The 3.1 update has already been widely addressed in multiple fora, including Justice's review here on DNN, but the discussion on cutting has clearly been re-opened after the big impact these penalties had during the Western and Eastern regional tournaments. After boutcasting the majority of those bouts, the letters B, O, and X are nearly worn off my damn keyboard. I feel like I, too, need to express frustration on the cutting issue.
I have never been a skater or an official of any kind, so my perspective on this is simply that of a fan (though a reasonably well-informed one).
I feel like the source of the problem is this sentence in 6.2.10: "Cutting the track penalties are issued when any part of the returning skater's skates, body or equipment are touching the floor inside the track boundary".
Is a player really "re-entering the track from out of bounds" when one of her wheels touches the track as she jumps to her feet? Or when she's trying to slow herself specifically to avoid a cut but nudges the track? Or when she's knocked on her ass and some part of her body touches the track ahead of the blocker who decked her?
The cutting rule is meant to stop a skater from "bettering her position" while out of bounds. As far as I can see, cuts happen in one of three ways:
- The skater intentionally cuts
- The skater unintentionally cuts due to lack of awareness of an opponent's position
- The skater unintentionally cuts even though she's fully aware of her position and her opponents' positions and really is trying follow the rules.
1 and 2 are clearly penalties. 3 needs some work. If a skater is obviously slowing down and looking at the blockers, finding her place to legally re-enter, and one of her wheels touches the line, this is not IMHO an attempt to better her position. It's an attempt to follow the rules. Similarly, if a skater's motion is obviously out of control due to, er, "opponent influence", this is not an attempt to better her position, it's getting her ass kicked. How she behaves upon recovery is what should matter.
The cutting rule has also led to a big increase in blockers "forcing the cut" by doing a hit-and-slow maneuver, even coming to a near-stop in an attempt to "hold" her opponent out of bounds. IMHO, strategies that involve one player forcing or tricking another player into breaking the rules should be highly discouraged. "Drawing the foul" is a strategy used in various situations in other sports too, but here we have a situation where it's really easy and quite common for a player to accidentally commit this foul.
The strict interpretation of the rule really doesn't seem fun or fair and it just adds insult to injury. I can't tell you how many times in the past two weeks I saw a girl desperately try to follow the rules and get a major for her effort.
Post-script:
Note that this is posted in the "Staff Blog" section of DNN. These are my thoughts and opinions and should not be taken to reflect the position of DNN or anyone other than myself. Also note that I have intentionally refrained from offering solutions. I think it would be presumptious of me to tell the WFTDA what to do about it. If anyone really cares to hear what I think should be done, I'm sure you'll ask!
-G
Problem with any rules is discretion
I heard over and over again that the 3.0 ruleset eliminated a lot of referee discretion - which in many ways is good, because then the rules are easier to enforce uniformly and consistently. Unfortunately, you'll also get these situations. I noticed it when I traveled to see Cincinnati and Carolina and at the Eastern Regionals.
If we give some latitude to referees, we'll go back to have some continue to call it tight, some calling it really loose, and some players trying to "game" the system.
It'll eventually come down to which complain the rules committee wants to live with.
The refs did it right
I didn't mean to blame the referees for any of my frustration with the cutting penalties; I should have made that more clear in my post. The rule says any part and that's how they enforced it, love 'em or hate 'em.
My beef is with the strictness of the rule itself. It's just way too easy to break, or be forced to break.
6.2.10 needs serious work
Rule 6.2.10 was created to eliminate unwanted behavior in roller derby - namely, skaters bettering their positions while skating out of bounds.
From what I can gather, to prevent this from happening the cutting the track rules were given razor-sharp teeth to stop the behavior.
Unfortunately, as we've seen, the behavior has not stopped. Even the very best skilled and trained skaters in Roller Derby are falling prey to the appliation of this rule.
Why?
Because the truth is that the laws of physics and inertia are stronger than anything the WFTDA Rules Committee can write.
What we have is a rule that is attempting to stop behavior that, sadly, is nearly impossible to stop. Skaters are attempting to stop cutting the track, but the line "Cutting the track penalties are issued when any part of the returning skater's skates, body or equipment are touching the floor inside the track boundary" pretty much guarantees many many penalties (and great fan confusion) that comes about regardless of skill level, effort, or intent.
My proposed fix is to require a skater to (a) be completely in bounds and (b) skating before this penalty is called.
(a) completely in bounds because it only at this point can we tell if a skater has actually bettered her position because it is only when a skater is in bounds can a skater be in play or do anything to affect the game; and
(b) skating for exactly the same reasons (if you're down you don't have a position and can't do anything to affect the game and are subject to a whole different species of penalties.
Doing this will give skaters a legitimate opportunity to actually avoid cutting the track penalties - calling the penalty the milisecond even the slightest piece of fabric from her wrist guard touches in bounds ignores the laws of physics - and its wreaking havoc at bouts.
I love it
It is NOT a "slow call" or a subjective one. This post, begining with the phrase "my proposed fix..." and ending with the wonderful concept "species of penalties" is a concise interpretation of 3.1 rules that is actually less in conflict with the general definitions of "in bounds" and "out of bounds" than the current rules clarifications are. I will be contacting my WFTDA reps promptly. thanks.
Reckless Ndangerment
Charm City Roller Girls
First I've heard of this
Because the truth is that the laws of physics and inertia are stronger than anything the WFTDA Rules Committee can write.
I, for one, remain unconvinced.
oh and Rei,
There are currently five levels of WFTDA ref certification. For info check out - http://www.wftda.com/officiating/
So mysterious...
MsDfiant,
Thanks! I'm actually familiar with that page on WFTDA, but I was being very literal when I said I want to see the standardized certification and that all the zebras should be on the same page.
All their officiating page tells me is which refs have their little gold stars. There's no list of requirements one can download like for skater requirements. There's no info on how or where your refs can attain ref training or what the minimum skills/knowledge is for each level. For leagues like mine that are in the process of getting their WFTDA certification or non-member leagues that play under WFTDA rules, this is no help whatsoever :(
http://fishnetburnns.blogspot.com
Just a Few More Months...
Refs who don't have WFTDA league affiliation are supposed to have access to the ref certification information in January 2009. Who you contact will depend on your region; there are 2 contacts for each of the 4 newly defined regions. If you've tried them and they aren't getting back to you, I would wait until January and try again.
Stegoscorus
Windy City Rollers
Rink Floyd's proposal
Whatever the case may be, something ought to be done about the situation. Again and again, announcers at the Eastern Regionals said "We're seeing that penalties determine the game". Not that penalties were a part of deciding the game. They emphasized it really, really clearly: it was THE thing deciding the games.
A big part of this is the cutting the track rules. We've moved from "discretion" to "interpretation" - a semantic difference if anything. As Gnosis writes, there are three cases of cutting the track that happen, but as written, someone intending to follow the rule can have a LACE fall forward, positionwise, and be called for cutting the track. And, no disrespect intended to the refs, but when it comes to how much attention to detail may be required to accurately make these calls, I think it will often be beyond anyone's ability, and will simply be 'best guesses'. 'Best guesses' that are determining who wins close games. Of the calls I saw this weekend that were questionable, the vast majority were cutting the track calls.
Rink Floyd's proposed solution is incredibly elegant. Rather than working on some small piece of a skater or her equipment, it focuses on the whole skater. I'm confident that every ref will be more than equipped to make calls that are so much more clear, and we'll move further away from interpretation of minutia and closer to a game that allows the fans to understand why fouls are called. Further, with more skaters in play, closer to a game that will keep fans up on their feet.
-HedonistPoet
Rule Nazism
HedonistPoet is absolutely right about penalties deciding bouts. It's becoming ludicrous just how often 6.2.10 is putting jammers in the box and heavily influencing the score by letting the other team swing for the fences unopposed.
The rule is inherently broken for the reason that Rink Floyd cites, and it has the end effect of giving referees more direct control over the outcome of game than in any other sport. A ref who calls too many fouls in basketball may be irritating, but chances are you're not going to see a game decided by free throws.
6.2.10 ignores the fact that if the corner of my kneepad crosses the track boundary as I'm trying to control a slide and re-enter legally, the game is not adversely affected. The other team suffers no detriment whatsoever because my pad scooched over the line by 1 cm.
So many other rules are based upon how they affect gameplay. If I push a girl and she falls, I get a major, whereas if she doesn't even stumble, I get a minor. 6.2.10 tried to do that by introducing the multiple skaters rule, but then goes and breaks it again by being so darn strict on what re-entering the track means.
For the purpose of any other rule if I am down on the outside of the track boundaries, I am out of bounds, and most certainly out of play. I'm not passing anyone, I'm not getting a free ride skating out of bounds. If the rule is meant to keep skaters from bettering their positions, why does it allow for penalizing them when they aren't even in play yet, particularly if they aren't passing in-bounds players?
This rules gives me no end of frustration as a player, because it seems that whenever a new rule comes out all the refs go nutty on calling penalties to the very letter of it, and sometimes even beyond and 6.2.10 is a Rule Nazi's wet dream.
As a captain, it really kills me to see my players put in the box for one wheel going over the boundary by 1/8 inch for a half a second, and then observe the same girls getting hit in the face and head, being back blocked, pushed or slide tackled with no penalties called.
My understanding is that the job of the refs is not to call penalties, but first and foremost to keep the skaters safe! Having their collective BVD's in a knot about calling cutting the track penalties is causing some refs to miss blatant fouls in the pack!
I would rather see the refs less strict on cutting the track penalties for both sides and more observant of the hands, elbows and trips; things that not only really impact the game, but have a strong affect on the safety of my girls.
Hopefully WFTDA has the foresight to do a little tuning to this rule so it's more realistic and less punitive. I'd also like to see some sort of standardized ref certification and test, like the one for skaters. I think it would do a world of good to get all the zebras on the same page!
-Rei Zerburnn
http://fishnetburnns.blogspot.com
History is important
Previous versions of the rules allowed for quite a bit of local variance in how things were called.
This was great if two leagues wanted to play a more open game. Less penalties were called, it was faster and when penalties were called it was for the elbows and hits to the head. Two other leagues could decide to get together and play a very strict, letter of the rules kind of game. They play the same, so far fewer penalties but each team expected that if you inched forward on a cut that was a measurable advantage and should be penalized ... and so played accordingly.
Now put one of those loose teams in with one of those strict teams. Who wins? That depends on how tightly the ref-crew calls it. Call it loose and the loose team who's used to it runs all over the place, cutting here and there and probably wins. Call it tight and the loose team is going to get hit time and time again with what they perceive as technicalities.
The answer is to call it the same; and those guidelines are given by the WFTDA. Refs do not have the authority to decide to be slack on the cutting the track calls. They are expect to call everything because if they do not in a close game that one call can affect the game.
The referees have far LESS control than they once did over the outcome of a game ... but I'd balance that by saying that the game is not about scoring points primarily ... it's about penalties, managing minors on jammers, drawing the cut-tracks, etc. This is a sport where the scores combined can easily be 200 ... and so can the penalty count.
As a ref I can also tell you that many of the rules do not, in my personal opinion, work to keep the skaters safe. The sheer fact that there are so many technical penalties - things that could be avoided if there was a simple yield-the-advantage clause - keeps the refs focused on trying to call those, report them to the trackers and we miss far too many safety issues. Plus the box cap. And the fact that you can't play while bleeding but can play covered in blood.
The bright side is that I think the WFTDA does watch these kinds of things very closely.
I would love to hear your thoughts on what I posted elsewhere here about rules changes I'd like to see ... I think, after reading your recent comment, you're saying some of the same things that leagues like Carolina have been saying for some time (no more minors, etc.)
Intent
It's the old "guilty until proven innocent" trap. 8.3.3 states we should assume legal intent, but instead the punishment is instantaneous.
My personal feeling on the cutting track/foremost blocker issue is that the majority of the skaters who received majors over the last two weekends did not intend to better their position. It was, as Rink Floyd stated, physics.
If the jammer is passing to the inside and gets blocked out of bounds, odds (and momentum) say she will re-enter in front of that blocker. Can she get Lead Jammer? No. Does she get a point? No. Should she be given a minute in the box and be a quarter of the way to ejection? NO.
My local head ref can vouch for the fact that I have been debating 6.2.10.5 since the first time I read it.
"Jethro Skull"
DCD; no venue, no fans, no season, no problem.
A few points to chew on
Refs have been instructed this year more than others to follow the specifics of the written rules and guidance from the WFTDA ... like it or not, if the skater slides face first and her nose crosses back on the track before any other part of her while her hips have passed people, that is a cut and the referees have been instructed to call that.
Don't assume the refs even LIKE the rules they are calling. Like / not-like has nothing to do with it.
The cutting rules are certainly problematic. More problematic to me, however, is that the system is currently about penalties. Many (most? I don't know) games have more penalties logged than points.
Some crazy people out there have lobbied (and continue to lobby) for changes ... like the complete removal of minors, like the ability for a skater to correct her situation and (if she does), award no penalty (like the one dropping to a knee to avoid the cut, like the jammer yielding on the false start) ... and for situations like scoring, simply do not award points for the illegal passes. Re-scope penalties and have a target more in the range of 20-40 a game instead of 150-200. Penalties would be obvious to fans and spectators (how often can you really track minors today) and more importantly you be focusing the vast amount of observation and brainpower of the referees on the field to catch 100-150 technical fouls ... with that many to call, if they mess up 10-15% that's still a lot of blown calls and missed calls. Let's stop counting the procedural issues, stop tracking the paperwork and start focusing on scoring points and keeping people safe.
Oh, and fix pack definition.
Oh my...
stats geeks everywhere just blew a gasket. I can think of one in particular...
I have to admit this sounds quite feasible. Focus on the truly dangerous/poor sportswomanship shots, and let these athletes do what they are there for; to try to win.
Otherwise we'll be throwing yellow panties, stopping the bout every 13 seconds so we can hold hands and watch the replay, and the average 60-minute bout will take 6 hours. It's too scary to consider.
Duke City Derby
no venue, no fans, no season, no problem
Less stats folks than you may think ...
Some initially blew gaskets ... but have since repaired them and now see the light.
Spaceage technology...
My gaskets are unblowable.
your gaskets
this quote should go into the anals ... er annals of derby history!
www.phillyrollergirls.com
In the same vein.....
One of my pet peeves concerning derby is when the jammer tried to re-engage, but the blocker is skating mooooooooooooooooooooore than 20 feet from the back of the pack so jammer can't re-engage. In other words, blocker is getting the "benefit" of the jammer not allowed to re-engage despite the fact said blocker is committing a penalty herself!
The Original GGRDonald
too many peeves to fit one column
Ref Bowling
In the same vein.....
Submitted by theoriginaldonald on October 15, 2008 - 9:10pm.
One of my pet peeves concerning derby is when the jammer tried to re-engage, but the blocker is skating mooooooooooooooooooooore than 20 feet from the back of the pack so jammer can't re-engage. In other words, blocker is getting the "benefit" of the jammer not allowed to re-engage despite the fact said blocker is committing a penalty herself!
GGRDonald, I completely agree. I have been telling my local officials that I think cutting the track heavily favors blockers who want to...shall we say...use the rules in an unscrupulous fashion to their advantage.
Another case in point is that it's now incredibly advantageous for blockers to hit to the inside instead of the outside in order to try to try to force the jammer to cut, especially using a "block and stop" method.
This sets up a scenario I like to call "ref bowling". With a little timing a blocker can blast the jammer into the infield, likely making her get a penalty, and at the same time have a good shot at taking out a pack ref, which is one less person watching when they trip or elbow an opposing player. Even better, if their jammer and jamref are clear of the pack, it's the perfect time to "bowl" an opposing skater into the ref with the lowest skating skills and hopefully cause a pileup. Strike!
I hate seeing the game played this way, but the rules can cause nasty evolutions in tactics.
I've also heard some refs complaining lately about skaters flying into the infield and how they should watch out for the ref's safety! I tell them that I worry about their safety too and don't know why WFTDA would put them into this situation where they are such big, stripey targets...
Boo.
http://fishnetburnns.blogspot.com
Actually, because the
Actually, because the blocker IS more than 20 feet behind the pack, she's directly inhibiting play of the Jammer, the Jammer doesn't have to engage or 're-engage' the blocker. Instant penalty for the blocker, not the jammer as the blocker is Out of Play.
"One is the loneliest number.."
Calls
Officiating sports is situational to a great extent, which requires an official to make quick and fair judgment based on what they have just witnessed. It's not always technical. The officials that are taking everything so literally, based on what is read in a rule book, are simply inexperienced in the realm of sports officiating. It certainly weighs on the game. And it sucks.
I would tell you that you are completely wrong
The officials that have relevant other-sports experience are constantly griping behind closed doors at the literal and specific way they are being told to call games.
Remember this ... derby is equal parts ...
- people with basically no sports experience
- people with some bits of team sports experience (and those want the game to be called more like soccer or hockey or similar)
- people with speed skating experience (which is linear, and a millimeter of difference is, to them, meaningful)
Seriously. Many of them have considered quitting because the rules themselves and the manner they are being required to be called and the amount of paperwork they generate borders on obscene and at the very least silly in their opinions.
Carolina and Texas, for instance, want to see a game playable with 4-5 refs max and a penalty count near the 60s. They'd rather see some of the stuff simply let-go or if the skater yields the advantage (unlike the current track cutting), then no penalty at all.
That, however, is not the general consensus currently.
Imagine those skaters with a speed skating background or no sports background though ... in their experience someone changing position in the sport they are used to playing (or not at all) is measurable. In their mind, that has to translate to an impact.
I the minds of others who know that there are "don't use your hands" rules in soccer, basketball and hockey and 99% of the touches are not penalties because even a little push or tug more often than not has no MEANINGFUL impact.
Can you measure the change? yes ... and the current instruction is to call it as such (and a major if it changes positions or causes the skater to step out of bounds)
Even if you could measure it, is it meaningful? That's a whole different question.
Contact
Well it's a drag that the officials are being told to call things so literally. And I live on the Carolina/Texas side of the fence. Let-the-skaters-play-the-game.
It's a contact sport and this isn't a case of skaters needing to learn the rules or learn to play by the rules. Contact being a large part of derby creates many situations that won't appear in speed skating.
This is a good perspective
And it's probably wise to also apply it to talking to refs and "gaming the rules", which I dare say might seem like accetable/strategic manuevers to those who have team sports experience and inexcusable to those from no-sports or "linear sports" (great distinction vodoo).
Being a team sports girl, I do find myself feeling lenient towards expressing your opinion on what the call should have been and towards using rules to force opponents to do things they don't like. It's a bit ingrained maybe. I've been "suggesting" breeches to officials in other sports a great many years. Perhaps us team gals should clarify that shouting out to a ref doesn't mean I expect him/her to take my view every time (or even most times, or even ANY time). My experience has always been: You vent, the ref almost NEVER changes a call for you since it is their job and not yours to be watching these things, and play goes on. maybe, MAYBE if a similar instances occurs later in the game they have your objection somewhere in their subconscious- but that's about as far as you might expect it to go. The more you yell, the LESS likely the refs will be sympathetc, so you choose your battles, keep it brief, and move on. I would venture to say that it's therapeutic as an athlete, but also probably not so therapeutic to refs.
And then there are the "gaming the rules" accusations. Where again, I don't find issue at all. Do team sport athletes game the rules? ALL THE TIME. for clock management, for psychological advantage, for no reason at all. Do I drop to the back of the pack (and beyond) so opponents have to come in behind. yes. why? It's a win/win for me. I'm pushing her back (which is goal #1), she might just cut in and get a major (bonus!), and if she doesn't she is FRUSTRATED by being forced to follow my slow self around. It's 20x better than trash talking b/c instead of implying that you own her, you're showing that you actually do (for about 3 seconds). Ice the kicker, wait forever before pitching, wave your hands wildly and yell "BALL" in front of the player trying to inbound the ball. All of these things are little manipulations that make you look obnoxious, but the smart kind of obnoxious, and are worth it if you force your opponent to make a mistake.
Do linear sports athletes do similar things? I don't know. I've never competed in any of those. But I can certainly see how people without sports backgrounds might react differently to what I tend to see as standard veins of competition. I should also point out that none of these little games within a game are without risk. If I slow to a stop I am just as un-maneuverable as my opponent. And if I'm out of the pack she's got only me to beat (much easier than me and two friends). So you always open yourself to a litle vulnerability when you push rules in your favor.
Reckless
Charm City Roller Girls
Sunshine
I pretty much agree with everything Reckless said. Everything. I think people hate the cut penalties quite a bit right now because of the part it played at both regionals. But, when my league was at ECE, the beginnings of this were settling in. My league has made a conscious effort to adjust to the cutting rules and I don't feel like we suffered as much because of it at regionals. I imagine there are other leagues less frustrated by the cutting rules as well.
I think the newness of it and the relative ease of using cutting against jammers is why it played the factor it did. With all these top leagues getting exposure to it so often in such a short period of time, there will soon be some counter-strategy to it. I see this as some short-term pain more than anything else. Skaters will adjust to it and it won't be as big a deal down the road.
I wasn't at Easterns, but I was at Westerns and being a ref prior to coaching, I always have a laundry list of gripes about the reffing I see. Can't help it either; I'm just a douche like that. But, at Westerns, I felt cutting was called extremely well and as it's written. This including the "it's not a cut if the blocker is down and/or out-of-play." Pretty much everyone of those calls was spot on. I personally am much more concerned by the overall lack of speed I'm beginning to see in bouts. Pulling 20 feet majors by a whole pack of barely moving skaters is of great concern to me. It looks like the dreaded hockey buzz phrase, "the neutral zone trap". But I won't start on that. I'll just say that this outrage at cutting penalties will go away. Give the skaters some time to adjust to it and counter some of the strategy involved and it will only be a small part of the game. Plus the refs won't have to deal with more rule changes.
Forcing The Cut and Skating Clockwise
The cutting rule has also led to a big increase in blockers "forcing the cut" by doing a hit-and-slow maneuver, even coming to a near-stop in an attempt to "hold" her opponent out of bounds. IMHO, strategies that involve one player forcing or tricking another player into breaking the rules should be highly discouraged.
If I'm reading the rules correctly, an out-of-bounds skater should be able to skate clockwise to re-enter the track at the appropriate position, instead of having to wait for the blocker to pass her. The 3.1 rules prohibit skating clockwise only in specific circumstances: executing a block, skating to the penalty box, and retrieving a dropped helmet cover. Can anyone confirm my interpretation?
Interpretation Confirmed
Good insight. This is true on the track, but since you're talking about cutting (which isn't something that can happen until the skater re-enters), they have free reign to do just that to properly re-align their position.
Loop the loop
Joe Schwartz wrote:
If I'm reading the rules correctly, an out-of-bounds skater should be able to skate clockwise to re-enter the track at the appropriate position, instead of having to wait for the blocker to pass her. The 3.1 rules prohibit skating clockwise only in specific circumstances: executing a block, skating to the penalty box, and retrieving a dropped helmet cover. Can anyone confirm my interpretation?
Absolutely correct, nothing in the rules prohibits you from skating clockwise while out of bounds. The only way you'd be in line for a penalty is if you skated out of bounds intentionally (under 6.2.9) or if you engaged an opposing blocker upon re-entering play (under 6.2.4.2)
I have been telling my girls to use turning around or looping the loop as their first option and stopping or sliding as their second option. Still, this is a fast paced game and things happen rather quickly sometimes so it's all easier said than done.
If you're interested, I wrote an article for skaters about avoiding cutting the track penalties. You can read it here: fishnetburnns.blogspot.com/2008/09/avoiding-cutting-track-penalties.html
Still, what frustrates me about 6.2.10 is not necessarily that it's too strict, but that it's such an incredible impact on the team and on the game if the call is bogus. Especially for leagues like mine that are pending WFTDA, or the non-WFTDA leagues who don't exactly have creme de'la creme refs, it can be crippling to have a zebra call this rules sloppily.
I've seen refs call a jammer for cutting the track when they cut in front of an out of bounds blocker or when their skate is riding on the track boundary (technically still in-bounds). And it seems to be because they think they need to be gung ho and super picky and call it even if they weren't sure because there's so much emphasis right now on sticking to the letter of the rules, when the problem is we've still got a lot of B, C, and sometimes even A level refs interpreting the rules in their own way.
For some other penalties it doesn't affect the game as much, but when you can take a jammer out for half a jam you had better make darn sure you called it right because that represents a lot of potential points.
@ Reckless: I played both team and individual sports before derby (softball, basketball, jujitsu, muay thai) and I know what you mean about there being a difference in thinking. Still, while I understand there are ways to use the rules-as-written to your advantage, I think there is a line between playing skillfully and smartly within the rules and looking to exploit a rule first and use your skills second. I always found those types of players in any game to be annoying, arrogant and sore losers.
The way 6.2.10 is written I could wait for a player to almost re-enter and then veer behind her to force the cut through no fault of her own, but I don't think that's right. Nor do I want to knock girls into the refs on purpose because I think it's unsafe. But I'll certainly take advantage of checking to the inside, or using a 2 girl T-bone to shoot a player across the apex of a turn. One is a strategic play, the other just seems a little dirty. It's not how I like to win.
Rei
http://fishnetburnns.blogspot.com
I'm with you
on not bowling for refs for safety's sake. I would also speculate that while the sudden dive to get behind an entering skater might make them cut track, it might as frequently result in some very awkward and dangerous contact with this skater. Which opens you up to injury (most importantly) but also a pile of penalties such as blocking out of bounds (if you arrive too early), tripping, contact to illegal zones (head/back/lower legs) or skating counter-clockwise.
I, for one, was plenty overstimulated by the action in the packs at Eastern's. Staying on my skates and trying to help my jammers was keeping me busy enough that having the foresight to knock a player into a ref to stop another player was way beyond my scope. And truely, I think this is the key. So long as we encourage LOTS of legal blocking activity in the pack there just won't be room/time to over-manipulate the rules of the game. The answer to a great many gripes in derby is to land a big strong legal hit on the girl who's actions are disrupting your team's flow. So long as we're allowed to do that, I think we'll all get along just fine in the end.
6.2.10 vs. Miss Fortune
Lots of people above have weighed in on this, and I think there are both pros and cons to the rule in general. One specific part that I think should definitely be eliminated from the rule is the definition of cutting as it relates to ANY part of the skate or body, instead of just the skates. Why? Because it eliminates stuff like this: http://flickr.com/photos/rollerfan/1866215245/ -- her skates are CLEARLY in bounds, but she's touching the ground on the corner outside the track. Is she bettering her position? NO. Is she hurting anyone? NO. Is it pretty damn cool? Absolutely. And now, illegal.
not illegal
Sorry, but the Miss Fortune photo linked above is in no way illegal under 3.1.
- The 'skating out of bounds' rules (6.2.9) specifically refer to skates.
- The 'out-of-bounds blocking' rules (6.2.4) very specifically talk about skates being on the track.
- Cutting rules are impossible to apply to the photo, given lack of context, but under all the rules her position is on the track. If she passes someone while in this position, dragging a finger out of bounds, it's not a cut because by keeping her skates in bounds, she never leaves the 'in-bounds' state.
I'm not a fan of aspects of the cutting rules either, but this photo doesn't make a relevant argument.
irrelevant argument
I'm not a fan of aspects of the cutting rules either, but this photo doesn't make a relevant argument.
It does, however, make the unrelated argument that Miss Fortune is a badass, and that Joe Schwartz knows how to take him some derby photos. Damn.
Photo
... and that Joe Schwartz knows how to take him some derby photos. Damn.
The best out there imo.
Glossary contradiction?
Sorry, but the Miss Fortune photo linked above is in no way illegal under 3.1.
- The 'skating out of bounds' rules (6.2.9) specifically refer to skates.
- The 'out-of-bounds blocking' rules (6.2.4) very specifically talk about skates being on the track.
- Cutting rules are impossible to apply to the photo, given lack of context, but under all the rules her position is on the track. If she passes someone while in this position, dragging a finger out of bounds, it's not a cut because by keeping her skates in bounds, she never leaves the 'in-bounds' state.
I'm not a fan of aspects of the cutting rules either, but this photo doesn't make a relevant argument.
Then we have the WFTDA 3.1 glossary that states: "A skater is out-of-bounds when any part of the skater's body or equipment is touching the ground beyond the track boundary...."
Thus, under the rules, if any of you is touching out of bounds then ALL of you is out of bounds. And you remain so until no part of you is touching any point beyond the track boundary.
Therefore, under the photo we see, if such skater passes someone while touching her finger beyond the track boundary she's (hyper) technically out of bounds and bettering her position.
But this certainly does contradict Rule 6.2.9, which is focused on the location of a player's skates.
By golly it'd be nice to see some consistancy in the rules.
*(As a matter of course, no way I would call a CTT Penalty on the gal in the picture - but I figured I'd throw some gas on the fire by showing how it could be done, with a hyper-technical and strict interpretation of the rules).
-Rink
Yeppers
It's a contradiction.
And brings us back to the mystery of how a skater with only a finger inside the boundaries and the rest of herself OUTSIDE of them can be called for a cutting track penalty before fullfilling the definition of being in bounds.
also goes to show that glossary writing is difficult and important work that might offer an easy solution to our dreaded 6.2.10 by simply editing to say that a cutting track penalty is issued if a skater re-enters the track in such a way that her position is bettered once she returns to being in bounds (as defined in the glossary) than it was when she departed the track boundaries.
ps. can't score points until you're fully in bounds either.
Reckless
Charm City Roller Girls
Whoa.
I never noticed that "out-of-bounds" definition in the glossary, nor the corresponding definition of "in-bounds". And although section 6.2.9 says that "no part of the skater's skate(s) may touch the ground outside the track boundary" and the intent seems clear, it doesn't strictly preclude other body parts from consideration. But that's an extremely nitpicky interpretation, and I'm inclined to agree that Miss Fortune should be considered in-bounds in the example above.
So besides this minor problem with the glossary and 6.2.9, I agree that 6.2.10 needs most of the work. It would make more sense if 6.2.10 penalized a skater only after she returned in-bounds (thereby bettering her position) instead of merely touching in-bounds (which doesn't define her position). That would certainly make the rules more consistent, and IMHO no more subjective or difficult to enforce. Additionally, you could try to include impact/intent criteria similar to those elsewhere in 6.2, but at the expense of increased subjectivity.
Is there a common scenario causing most of the "unjustified" penalties for cutting the track? In other words, are most of them called against skaters who haven't yet returned in-bounds, or against skaters who returned in-bounds but did it unintentionally? (I'll admit, when watching the recent bouts, I usually had no idea why the penalty was called.)
I'm also curious what was the rationale for the current wording of 6.2.10? Even granted that a totally objective rule was desired, why is it so strict?
First Time Fans
Duke City will start our 2009 regular season in April, at our enormous, sparkly new venue, the Santa Ana Star Center. We're very excited about this chance to play in front of tons of fans (hopefully), but I gotta admit, I'm nervous about the effect these rules will have on them. People who come to see us for the first time are gonna be lost. It's weird enough that we pull players out of the game while the game continues (I've made my peace with this, but seriously, it takes some adjusting to), but for us to be constantly calling skaters out for no apparent reason (how many first time fans are gonna notice that the jammer not only cut an opponent in turn 1, but one of her teammates on the opposite side of the track as well?) makes me nervous that they aren't gonna understand our sport, or, worse, will believe that the refs are fixing the games. For those of us in the know, the rules follow a certain logic, and there's a history behind them, but they do not make us very fan friendly. Fans, generally, walk away frustrated when they feel that their team lost on penalties, and it seems to me we're giving them lots of chances to feel frustrated. So I'm not making a specific policy proposal here, and I have great respect for the Rules Committee, and really for WFTDA in general, but I gotta say this: hockey is regarded, in this country, as a hard sell because the rules are confusing for new fans. Hockey, compared to our sport, is a fucking breeze to watch or officiate. It's something we should keep in mind. That being said, Jethro, we're gonna call it tight in Santa Fe tomorrow, just like they will at Nationals!
--
If we lose our focus on local teams and local fans, we will soon be in danger of losing our venues, and possibly our sport.
Trying desperately to avoid any more sports analogies...
I'm going to take a nice wide brush and say that every sport has nuanced rules that you learn about as time passes. That does not make the games any less exciting as you start to get into a new sport. Heck, there are some sports I watch occasionally where I legitimately have no idea what's happening on the field. But I also don't think those sports are stupid or confusing. I'm the newbie.
But I will say that it's incumbent on the announcers to convey the narrative to the fans in an emotional way. Fans learn the sports through announcers, even if you're sitting next to SuperFan #1. As long as your announcers can communicate the nuanced rules in a way that makes sense, the fans won't even realize it's being so hotly debated on the Internet.
- bjmacke (a.k.a. Apron)
Making watching easier.
Well as a fan, figuring out the game and trying to spot the penalties IS part of the intellectual interest of roller derby. (Did I just say intellectual and roller derby? Bad Simon, no biscuit) But a quick, basic review of the rules INCLUDING what the penalty signals that the ref's are using is alot of help in figuring out what is going on. You may not be able to spot all the penalties, but it does help to understand the basics of cutting track and blocking out of the pack, which are easier to see from the stands than some of the other penalties.
Rule changes and decline of attendance
While one could not totally equate the decline of attendance in some WFTDA leagues with the new rules as there are other aspects including the price of gasoline and the overall state of the economy which is making people think twice about where to spend their dollars but I wonder if some of the reason is because fans feel "lost" as a result of the ever changing rules.
I have observed that based on the two WFTDA leagues that I cover as a part of Michi-chan's Real Derby, the announcers do not always explain the penalties. But at the same time, I do not see a lot of communication between the officials and the announcers. If you compare derby to other mainstream sports, you may be able to take a few things that work for these sports..
In hockey, a sport, which like derby uses a penalty box, a skater who is sent to the penalty box is sent for a specific reason and a specific duration of time. But it is made very well known to the fans and others the reason for the skater being sent to the box.
In football, which like derby, has complex and an extensive rule-set for penalties, the officials are equipped with wireless microphones to administer the penalties. In addition, there are a significant number of hand signals that can be used to communicate.
In horse racing, the announcer may be considered a steward of the track and therefore is fully in the loop of situations that take place so they can be properly communicated.
For these types of sports, there's a huge difference between them and derby where it comes to penalties. In hockey, the penalty could cause a stop in play where the trip to the box is initiated. In football, the flag is thrown but the administration of the penalty does not take place until the play is over or otherwise blown. In horse racing, a stewards inquiry is not initiated until after the race ends.
In derby, the penalties are administrated during a jam and unlike these other sports, play is not stopped nor do officials wait for play to naturally stop before a penalty is administered. Because of the fast pace of the game, refs are more focused on whistling off girls to go to the box, giving the "you're out of here..." hand signs and then that's the last we hear about it.
Think about this. What if derby had a more simplified rule-set and significant penalties that would result in the opposing team to be given an on-track advantage (e.g. penalty box) were not administered until after the conclusion of the jam? Yes, this would be a complete 180-degree on how roller derby is officiated.
The announcers and the fans need to know exactly what is going on. Fans want to see their favorite skaters skate and not being blown to the box for every little thing. Seriously folks, true 5-on-5 jams seem to be getting fewer and fewer with every rule change.
Trips to the penalty box should be fewer and far between for more serious penalties similar to the hockey experience.
For those few people out there who have Olympic aspirations for this sport, the rule-set and procedure will need to be a bit more simplified and the communication methods for ref calls will need to be significantly improved for international competition.
Just my 2¢ for what it is worth...
with derby love...
Michi-chan
Michi-chan's REAL Derby
http://www.michichan.com
There is a way
The following things happen in tourney play, and should be emulated at any non-tourney play:
1) When a player is called on a penalty, the ref makes the corresponding hand signal. This hand signal is in every program I've seen for the past few months, so a fan simply has to open up the program.
2) Announcer liaison. In tourneys, there is a ref sitting next to the announcer to convey the penalty information, and to answer any questions they may have about gameplay. I know this is not always possible at non-tourney bouts due to staffing, but it is also up to the announcers to be up to speed on the game they are announcing, and to know the hand signals.
-Judge Knot, PRG
Hear! Hear!
Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter. This is getting offtopic, but I muchly agree.
Obviously derby refs are very busy people, but the more communication with the audience during potentially-confusing situations, the better. I saw a lot of great improvements in ref communcation during the regional tournaments, at Houston in particular, and I MUCH appreciated it. Endless Justin in particular was really good about skating over to the announcer table and shouting out clarifications.
Not every call, of course. There are way too many and that's what hand signals are for, as Judge mentions. But any time play stops and there's a zebra huddle, the fans should be told what the huddle was for. Player ejections also come to mind; we had a couple cases during regionals where players were ejected from the game and there was no clear explanation from the refs. In one case, the ejected player actually logged on the the DNN boutcast from the locker room and told us herself!
So, yeah. Let's start putting a wireless mic on the head ref ala NFL. Barring that, Head Refs, please skate over to the announcer's table and clarify whenever you can. I know it's an extra responsibility and will add a few seconds to the game, but it really does help us fans (and boutcasters).
Wireless mics
During Charm City's first season, before Johnny Zebra created the excellent DerbyBoard program, I wore a wireless mic as head ref and would announce the jam score after every jam and would occasionally use the mic to explain ejections or other Uniquely Weird Shit. Not such a bad idea, although I always worried about taking a fall directly on the mic (as the receiver was clipped on at my waist) and utterly destroying it.
Notably, though, the announcing-of-the-score via mic did lead to some very dramatic moments at the end of close bouts.
JFM
Whistle Levels can be confusing as well...
Having called for some of the newer leagues and experiencing both regionals this year, I can definitely say the use of hand signals is a great help in understanding what is going on. Conversely though, some refs get a little too emphatic with their whistle usage. I realize they are trying to get the attention of the offending skater, but sometimes they get so loud with a whistle that it actually effects the momentum of the ENTIRE pack! Whistling too often or too loud can also confuse the crowd as well.
Also for the newer refs, Ref huddles are ok, but not if they last 2+ minutes. Fans grow quickly disinterested when the play is stopped for that long, and several times in succession.
Stupid Cheaters
I know we've pretty much beat this into the dirt, but I just gotta get my lumps in on it. I have a big mouth. I can't help myself. (It's a problem. Really.) Someone stop me! (Not really.)
Fixing the cutting the track conundrum is easy. All the precedents and definitions to make this rule make sense already exist in some form in the rule set. It's all good people.
First, jammers should NOT be allowed to advance through the pack out of bounds. It is cheating. Out of bounds is not in play, so you can't play out there. Stop playing out of bounds, cheaters.
HOWEVER, a jammer's pinky finger “re-entering” the track boundary is not advancing through the pack. It creates no advantage, has no impact on the game and is therefore (according to the rules for game impact) not a penalty.
A player’s SKATE and no other body part should be the determining factor (just like the precedent already set by judging a player in and out of bounds) for re-entering the track.
A jammer on her knees (according the the blocking rules) is not in play and therefore has not "re-entered" the track. If she hasn't re-entered the track, then by definition, she has not cut the track.
If the player is out of play, then she cannot be assessed a penalty for cutting the track unless/until she re-enters IN PLAY (according the the blocking and in/out of bounds rules) and establishes her position.
A jammer re-entering the track from out of bounds who betters her position in the pack without immediately relinquishing that advantage by falling back behind the skaters she passed out of bounds should be assessed a major penalty for cutting the track. (She's being a cheater and cheaters should be punished for cheating. Stupid cheaters.)
However, if she immediately gives up that advantage (just like the precedent already successfully set by the false start rule) she should receive a minor penalty for cutting the track. (She's only cheating a little bit and recognized that she was being a cheater and made the honorable choice to stop cheating.)
All of this is consistent with the current rule set. All of this makes stupid cheaters accountable for their cheating ways. All of this is fair.
Kumbaya... Ohmmm... Na-na-na-na-na... Be one with the rules... Derby is love...
Finally...
Much respect and props to the WFTDA rules committee. Their's is the toughest and (in my "humble" opinion) most important job in derby. Thank you to you crazy bastards who for some reason seem to enjoy the constant barage of second guessing and abuse. You're doing a fine job of squashing stupid cheaters who deserve squashing. Cheaters suck. Rules are good. Keep up the good work, Rules Gurus (and refs--fine, sure, I'll thank the refs, but just this one time, though, and that's it, so suck it up, refs--thanks... a little bit).
Good luck, peoples.
Amen.
Quad Almighty
A point slipped away...
One of the things that seems like has slipped away in this thread is simple: the rules, as strictly interpreted, unduly effect watchability and playability of the game.
Unfortunately, given the way that rules updates happen, it will be quite some time before anything can be done about that. The verbatim of the rules, though, to my mind, seem clearly problematic. Most importantly, I think they are endemic of a philosophy in WFTDA that has the potential to keep the organization from growing as large as it could, as well as impacting skater retention.
I'd like to say that's just my interpretation, but I've felt that response to it in at least a couple of leagues.