeak
http://derbyunpopularity.blogspot.com
its easier to work backwards
someone please explain why all sports have some form of a delay-of-game penalty.
Delay of game
someone please explain why all sports have some form of a delay-of-game penalty.
Because it's a violation of the rules to take too long between plays, so that no one team can unfairly delay a play from starting within a reasonable amount of time.
In football, should a team take too long to start a play, they get a five yard penalty when time on the play clock expires.
In roller derby, should a team take too long to get their players out on the track before a play (jam) starts, they are "penalized" by needing to play the jam without the players (or positions) that did not enter the track when time on the play clock expires.
Roller derby already has a play clock. It's the 30 seconds between jams. Football's play clock is the 40 seconds between each play. When people are clamoring that derby needs a play clock, they don't realize that it already has one. So why add another one?
When a football play starts, they don't start another play clock, do they? There is no rule that says "once the play begins, players must move forward within 5 seconds or be subject to delay of game penalties."
That's no different than saying, "once the jam begins, players must move forward within 5 seconds or be subject to delay of game penalties." It would be a stupid and unnecessary rule in football. So why do people think it's a good and necessary idea in roller derby?
Football players just GO when the play starts, because they'll get destroyed if they don't. The threat of losing is all the motivation they need to move on their own. Adding another derby "play clock" would not be necessary if roller derby players had the same motivation to skate forward (under the threat of losing if they didn't), just like football players (or players in all other field or track sports) do.
If you add one anyway, is that really going to change people's motivations on what they feel is best for themselves and their team under the current rules?
who said anything about a playclock?
baseball doesnt have a clock at all. there are still delay of game rules.
The clock
baseball doesnt have a clock at all. there are still delay of game rules.
When play has stopped, there are delay of game procedures, yes. But the baseball rule (one of many on the subject) says this:
If pitcher delays once the batter is in his box and the umpire feels that the delay is not justified he may allow the batter to step out of the box momentarily.
So there is a clock in baseball. It's just not publicly visible to anyone. All that matters is the clock in the umpire's head, and if that clock expires, he'll call time (if the pitcher takes too long) or issue a strike (if the batter takes too long to get into the batter's box). You can't call "time out" unless there's time (and therefore, a clock) in the first place, now can you?
Hockey is the only sport where a delay of game rule has nothing to do with clocks or time (shooting the puck over the glass while in your defensive zone is a delay of game penalty), but it's a bit of a misnomer as it's more of an intentional grounding penalty. But in all other circumstances, you can't measure a "delay" unless there is a definite value to compare against. Like a timer, or clock, or an umpire's patience.
So by asking about a delay of game penalty, you're the one that said something about a play clock. Unless there's some other delay penalty that doesn't involve one.
clock solutions
- Period clock should only run when jammers are released and "jam is on."
- Penalty time should only run when jammers are released and "jam is on."
- Shorten periods to 20 or 25 minutes of actual "jam on" game play.
- Create a delay of game penalty for delaying the "jam on" state between jams, including a "you're jointly responsible" double major.
Replay shows can then crop out between-jam time and neatly fit into a 60 minute TV program without missing any action. The path toward national TV exposure just got 30 minutes easier, aka 33% cheaper for interested time-buy sponsors.
Non-starting jams? Eliminated. Waiting around for teammates? Eliminated -- do the crime, serve the time. The nifty strategy of burning time as a jammer to get teammates out of the box? Retained. Allowing teams to choose their pace of play? Retained. Difficult TV mechanics resolved. Multiple problems solved. Koo koo ca-joo.
So, if it doesn't happen in football, it can't happen in derby?
What about basketball?
Basketball has a shot clock, a backcourt clock, a guarded clock, lane clock. In your analogy, what's the need for the backcourt clock or guarded clock? Doesn't it behoove a team to cross midcourt and pass and score? I agree that looking at other sports is a GREAT idea but getting bogged down in one sport is kind of ignoring a lot.
Basketball's shot clock and "the why"
We all know why basketball implemented a shot clock. A team with a lead and possession of the ball used to be able to hold it indefinitely by not doing anything. The only realistic chance the other team had of getting the ball back was to try and steal it, which almost always resulted in a foul and two free points to the stalling team by way of free throws. This was unfair to the team without the ball, through no fault of their own; they wanted to do something, but the other team wouldn't let them unless they felt compelled to play offense...which they never did.
What the shot clock did for basketball is allow the team in arrears a fair and equal opportunity at ball possession. The team in the lead was forced to play offense and defense consistently, because both teams knew both teams would get the ball and have an equal opportunity to score or stop the other team from scoring. In this way, the team ahead still had to fight for points and fight to stop the other team from scoring, because if they stopped playing offense altogether, the team behind would be able to do something about it when it's their turn with the ball and catch up.
Fundamentally, basketball is exactly the same as roller derby, if you think of the team with the ball as on a power jam (the only team that can score) with a jam clock of 24 seconds. A team with the initiative (lead jammer/possession of the ball) has a set period of time (two minutes/24 seconds) to try to score points. The other team has a fair chance to try and stop them from doing that within that same period of time.
Roller derby is different because both teams have an opportunity to gain the initiative (lead jammer) during the same period of time (a jam). Within a two minute jam, both teams try to score points at the same time, and both teams try to stop points being scored at the same time. Unlike the pre-shot clock era of basketball, both teams have the motivation to want to try and do whatever they need to do to score points during the allotted time, because if they don't, the other team may score points instead.
But therein lies the trouble with modern derby rules. Rat City, despite being down a lot of points to Rocky Mountain, still used their stalling-start strategy as precious seconds ticked away. They were not going to move off the line for ANYTHING. They wanted Rocky to push forward instead, which would put them at a positional disadvantage. Rat was effectively "holding the ball," forcing Rocky Mountain to split the pack so each and every time they could make it harder for the Rocky jammer to get through the pack, and easier for the Rat jammer to get through "the pack" and gain the initiative--lead jammer. (The alternative for Rocky was to try and foul Rat City to try and get the initiative back...and you wonder why Rocky had so many penalties?)
This was unfair to Rocky Mountain, who just wanted a fair and equal opportunity to gain lead jammer (the initiative) as Rat City. However, by taking the rear wall of the pack, this is what Rat had the opportunity to do on each and every jam (imagine Rocky was in blue, and Rat in white):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GSg8kBV_Rig
By holding the rear, Rat understood that it was completely possible for Rocky's blockers to overextend the pack boundaries or engagement zone, but themselves out of play, and allow the Rat jammer to go through untouched, all without having to contact a single Rocky blocker. Meanwhile, Rat could slow down the Rocky jammer 4-on-1 without fear of ever being put out of play. Rocky understood this too, which is why they were extremely reluctant to start skating forward and put themselves into a pickle. Because if it was in their best interest to move forward, they would have.
Just making it so the jammers are always released will not change this fundamentally unfair advantage a team can enjoy by loitering at the back of the pack and not engaging the other team's blockers. Hell, you can see in the above video, after the jam started, even as everyone was moving forward, no one from the white team touched anyone from the blue team, but the white team was still rewarded for it. (Because banked track rules require skaters much move forward, there was literally nothing the blue team could do to prevent this from happening.)
If people want to continue to subscribe to the illusion that "things are happening" when eight players are not moving (ten minus two circulating jammers) instead of all ten players are not moving, go right ahead. But until the rules are changed so both teams have a fair and equal chance to score or defend from being scored upon under all circumstances, the only way things will be "fair" under the current rules is if teams try to out-slow each other on the track. That's only going to lead to more boo-inducing slow derby tactics.
Shot clock came out of boredom. Sound familiar?
The shot clock was not implemented because of the unfair advantage. The shot clock was implemented because basketball games were boring and they were losing fans. The same reason why derby should implement a delay clock at the beginning of jams.
Derby is a lot like basketball in some ways and your shot clock analogies make sense, so why do you still have the aversion to the delay clock? If the basketball shot clock = derby jam clock, then the backetball backcourt clock = derby delay clock. You have to pass a line on the floor in a specified amount of time. It's the exact same rule.
Here's why I don't get the opposition to a delay clock (as opposed to one whistle which only solves the stall problem but doesn't prevent any of the other problems that have cropped up). It completely changes the dynamic of how starts are currently handled but puts starts right back to how flat track derby was originally conceived.
The rule would look something like this: Every blocker must pass the pivot line after the first whistle is blown. Any blocker that does not cross the line or prevents another blocker from crossing the line will incur a penalty.
Minor: at 5 seconds
Major: at 10 seconds
This does a number of things.
1. Starts the jammers within a reasonable timeframe.
2. Puts the blockers at least 30 feet in front of the jammers when the jammer whistle blows.
3. Creates a pack speed so if a team stops (and the other team continues forward at that speed), the team in back would pick up a destruction of pack major.
4. Takes away the advantage of a stopped pack because the jammers will be hitting the pack at speed and will be almost impossible to block at a standstill.
5. The back also becomes less advantageous because with the pack speed, the front blockers will take longer to get out of play, which reduces the whole reason to be in the back in the first place.
Once teams become more disciplined and stop getting out of play in the front, the front of the pack will be the place to be as the team in front is more likely to control the speed of the pack.
Don't you dare try to out-sports me, sonny
The shot clock was not implemented because of the unfair advantage. The shot clock was implemented because basketball games were boring and they were losing fans.
Yeah, you don't know what you're talking about. Educate yourself: http://www.snopes.com/sports/basketball/24second.asp
Yes, back then basketball was boring and it was losing fans. But that was a symptom of the problem, not the problem itself. The problem is why was it boring, and why it was losing fans.
Back then, fans were bored because nothing was happening on the court. The reason why nothing was happening on the court was because a team with the basketball and the lead had no reason or motivation to play offense. The reason why they didn't have the motivation is because they knew they would be giving the ball back to the other team if they tried to score and missed, giving them a chance to catch up. So to make sure the other team never had a chance to try to catch up, the team on offense held the ball indefinitely. The reason why they held the ball indefinitely was because they knew the only way the other team could get it back was to commit fouls (and give up free throws).
In other words, there was virtually nothing the team without the ball could legally do to get it back. That has "unfairness" written all over it.
That was the true problem. To fix the problem (and the resulting symptom of bored fans), they made it so both teams were guaranteed a fair and equal opportunity to gain possession of the ball by implementing the shot clock. That way, both teams were compelled to try and score on every possession, knowing that if they didn't the other team would get their chance to increase their lead or make a comeback. There was no way to escape engaging the other team, at any time. Because both teams were required to constantly play offense and defense on alternating possessions, there was a dramatic increase in action, which ultimately made basketball the game it is today.
Derby is a lot like basketball in some ways and your shot clock analogies make sense, so why do you still have the aversion to the delay clock? If the basketball shot clock = derby jam clock, then the backetball backcourt clock = derby delay clock. You have to pass a line on the floor in a specified amount of time. It's the exact same rule.
It's not, because at this point you're failing to understand the dynamics at work.
Long story short (Google if you want the long story), the half-court timeline rule (formerly 10 seconds, now 8 seconds) is a way to force a team to get into their offense more immediately and prevent the team with the ball to use unfair stalling tactics of any kind. The only reason why a team would fail to get the ball across mid-court is if the other team prevented them from doing so, via a full-court press defense. Hence, why you rarely see this violation in basketball nowadays: The team with the ball has every motivation to move forward with the ball, because if they don't, they will give up possession of the ball to the other team.
This is why derby doesn't need a "10 second rule." It's necessary for something like that to exist in basketball, because only one team can have the ball at the time. The team on offense has every motivation to go forward, because they know that if they don't the other team will gain control of the initiative (ball possession).
But in derby, both teams play offense at the same time. Even so, the same logic applies: Both teams should be motivated to go forward because if they don't, the other team will gain control of the initiative (lead jammer).
However, as is becoming increasingly more obvious, one or both teams in a roller derby game are being motivated to not move forward. They are finding reasons and loopholes to not engage the other team's blockers constantly.
So this begs the question... why do players not want to move forward? Why do players not always want to engage the blockers on the other team?
Creates a pack speed so if a team stops (and the other team continues forward at that speed), the team in back would pick up a destruction of pack major.
Okay, so once the pack starts rolling forward at the start, there will eventually come a point where a team goats a blocker and brings the pack to a halt.
The pack is required to have both teams in it, and a team who attempts to change the speed of the pack by themselves will be penalized for it. So even if that goated blocker escapes, as long as the goat wall (sans goat) at the back does not move forward, the team gaining the front of the pack can do nothing more but stand around, for if they tried to skate 10 feet ahead of the team standing and not engaging them up front, they would be attempting to change the established speed of the pack (not moving) and would get penalized.
In other words, there is virtually nothing the team at the front of the pack can do to legally speed it up again. That has "unfairness" written all over it.
That sounds like the true problem.
So what's the fix for it?
We're talking about two different things
So, basically, basketball instituted the shot clock because the game was boring.
Again, the backcourt clock is the exact same thing as a delay clock in derby. Basketball teams should want to cross midcourt so they can score, right? I mean, they do have a shot clock so it's not like they can delay more than 24 seconds anyway. So, why the need to compel them to cross midcourt? Derby teams should want to cross the pivot line so they can score, right? So, why the need to compel them to cross the pivot line? Both rules would have the same reasoning behind them. Skaters aren't moving forward because it benefits their team just like basketball players weren't moving the ball forward because it benefited their team.
To the main point, though, you're talking about abolishing all slow/stop derby and I'm talking about abolishing no-jam and rugby derby.
Look, I get that you think the advantage should be at the front of the pack but you really haven't thought it through. Well, actually, I'm sure you have, you just haven't thought it through correctly. Your pack solutions create the exact opposite scenario. Both teams would want to control the front of the pack (instead of the back). Instead of a pack at a standstill, you would create a pack that's sprinting. This may sound better but it's really really really really not. That is FAR more boring than a slow/stopped pack and makes for a pretty pointless game (a game that would be very similar to the basketball of yesteryear). One team gets lead jammer after more than a minute if at all (both teams NEED to control the front, remember, so as one team speeds up the other speeds up and then the other and then other). Then, the team without lead gets free and they go as fast as possible (with nothing the team with lead jammer can do legally to slow down the pack (sound familiar?)). Jam ends 0-0. Rinse and repeat.
You have to create a situation where both the back AND the front can be advantageous depending on the game scenario. Putting a delay clock at the start of the jam actually does this. The back tries to get a split pack. The front will take the occasional split pack in order to control the speed of the pack once lead jammer is determined. Without a delay clock, the back of the pack has too much of an advantage and can get a split pack at too high of a percentage. A delay clock reduces that percentage significantly (creates a speed for the pack, creates distance between the blockers and jammers), thus, taking away the advantage of a non-moving back of the pack team.
The team that gets a goat could have prevented having a goat gotten by better pack positioning, by having blockers that could get out of a block, and by having blockers that could set a block for their goat. If the other team doesn't get a goat, they can't slow the pack down and the team in front can speed it up as soon as the other team tries to get a goat or block the jammer. You blame teams for not preventing runaway pussies but give teams a pass for allowing goats. I don't get it.
Checked with Certified Refs
Hey, Norb, I asked a certified ref the same question (basically, can you just line up on the pivot line and go? isn't it the stationary team that's breaking the pack?) and he said yes. You can, and you will not be penalized for breaking the pack. That doesn't really prevent the team in the back from staying just ahead of the jammers as they reform the pack, but it does get them moving so you don' t have that ridiculous wiggle into the pack thing jammers did a lot in Easterns. A moving (even slowly moving) pack is a lot easier for a good jammer than a stopped pack.
I also asked another certified ref if the front team would be penalized for not skating backwards to reform the pack and he said that you don't have to skate backwards to reform the pack; you just have to not move more forward once the no pack is called.
And a little bird told me that it was possible for a stuffed jammer to hand the panty over the wall of knee-planted blockers on the jammer line - to their pivot, and the pivot can take off and her next entry into the pack is a scoring run. That doesn't *sound* right to me because no one passed the blockers in play on the first "pass" while panty was in air. But the bird was a super reliable source, and she told me that was the interpretation at Westerns (tho it was maybe not known to teams? cz no one did it) and that her team had been practicing it. Fact is, even if that *doesn't* count as the first pass, at least it theoretically gets people moving so a jammer has a chance to rely on skill instead of wiggling to get through, even if she has to do a lap to get there. Either way, that could be a bit of a game changer cz you'd line your jammers up in pivot hats a lot more often.
I'm with Bo. I like the banked track Pack Box - so the pack has a pivot line and a back line behind which blockers may not line up. I also like the 3-second rule that starts the jammers regardless. I also like Hurt's idea of a one-whistle everyone start, though I don' t think either of those solutions encourage anyone to actually move *forward* at the whistle since current rules allow skating clockwise (and losing that would be sad, IMO). But they're a start.
And I like it when teams refuse to line up on the jammer line, or react to that particular strategy at all - when they just go out there and play roller derby. Which happened in pretty much all the jams of the games after the Rat vs Rocky game, so even if the game was the worst I have ever seen (bar none, and I strongly considered retiring after watching because I want to play roller derby, not hands-free wrestling on skates) - at least taking that boring strategy to its logical and retarded conclusion seemed to get everyone talking and inspired the rest of the teams to actually play.
I also strongly believe that if both teams refuse to play more than a couple jams, they have forfeited the game and should be treated so.
Panty Pass
Wow! That could work. I just reread the panty pass rules and your little bird is totally correct. You give up the possibly of getting lead jammer though, but your blockers would be in front and maybe able to hold the opposing jammer long enough for the new jammer to score some points. This could totally change the perceived advantage of having the back of the pack at the start of a jam.
8.4 - A Jammer pass, either
8.4 - A Jammer pass, either INITIAL or scoring, cannot be initiated by entering
the pack from the front. If a Jammer who has exited the front of the engagement
zone is then swallowed backward into the front engagement zone and/or pack, she
returns to her previous pass (see ) until she again re-exits the front
engagement zone.
That's the only thing that
That's the only thing that could be "interpreted" in the rules determining if the jammer cleared the pack and completed her initial (first) pass.
A real question
A real question, of course, from a real coach, and this could be what Ivanna is talking about when she writes “the interpretation at Westerns”. As I read the rules I don't think 8.4 applies to panty passes.
8.4 is concerned about the tactic of “eating the baby”. A couple of years ago I saw this happen to my team, Deranged was jamming and at the jammer whistle she knocked our jammer into the infield and skated backwards. Our jammer not wanting to commit a track cut minor also skated clockwise to get behind Deranged. Deranged continued to skate backwards and the two jammers went about half a lap going clockwise, (with our bench screaming at her to take the minor cut, but she was determined not to commit the minor), to the point, that the pack that had continued to skate forward, had almost caught up. Deranged then allowed our jammer back on the track and Rocky that then had the front of the pack swallowed her up and recycled her to the back of the pack.
Once our jammer fought her way through the pack, the question then arises, “What pass is she on?” “Did she just complete her initial pass?” Of course, WFTDA already had 8.4 in affect, informing refs how to properly call this situation. “A Jammer pass, either initial or scoring, cannot be initiated by entering the pack from the front.”
As I read the rules about the panty pass, I see nothing that says the panty can not be passed forward, it just can't be thrown.
Unfair
You give up the possibly of getting lead jammer though
Why should a team have to forfeit lead jammer just to break a rear wall? That doesn't seem very fair.
This could totally change the perceived advantage of having the back of the pack at the start of a jam.
Um, what you just said is ANOTHER advantage the rear wall gets. "We're not going to move this rear wall, so if you want to give up lead jammer to try and get through it, go ahead!"
Regardless, I don't see how a technicality like this will change the fact that entire jams can go off without anyone skating for two minutes.
No lead
Actually, Windy, giving up lead here is a reasonable trade-off, if not outright advantageous. With the pivot off and sprinting immediately and the opposing jammer still behind your wall, you have a good chance to hold them long enough for your new jammer to start scoring points before they can get free, get lead and call the jam.
Worst case? You get a 0-0 jam. That's a pretty good downside for any derby strategy.
In Play
Is the Jammer in play before the jammer whistle blows?
Panty pass counter
What I'm not sure about (after scrimmaging it out last night at practice) is if the jammer has to be in play to pass the panty. Based on my insider info, sounds like no, they can hand it off as soon as the first whistle is blown. But my former rules committee perspective is that jammer doesn't exist (so shouldn't be legal to pass the panty) until her whistle is blown. There are precedents otherwise, though (like being able to call a jam from out of bounds or down), so I can see arguments for why we should let the jammer pass on the first whistle. And I like the One Whistle Starts Them All idea the more I think about it, anyway. I will be interested to see how its called in S Centrals.
And WindyMan, after reading your last ("Basketballs Shot Clock and the Why") - I just wanted to tell you that I asked Rocky players why they didn't just start on a knee or send a guy out or whatever to get the jam started. And the player I talked to said they agreed that if they were ahead, they'd let Rat stall - so attributing blame to Rat City and saying poor Rocky Mountain - um, no. Both teams decided that outcome, and it takes two to have a stalemate. Each team had their reasons, but in my mind, there isn't a bad guy and a victim (or two bad guys, even though that was my first reaction). There's just a young sport with smart players and evolving rules and two teams that put a spot light on a weak spot in those rules.
Re: Panty pass counter
3.5.1 The star may be transferred by either Jammer while in the Engagement Zone. Jammers and pivots must be within the Engagement Zone play to pass the star.
So, the jammer does have to wait for her whistles?
Or no?
Jammer whistle
The rules aren't specific at all on the status of the jammer between the first and second whistle. That would seem to make it legal to pass the star after the first whistle, provided the pack is right in front of her. On the other hand, that approach to omissions would open up the question: Can a blocker skate CW behind the jammer line and block the jammer before the second whistle?
There is a hole in the rules that needs an immediate plug.
I would suspect
I would suspect the jammers need to be released before the panty can be passed, another good question, though.
It matters, The way I see it
It matters, The way I see it if the jammer (even if she started as a pivot)is accelerating prior to the jammer start whistle it is a false start and she has to yield.
That's just me though. However, I also am of the school of thought that belives that moving forward without touching your skate past the jammer line is also acceleration (contrary to the way it's called).
In physics, acceleration is the rate of change of velocity with time. In one dimension, acceleration is the rate at which something speeds up.
So if you use the above as the standard of acceleration if a skater were to move her arm (or foot) forward past the jammer line that would qualify as acceleration regardless if she touches her skate or body to the floor past the line.
It has been explained to me several times that it is not considered acceleration until the skater touches the floor past the line. Now does acceleration that touches someone that is touching the floor count as derby acceleration?
So, short explanation....I don't friggin know.
the rules are clear on one thing, for sure
Reaching over the line does not put a jammer on the other side of the jammer line. Touching the track on the other side of the line does. I can't think of any exceptions to that in the rules. You can lean, reach, glare and anything else that doesn't involve touching and still not be past the line. Remember all those "is it a line or a plane" discussions a hundred years ago?
But what about touching the
But what about touching the pivot to pass the panty? Isn't that touching past the line?
Nope
The jammer has not false started unless any part of her body, clothing or equipment is touching the surface of the track past the jammer line at the moment the jammer whistle is blown.
Engagement?
I see this in terms of "engagement." It seems to me that a jammer cannot engage play until the jammer whistle is blown. Passing the panty to a pivot after the first whistle but before the jammer whistle appears to me that the jammer is in fact engaging out of play.
But, I don't see it written as such in current rules.
I see alot of changes in the future.
Ch-Ch-Ch-Changes
If this tactic tests out with the desired result, you could see a lot of tactical changes, with few if any rule changes. We'll see what comes of it during South and North Centrals. If this works out well, I wouldn't be surprised to see a small tab attached to the jammer panty for quickly whipping the panty off.
No engagement
Even if it said the jammer cannot engage, engagement is blocking or assisting. All it does say on the subject is "Jammers begin at the second whistle." and "...the referee whistles the Jammers to begin their sprint through the pack with two short whistle blasts."
It also says "The Jammers may engage each other anywhere inside the track boundaries for the duration of the jam. When a Jammer is outside of the Engagement Zone, she may only engage the opposing Jammer."
Apparently the rules say it is legal for the jammers to block each other before the second whistle. ~sigh~
Star Pass False Start
According to the rulz...
2.4.4.1 - Jammers are considered in position and ready if they are in bounds when the first whistle of the jam (i.e., the whistle to start the pack rolling) is blown. Jammers are subject to false start penalties if they are not on or behind the Jammer line at the Jammer start whistle (see Section 6.13.5 for specific penalty details). Jammers are permitted to put on their helmet covers after the jam has started. However, each Jammer must have her helmet cover in hand before the jam starting whistle. A helmet cover cannot enter a jam in progress.
Most importantly: Jammers are subject to false start penalties if they are not on or behind the Jammer line at the Jammer start whistle.
If a Pivot becomes the Jammer due to a star pass, before the Jammer start whistle, while the Pivot/Jammer is not on or not behind the Jammer line, then shouldn't said Pivot/Jammer receive a major false start for entering the engagement zone before yielding advantage after a false start?
Absolutely
But the pivot is not the jammer when they receive the star. The original jammer is now an inactive jammer. The jammer status is not transferred until the jammer cap is on the pivot's head.
I agree and there's a workaround
I agree with your logic. If the Pivot has become the jammer before the jammer whistle, then when the jammer whistle is blown if the new jammer is still across the line, they'll have to yield.
Of course, the Pivot doesn't become the jammer until she is wearing the jammer panty. She can carry it in her hands until the jammer whistle is blown. I think she can even skate away holding it.
Therefore
If ALL of the blockers on the team that engages the Star Pass start skating forward, once they get far enough away & "NO PACK" is called, the jam whistle should blow, allowing the pivot carrying the jammer panty to put it on & be a quarter lap ahead of the opposing jammer...
Right?
Yup
That's where this train of thought and action inevitably ends up. This brings us to:
"9.3 REFEREE DISCRETION
9.3.1 The consensus of the referees will be the final decision on any disputed point that is not clearly spelled out in these rules."
Since the status of the jammer isn't clearly defined between the first and second whistle, it's up to the ref team at each game to decide how legal such a play will be. At least until there is an addendum to the rules that eliminates the uncertainty.
The problem of doing this, is
The problem of doing this, is that this becomes a precedent, and thus a whole new rule, made up in the middle of a game.
If that happens, what is the obligation to the teams to tell them that a new rule has been written by the referee crew, and what that rule is?
Does this become a precedent to be referred to for the remainder of the tournament, or do the skaters get new rules for each game?
This would seem to be more the purview of an on-site game commission which can be convened on no-notice, rather than the referee crew.
I'm under the impression, that if it isn't in the rules, and it isn't a danger to other skaters, it's allowed. If that wasn't true, we wouldn't have the start line dilemma we have now.
What's to stop a jammer from
What's to stop a jammer from skating clockwise around the track and handing the star to the pivot on the pivot line, then taking a knee with the other blockers?
Or if precise timing is needed, they take a knee and the jammer hands the panty over across the pivot line. She's still behind the jammer line, almost a lap behind it, and there's nothing in the rules that accounts for negative laps. Even so, does the negative lap go to the jammer person, or the jammer panty? Is that clear in the rules?
And if anyone can't find a reason to forbid it, why wouldn't the opposing blockers chase her clockwise so they could be in front of the pivot when they take a knee?
Once you open this Pandora's box, you have an avalanche of unintended consequences.
I might be able to come up with a few other strategies to ruin roller derby.
Precedent
My speculation is there is a small bit of precedent for this, and a lot of room for interpretation, but there is such a thing as a negative lap. It's how a 6-point pass is possible (and happened once, but wasn't scored/reported correctly at the time). Of course, the interpretation side is if the panty makes a negative lap or not. That's how I would interpret it, but I think there needs to be a WFTDA supplement to put it to rest.
I wonder if the reffing crew for South Centrals has had much time to work out how they're going to do these things if they come up, and I wonder if they're going to come up.
But if the jammer whistle
But if the jammer whistle hasn't blown yet, there are NO laps yet.
Even in the case of a negative lap, that team has an advantage, because they can treat the jam as a Powerjam kill at first, while their pivot/jammer can enter the pack at full speed while the opposing team is concentrated on springing their jammer and can't spare the resources to shut the door.