Zebra Huddleβ„’

Older Rulesets => 5/26/2010 Rules => Rules Discussion 5/26/2010 => Topic started by: Slaying Mantis on July 09, 2011, 05:15:41 am

Title: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Slaying Mantis on July 09, 2011, 05:15:41 am
Okay, so, somewhat related, perhaps more appropriate in the "Hypothetical Rules" section (and yes, I have followed the entire "team behind the jammer line" thread about this recently and feel I can grasp how these are called)... but what if the *entire pack* lines up behind the jammer line?

I am just waiting for this to happen, and soon, given the tenacity of (our beloved) skaters to find as many loopholes in the rules as possible. My first instinct is, all skaters minor false start?  OR, jam whistled dead due to impact of game play?

But, in the case of false starts... there are no skaters to "yield" to, so no possibility of upgrade to major, as the pack is already established, granted it is way ahead of the pivot line. How to assess this kind of SNAFU?
Title: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Riff Reff on July 09, 2011, 10:38:40 am
in this case: False start penalties to everyone. they'd all have to come to a complete stop, which is what you do to yield if there is no one to yield to. If they all stop, all false start minors. If a skater does not stop -> upgrade.

Quote
but what if the *entire pack* lines up behind the jammer line?


I cannot really imagine why this could be beneficial for both teams.
Title: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Brad Religion on July 09, 2011, 01:37:02 pm
I can think of a reason or two... But I try not to discuss strategy or the reasons behind it around here. Just know that there are teams that will do this if the other tries it.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Cliquework on July 09, 2011, 07:56:43 pm
Origin Topic: http://www.zebrahuddle.com/index.php?topic=1969.0
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: James Harper on July 11, 2011, 05:58:01 pm
I can think of a reason or two... But I try not to discuss strategy or the reasons behind it around here. Just know that there are teams that will do this if the other tries it.

Would this be considered adversly affecting gameplay and there for have the jam blown dead?

My initial thought is no, but can see an arguement from both sides.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Pol E. Dangerous on July 11, 2011, 11:52:00 pm
I can think of a reason or two... But I try not to discuss strategy or the reasons behind it around here. Just know that there are teams that will do this if the other tries it.

Would this be considered adversly affecting gameplay and there for have the jam blown dead?

My initial thought is no, but can see an arguement from both sides.

If every blocker lines up behind the jammer line, then every blocker will receive a Minor IP - False Start.  Following that, there could be a discussion about how can the blockers yield to each other when they are all false starting.

Once that has been established, all the blockers are in the pack, so the game continues, no major impact.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: The Gorram Reaver on July 12, 2011, 02:41:35 am
If every blocker lines up behind the jammer line, then every blocker will receive a Minor IP - False Start.  Following that, there could be a discussion about how can the blockers yield to each other when they are all false starting.

Once that has been established, all the blockers are in the pack, so the game continues, no major impact.

I would argue that the Blockers must also yield any advantage they have gained on the Jammers, just as a false starting Jammer who doesn't have an opposing Jammer must yield the advantage gained on the pack.  In other words, I would issue major penalties to Blockers who engage or pace the Jammers immediately following the Jammer start whistle.  After all, the Jammers have every right to expect that they can move freely for at least ten feet before engagement, and that all skaters who will be engaging them just after their start whistle will be in front of them when they begin.  That is the true advantage that the pack is gaining by lining up behind the Jammer line.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Megapickle on July 12, 2011, 04:01:06 am
I would argue that the Blockers must also yield any advantage they have gained on the Jammers, just as a false starting Jammer who doesn't have an opposing Jammer must yield the advantage gained on the pack.

Reaver, that's not quite right. The Rules Committee comment on the topic: http://www.zebrahuddle.com/index.php?topic=1723.msg24550#msg24550 simply says that the Jammer must stop. She doesn't have to wait till the pack is any particular distance in front of her, or even in front of her at all.

Edit: Nevermind, on further thought, the explanation linked above still leaves open your interpretation that the Jammer should yield to the pack, because of the phrase "yield the illegally gained position". It doesn't specifically state whom that position is relative to. But I still stand by this part of my post:

The language of 6.13.5 and 6.13.16 consistently uses "Jammer or Blocker(s)", instead of simply "skater(s)", clearly with the intent to make make it apply respectively. That is, Jammers yield to Jammers, and Blockers yield to Blockers.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: JoeXCore on July 15, 2011, 01:00:15 am
http://wftda.com/rules/publications

This is now addressed.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Megapickle on July 15, 2011, 01:30:07 am
http://wftda.com/rules/publications

This is now addressed.

Seems like the nuclear option, but good to see. One odd consequence: If a team has a poodle-er, and also a single blocker that steps across the line a half-second early, we're supposed to call off the jam. :-/

Now here's hoping we see a similar swift & harsh response to the 2-minute jam-that-wasn't from ECDX:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sbSCsITycPw
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: The Gorram Reaver on July 15, 2011, 02:54:14 am
One odd consequence: If a team has a poodle-er, and also a single blocker that steps across the line a half-second early, we're supposed to call off the jam. :-/

Not necessarily.  Bold emphasis mine. 
[rule]If at the first whistle, the majority of on the track Blockers and Pivot Blockers from both teams are not in position, the referee must immediately end the jam and an Official Timeout will be called.[/rule]
The situation you describe would only cause the jam to end in an Official Time Out if there was only one other Blocker on the track, because that is the only way two Blockers/Pivots can constitute a majority of the Blockers/Pivots from both teams.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: JoeXCore on July 15, 2011, 02:56:55 am
One odd consequence: If a team has a poodle-er, and also a single blocker that steps across the line a half-second early, we're supposed to call off the jam. :-/

Not necessarily.  Bold emphasis mine. 
[rule]If at the first whistle, the majority of on the track Blockers and Pivot Blockers from both teams are not in position, the referee must immediately end the jam and an Official Timeout will be called.[/rule]
The situation you describe would only cause the jam to end in an Official Time Out if there was only one other Blocker on the track, because that is the only way two Blockers/Pivots can constitute a majority of the Blockers/Pivots from both teams.

Pickle is right if that team has only those 2 blockers on the track in that particular jam.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Megapickle on July 15, 2011, 03:00:48 am
Nope, Reaver, two blocker-false-starts from one team does necessarily mean the jam is called off. Your quote needs to include the previous sentence as well:
[rule]It is required that the majority of on the track Pivot Blockers and Blockers from each team begin in this pre-jam positioning.[/rule]

The one you quoted with "both" is just lazy English. As is this one:
[rule]Blockers are considered in position when they are lined up behind the Pivot and ahead of the Jammer line.[/rule]

Either they meant "Pivot Line", or "any Pivot touching the Pivot Line". Makes little sense as written.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: JoeXCore on July 15, 2011, 03:05:13 am
I do not think the intent was for a

| X X X X                    |  O O
| O O                         | *
|                                | *

situation to result in a jam call off

is that "diagram" a good representation of what I am trying to say?
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Megapickle on July 15, 2011, 03:17:36 am
The situation you describe would only cause the jam to end in an Official Time Out if there was only one other Blocker on the track, because that is the only way two Blockers/Pivots can constitute a majority of the Blockers/Pivots from both teams.

Also, you mis-read the "majority" concept. Two in-place & two out-of-place results in a call-off. Jam only continues if the majority (greater than 50%) are in-place.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: JoeXCore on July 15, 2011, 03:22:15 am
The situation you describe would only cause the jam to end in an Official Time Out if there was only one other Blocker on the track, because that is the only way two Blockers/Pivots can constitute a majority of the Blockers/Pivots from both teams.

Also, you mis-read the "majority" concept. Two in-place & two out-of-place results in a call-off. Jam only continues if the majority (greater than 50%) are in-place.

While I agree with your statement in regards to that is what it says.
My "diagram" was me pointing out that I do not think that was the intent.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: The Gorram Reaver on July 15, 2011, 03:31:32 am
OK.  I'm going to go with conflicting English/poor proof reading.  I'm also going to get an answer from Rules Com....
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: mick hawkins on July 15, 2011, 03:37:15 am
Not necessarily.  Bold emphasis mine. 
[rule]If at the first whistle, the majority of on the track Blockers and Pivot Blockers from both teams are not in position, the referee must immediately end the jam and an Official Timeout will be called.[/rule]

plus...

| X X X                    |  O O O O
| X                          | *
|                             | *

Is not "both" teams not in position... so "both teams" can't be a requirement for the clarification to apply (otherwise we're back where we started)
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Megapickle on July 15, 2011, 03:38:14 am
Yeah, Reaver, please do. But I'm confident that they intended that each team needs an "internal" majority in-place. "Both" can be interpreted either your way or mine, whereas "each" has a more specific meaning.

The Pivot-Line vs Pivot-on-the-Line one could truly go either way, though, and really needs to be cleaned up. If they meant Pivot-on-the-Line, then if she manages to stick her hips behind two opponents right before the whistle, then again, the jam is called. Lame.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: JoeXCore on July 15, 2011, 03:39:41 am
Pickle you are %100 correct in regards to each.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: mick hawkins on July 15, 2011, 03:47:46 am
If they meant Pivot-on-the-Line, then if she manages to stick her hips behind two opponents right before the whistle, then again, the jam is called. Lame.

not sold on that one

While it says "Blockers are considered in position when they are lined up behind the Pivot and ahead of the Jammer line."
That's not actually what's specified in the rules.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Megapickle on July 15, 2011, 04:00:41 am
Check the URL, Mick. These "Publications" are the rules.

Anyway, it probably does mean "Pivot line" (myself, I am going with this meaning for now). But interpreting it as just "Pivot" (i.e. the striped skater) is not far-fetched by any means. Obviously, if said Pivot is on the line, then the blockers ahead of her are out of position per 6.13.5.2.3.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: mick hawkins on July 15, 2011, 04:02:36 am
Mick, did you read the line I quoted above?
[rule]Blockers are considered in position when they are lined up behind the Pivot and ahead of the Jammer line.[/rule]

It's just sloppy writing, and probably does mean "Pivot line" (myself, I am going with this meaning for now). But interpreting it as just "Pivot" (i.e. the striped skater) is not far-fetched by any means.

ah... here I am agreeing with you and didn't realise.

I dont think the clarifications are rules as such - more an explanation on how to call the rules.
The clarifications don't override or contradict the rules - the rules still apply
"Rules Publications are released by the WFTDA Rules Committee periodically throughout the year, providing official guidance for interpretation of the rules."
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Cliquework on July 15, 2011, 04:06:59 am
Nope, Reaver, two blocker-false-starts from one team does necessarily mean the jam is called off. Your quote needs to include the previous sentence as well:

While I agree with your statement in regards to that is what it says.
My "diagram" was me pointing out that I do not think that was the intent.

Consider the precept when considering multiple lines.

[rule]Prior to the start of a jam, Blockers and Pivots must be in position in pre-jam formation so that the pack will exist behind the pivot line and in front of the Jammer line at the time of the first whistle or immediately after the first whistle should the Jam begin with a No Pack.[/rule]
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: The Gorram Reaver on July 15, 2011, 04:33:57 am
I've asked about both the either/both issue and the "behind the Pivot" issue.  I suspect, for the latter, because they have referenced the applicable sections of the rules citing position requirements that they intend that to be interpreted as "behind the Pivot line and any Pivot who is on the line".  But it doesn't hurt to get that verified.

Cheers!
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: gnrl grievance on July 15, 2011, 04:36:53 am
Mick, did you read the line I quoted above?
[rule]Blockers are considered in position when they are lined up behind the Pivot and ahead of the Jammer line.[/rule]

It's just sloppy writing, and probably does mean "Pivot line" (myself, I am going with this meaning for now). But interpreting it as just "Pivot" (i.e. the striped skater) is not far-fetched by any means.

ah... here I am agreeing with you and didn't realise.

I dont think the clarifications are rules as such - more an explanation on how to call the rules.
The clarifications don't override or contradict the rules - the rules still apply
"Rules Publications are released by the WFTDA Rules Committee periodically throughout the year, providing official guidance for interpretation of the rules."


I get that a pedantic ref may interpret it to mean just 'pivot' and no it's not far-fetched to assume they may call off the jam if two blockers false start because the pivot moves her hips backwards 5 seconds before the whistle but surely if you take a purposive approach to the interpretation this would be absurd and not the rules committee's intention.

Just like any poorly worded piece of legislation, one person's interpretation may be vastly different to another's, however I still agree with Mick that a plain meaning interpretation of the rules in any ordinary situation would not call for calling off the jam just because the blockers started ahead of the hips of the pivot. This is of course just my humble opinion and would be happy to be corrected  ;D
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: mick hawkins on July 15, 2011, 05:26:15 am
One odd consequence: If a team has a poodle-er, and also a single blocker that steps across the line a half-second early, we're supposed to call off the jam. :-/

Not necessarily.  Bold emphasis mine. 
[rule]If at the first whistle, the majority of on the track Blockers and Pivot Blockers from both teams are not in position, the referee must immediately end the jam and an Official Timeout will be called.[/rule]
The situation you describe would only cause the jam to end in an Official Time Out if there was only one other Blocker on the track, because that is the only way two Blockers/Pivots can constitute a majority of the Blockers/Pivots from both teams.

Pickle is right if that team has only those 2 blockers on the track in that particular jam.

Actually JXC I'm not sure that's right, so I understand correctly, I read it as...
a team has 3 blockers in position and one poodling
if one of the in position blockers false starts - the team had only has 2 blockers in position which is not a majority of blockers on the track

I believe this is what Megapickle is saying. That right?
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Megapickle on July 15, 2011, 05:31:08 am
Right, Mick, as long as you don't dramatically edit your post, that IS what I'm saying.  ;)

Majority from each team (3 of 4, or 2 of 3, or 2 of 2) must be "in position" at the 1st whistle, or else we call it off. Dumb, but as I see it, true.

They're obviously going to have to clarify this clarification. We shouldn't be put in the place of parsing this mess.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: mick hawkins on July 15, 2011, 05:35:03 am
Right, Mick, as long as you don't dramatically edit your post, that IS what I'm saying.  ;)

hey, it's not my fault you're so quick   ;)
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Black Adder on July 15, 2011, 06:22:35 am
I think the 'Pivot' - 'Pivot Line' issue is a little pointless

The rules still state


 
[rule]3.1 BLOCKER
3.1.1
Prior to the start of a jam, Blockers line up behind the Pivots and ahead of the Jammers. They play a key role in determining the position of the pack and keeping the pack formed. Blockers never score points. Only the Pivot Blocker may become eligible to score points, according to the specifications in Section 3.5 Passing the Star. [/rule]


but is expanded upon in

 
[rule]4.2.3 Non-Pivot Blocker Starting Positions: Blockers line up behind the Pivots as demarked by the hips. If a Pivot is not on the Pivot line, Non-Pivot Blockers are not required to line up behind her.[/rule]


So the clarification is still in line with the rules as written.

I think the important line is
 [rule]Blockers and Pivots must be in position in pre-jam formation so that the pack will exist behind the pivot line and in front of the Jammer line at the time of the first whistle or immediately after the first whistle should the Jam begin with a No Pack.[/rule]
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: JoeXCore on July 15, 2011, 06:30:48 am
One odd consequence: If a team has a poodle-er, and also a single blocker that steps across the line a half-second early, we're supposed to call off the jam. :-/

Not necessarily.  Bold emphasis mine. 
[rule]If at the first whistle, the majority of on the track Blockers and Pivot Blockers from both teams are not in position, the referee must immediately end the jam and an Official Timeout will be called.[/rule]
The situation you describe would only cause the jam to end in an Official Time Out if there was only one other Blocker on the track, because that is the only way two Blockers/Pivots can constitute a majority of the Blockers/Pivots from both teams.

Pickle is right if that team has only those 2 blockers on the track in that particular jam.

Actually JXC I'm not sure that's right, so I understand correctly, I read it as...
a team has 3 blockers in position and one poodling
if one of the in position blockers false starts - the team had only has 2 blockers in position which is not a majority of blockers on the track

I believe this is what Megapickle is saying. That right?

Yes I later realized that the if in my statement was frivolous in that particular regard he is simply correct.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Black Adder on July 15, 2011, 06:37:29 am
So this would not be called off?
Just checking

l xxo           looo
lxx              l*
l                 l*

as there is still a pack after the whistle and a majority of blockers are in place.
Also with the wording this would still be ok if the 'o' between pivot and jammer line was on a knee.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Megapickle on July 15, 2011, 06:42:44 am
Really, we've got to reserve judgement till we hear more from the Rules Committee before we start applying it to examples.

By Reaver & Clique's interpretation, this would be acceptable, and the jam would continue, even if the foremost O were on a knee at the 1st whistle, because once she stood, the pack would be "in position".

By mine, it's a call-off, because the Os do not have a majority "in position".
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Black Adder on July 15, 2011, 06:46:37 am
Cheers guys.
Just getting my head around the wording..
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: JoeXCore on July 15, 2011, 07:11:34 am
Woops... I totally just accidentally deleted a post that I made.

Anyway what I meant to say was that I don't think Clique disagrees with the idea that...


XXXXO    Jammer line OOO

would result in a call off

This is pretty clear

[rule]       It is required that the majority of on the track Pivot Blockers and Blockers from each team begin in this pre-jam positioning.   [/rule]
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Megapickle on July 15, 2011, 07:20:52 am
Clique's point was that when these two apparently conflicting sentences are right next to one another:
[rule]It is required that the majority of on the track Pivot Blockers and Blockers from each team begin in this pre-jam positioning.

If at the first whistle, the majority of on the track Blockers and Pivot Blockers from both teams are not in position, the referee must immediately end the jam...[/rule]

... we should think about the functional purpose of this publication: To ensure that the pack as a whole is placed where it belongs (per the intro). From that sliver of insight, I extrapolate that he means that overall majority of all 8 blockers is what we should analyze. Again, I disagree. But he & Reaver are the certified refs, & I'm the "pedantic" noob.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Interrobang Yerdehd on July 15, 2011, 07:30:01 am
Okay, I've been staring at this for maybe two hours now. Here're my thoughts:

Pivot vs. Pivot Line
I don't like it, but the two sentences just before the one in question both say "pivot line". I think they really do mean "pivot".

Each vs. Both
Reading it as "the majority of blockers regardless of team" means that, with one O in the box, this line-up:

l xx             l  ooo
lxx              l*
l                 l*

doesn't trigger a jam call-off since 4 of 7 blockers are in position. Clearly, this is counter to the intent of the clarification.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Mick Suffolk on July 15, 2011, 12:44:04 pm
This is how I'm seeing and reading it all be it with a spinning head...


|o            | xo                  
|x            |* ox                  
|              |* xo                  
Call off

|x              |
|x  x          |  oo
|  x            |* oo
No Call Off = Worst Play in Derby = Massive Headache
Call Off

|x              |
|x              |*  oo
|  x            |*  oo
Call Off ( 1 in the box)

Majority Behind Jammer Line =  5/8  6/8  7/8  8/8  Immediate call Off Etc
Majority In position =  5/8  6/8  7/8  8/8 Jam is on
                                    4/4 Equal in Number Jam is on (as above)

[rule]If at the first whistle, the majority of on the track Blockers and Pivot Blockers from both teams are not in position, the referee must immediately end the jam...[/rule]

Thats how I'd call it going on the "clarification"..but then again I could have got it arse about face ;)

Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Graeme on July 15, 2011, 01:56:20 pm
This is how I'm seeing and reading it all be it with a spinning head...


|o            | xo                   
|x            |* ox                 
|              |* xo                 
Call off

|x              |
|x  x          |  oo
|  x            |* oo
No Call Off = Worst Play in Derby = Massive Headache


|x              |
|x              |*  oo
|  x            |*  oo
Call Off ( 1 in the box)

Majority Behind Jammer Line =  5/8  6/8  7/8  8/8  Immediate call Off Etc
Majority In position =  5/8  6/8  7/8  8/8 Jam is on
                                    4/4 Equal in Number Jam is on (as above)

[rule]If at the first whistle, the majority of on the track Blockers and Pivot Blockers from both teams are not in position, the referee must immediately end the jam...[/rule]

Thats how I'd call it going on the "clarification"..but then again I could have got it arse about face ;)


Bolded...  I disagree, since there is no majority, it much like the pack definition, the Majority of blocker from both teams... so a 4 & 4 split = no Majority...
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Mick Suffolk on July 15, 2011, 02:11:06 pm
Bolded...  I disagree, since there is no majority, it much like the pack definition, the Majority of blocker from both teams... so a 4 & 4 split = no Majority...

So on that basis would you call the Jam off?...am starting to wonder about that one now
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Cliquework on July 15, 2011, 02:13:23 pm
Half is not a majority from both teams.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Megapickle on July 15, 2011, 02:20:34 pm
If we're going down that road, I'll point out this gem of logical ambiguity: In the sentence quoted just above, it says "if the majority...are not in position". That could be interpreted as "if the majority are out of position", OR as "if there's not a majority that are in position". Both are "right", and when the in/out split is 50/50, it matters which way you read it.

Seriously, time to find a new proof-reader.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Cliquework on July 15, 2011, 02:38:40 pm
I don't believe it's too complicated when we think about what it is were penalizing and why. Look at the whole.

Is having a poodle, perhaps even two, from one team an illegal procedure so great we have to call off the jam? No

Is having an entire team or pack behind the jammer line unduly affecting gameplay and go outside of the original intended starts of jams with the jammers 30ft behind the blockers? Yes. 150 is different than 30?

So what are the penalties we're seeing here?

Minors - As those players false started.

Major - Much like having too many skaters on the track, this additional major is for having the jam blown dead in response to this infraction. Goes to the pivot or person most applicable in just the same way.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Graeme on July 15, 2011, 02:59:07 pm
Bolded...  I disagree, since there is no majority, it much like the pack definition, the Majority of blocker from both teams... so a 4 & 4 split = no Majority...

So on that basis would you call the Jam off?...am starting to wonder about that one now

Yes I would since there isn't a Majority from both teams in the correct position, ie between the Pivot and Jammer lines.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Mick Suffolk on July 15, 2011, 03:13:18 pm
I don't believe it's too complicated when we think about what it is were penalizing and why. Look at the whole.

Is having a poodle, perhaps even two, from one team an illegal procedure so great we have to call off the jam? No

Is having an entire team or pack behind the jammer line unduly affecting gameplay and go outside of the original intended starts of jams with the jammers 30ft behind the blockers? Yes. 150 is different than 30?

So what are the penalties we're seeing here?

Minors - As those players false started.

Major - Much like having too many skaters on the track, this additional major is for having the jam blown dead in response to this infraction. Goes to the pivot or person most applicable in just the same way.

+1

From my point of veiw put in context like that makes it far easier to sink in and understand. :)
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Megapickle on July 15, 2011, 03:18:52 pm
Clique, please do follow Reaver's example & use your "certified" sway to tell the Rules Comm that they need to re-write this publication if they want it to be interpreted holistically this way.

They need to keep in mind that future readers of this material will not have the contextual understanding (as we do) of the recent "strategy" of a full team poodling. All they're going to have is what's in black & white... "It is required that the majority of each team begin in position." They won't have you looking over their shoulder telling them that this rule shouldn't apply to a situation where two (of four) teammates are 6-inches in front of a Pivot's hips.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Grim Griefer on July 15, 2011, 04:05:35 pm
Even with the historical context, the word must is used here. So, even in that "two blockers from the same team false starting by being in front of an on-the-pivot-line pivot" scenario, the jam must be called off.

[rule]
If at the first whistle, the majority of on the track Blockers and Pivot Blockers from both teams are not in position, the referee must immediately end the jam and an Official Timeout will be called.
[/rule]
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Cliquework on July 15, 2011, 04:34:46 pm
So is the word both.

I understand we don't all have historical context. But you're/we're here attempting to. So that we're all on the same page, and that's good. One of the purposes of ZH. Getting us on the same page. Perhaps it could be "written better". Who knows. Different words could be interpretet incorrectly too. As long as we can parse what's going on here I think we'll be okay.

What's more important for me right now, and many of you out there who have bouts this weekend, is to picture how you'll be handling it. Visualize. Captains meetings. Ref meetings. Implementation. This is a go, so lets get it understood before we use it.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Professor Murder on July 15, 2011, 04:42:36 pm
So is the word both.

I understand we don't all have historical context. But you're/we're here attempting to. So that we're all on the same page, and that's good. One of the purposes of ZH. Getting us on the same page. Perhaps it could be "written better". Who knows. Different words could be interpretet incorrectly too. As long as we can parse what's going on here I think we'll be okay.

What's more important for me right now, and many of you out there who have bouts this weekend, is to picture how you'll be handling it. Visualize. Captains meetings. Ref meetings. Implementation. This is a go, so lets get it understood before we use it.

This is why I dig monsieur clique.

Folks, the sky is not falling, the apocalypse is not coming, and there should be a lot less hyperbole from the pedant gallery.  A number of people here seem intent on repeating the same point, over and over - seemingly more concerned on being recognized as "right" than actually finding a solution or proposing alternative wording.  

We're still DIY, people.  You can make suggestions and even send them to Rules yourselves.  Are you trying to improve the game and consistency of officiating, or are you trying to get yourselves over?

EDIT: Let me phrase things this way.  Would you rather have this clarification or not?  As someone who had to handle this specific scenario in a no minors game at ECDX, guidance is preferred to no guidance.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: SeerSin on July 15, 2011, 05:06:19 pm
Okay, let's not read too deeply into this Publication. It's really pretty straighforward. First let's read it in its entirety not hack and slash it into it's piece parts. Think gestalt. It's about the game as a whole and the rules as a whole.

[rule]Pre-Jam Positioning
July 14, 2011

Prior to the start of a jam, Blockers and Pivots must be in position in pre-jam formation so that the pack will exist behind the pivot line and in front of the Jammer line at the time of the first whistle or immediately after the first whistle should the Jam begin with a No Pack. Pivot Blockers are considered in position when they are on the track on or behind the Pivot line and ahead of the Jammer line. Blockers are considered in position when they are lined up behind the Pivot and ahead of the Jammer line. Jammers are considered in position when they are behind the Jammer line and ahead of the Pivot line. (See Sections 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, and 4.2 for reference.)

It is required that the majority of on the track Pivot Blockers and Blockers from each team begin in this pre-jam positioning.

If at the first whistle, the majority of on the track Blockers and Pivot Blockers from both teams are not in position, the referee must immediately end the jam and an Official Timeout will be called. A minor illegal procedure false start penalty will be assessed to all skaters who were out of position at the start of the jam. Additionally, a major illegal procedure false start penalty will be assessed to the Pivot in that jam of the team(s) that did not field enough skaters in proper pre-jam position. If there is no Pivot in that jam, the penalty is issued to the last Non-Pivot Blocker to enter the track out of position to the extent that the referee is able to determine who that skater was. If there is not a Pivot in the jam and the referee is unable to determine the last skater out of position to enter the track, the referee issuing the illegal procedure must penalize the Blocker on the track closest him/her.

After the Official Timeout, a new jam will start as soon as possible (with no more than 30 seconds elapsing) once both teams are lined up in the proper pre-jam position (2.6.3.1). If at the start of a new jam there are not enough skaters on the track from each team in proper pre-jam formation, the referee will end the jam and additional penalties will be assessed.

[/rule]

Now let's analyze the wording that's creating such a buzz. Following is the most important part which tells you the entire point of the Publication to begin with:
[rule]Prior to the start of a jam, Blockers and Pivots must be in position in pre-jam formation so that the pack will exist behind the pivot line and in front of the Jammer line at the time of the first whistle or immediately after the first whistle should the Jam begin with a No Pack. [/rule]

Immediately following that we have simply a reiteration of what it means to be in position. This is something we already knew as it hasn't changed anything and we've been calling it this way for over a year.
[rule]Pivot Blockers are considered in position when they are on the track on or behind the Pivot line and ahead of the Jammer line. Blockers are considered in position when they are lined up behind the Pivot and ahead of the Jammer line. Jammers are considered in position when they are behind the Jammer line and ahead of the Pivot line. (See Sections 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, and 4.2 for reference.)
[/rule]

I think we all know a pack when we see one. Why doesn't it say pack? Because that would make one-knee starts illegal. So is there a pack? If not will there be one immediately following the jammer start whistle? If the answer to either question is yes proceed as normal.
[rule]It is required that the majority of on the track Pivot Blockers and Blockers from each team begin in this pre-jam positioning.[/rule]

If the answer to either above question is no the Publication then tells us what to do:
[rule]If at the first whistle, the majority of on the track Blockers and Pivot Blockers from both teams are not in position, the referee must immediately end the jam and an Official Timeout will be called. A minor illegal procedure false start penalty will be assessed to all skaters who were out of position at the start of the jam. Additionally, a major illegal procedure false start penalty will be assessed to the Pivot in that jam of the team(s) that did not field enough skaters in proper pre-jam position. If there is no Pivot in that jam, the penalty is issued to the last Non-Pivot Blocker to enter the track out of position to the extent that the referee is able to determine who that skater was. If there is not a Pivot in the jam and the referee is unable to determine the last skater out of position to enter the track, the referee issuing the illegal procedure must penalize the Blocker on the track closest him/her.

After the Official Timeout, a new jam will start as soon as possible (with no more than 30 seconds elapsing) once both teams are lined up in the proper pre-jam position (2.6.3.1). If at the start of a new jam there are not enough skaters on the track from each team in proper pre-jam formation, the referee will end the jam and additional penalties will be assessed.[/rule]
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Megapickle on July 15, 2011, 05:11:45 pm
Folks, the sky is not falling, the apocalypse is not coming, and there should be a lot less hyperbole from the pedant gallery.  A number of people here seem intent on repeating the same point, over and over - seemingly more concerned on being recognized as "right" than actually finding a solution or proposing alternative wording.  

We're still DIY, people.  You can make suggestions and even send them to Rules yourselves.  Are you trying to improve the game and consistency of officiating, or are you trying to get yourselves over?

Since I'm the only one who could remotely be seen as repeating himself, I'll say: Lose the degrading tone, Professor. Your analysis of why I'm here is flat wrong. I actually contacted WFTDA two different ways last night. Half-hour ago, they replied to me, "We'll get that stuff fixed."
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Anton Deck on July 15, 2011, 05:34:19 pm
So the intent of the rule is there needs to be enough skaters in legal position to form a pack at the start of the jam, behind the pivot and infront of the jam line?
Players caught out by a pivot their hips back on the whistle and people in the penalty box shouldnt cause the jam to be whistled off despite the literal interpretation of the wording there?
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Grim Griefer on July 15, 2011, 05:52:26 pm
I recommend that we be patient and wait until, as Megapickle said, the WFTDA proofs their clarification. Arguing syntactic ambiguities that we now know are going to be resolved by the WFTDA will not be a net benefit for anyone involved.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Professor Murder on July 15, 2011, 06:02:04 pm
Those of you (and there's more than one, mind) with concerns: how would you reword this publication to be more precise?
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: ShoNuff on July 15, 2011, 06:07:25 pm
This is a forum where if the sky isn't falling, someone climbs up on top with a jackhammer and knocks it down.

The point is to ask before it happens, when a team looks over this or that rule and finds a way to abuse it, what do you do?

And right now, any coach worth the title is busily looking over the new rule document and is thinking, how can I take advantage of this to help my team win.  They aren't saying, what is the intent, they're saying, what can I get away with.

And this reality is why rules have to be carefully written and why it is a good thing to have them torn apart no matter how depressing it is to the people who wrote it.  Teams will look for the loophole and if referees haven't looked for them too, they're going to get blind-sided and games aren't going to be run correctly.

I was talking to a referee who has been less than friendly to the written structure of the rule on their forum posts, but their first comment about the new rule statement was something along the lines of, 'This was despeartely needed since it is simply unacceptable that a team can gain great advantage from taking an illegal action as a strategy, and that's what has been happening.'

So rip into it, if it doesn't happen now, it'll happen in a bout.  And just because people are tearing the rules apart doesn't mean they aren't happy to see them.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: FNZebra on July 15, 2011, 06:10:43 pm
Those of you (and there's more than one, mind) with concerns: how would you reword this publication to be more precise?

And by that he means it is easy to gripe, but much harder to offer constructive suggestions. I'm not saying this to call anyone out, I've just heard Murder utter variations of this for a while now. ;)

EDIT: And just because your suggestion isn't visibly used immediately doesn't mean that it won't be. Sometime things take time.

Also, one instance of the word "both" has been changed to each now in that publication.

Quote
If at the first whistle, the majority of on the track Blockers and Pivot Blockers from each (http://wftda.com/rules/publications/prejam-positioning) team are not in position, the referee must immediately end the jam and an Official Timeout will be called.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Megapickle on July 15, 2011, 06:21:34 pm

Also, one instance of the word "both" has been changed to each now in that publication.

Quote
If at the first whistle, the majority of on the track Blockers and Pivot Blockers from each (http://wftda.com/rules/publications/prejam-positioning) team are not in position, the referee must immediately end the jam and an Official Timeout will be called.

Progress... But to truly eliminate the ambiguity, let's change it to:

If at the first whistle, there is not a majority of on the track Blockers and Pivot Blockers from each team in position, the referee must immediately end the jam...

OR, if the powers-that-be want evenly-split teams to be allowed to play-on, then it can be:

If at the first whistle, the majority of on the track Blockers and Pivot Blockers from each team are out of position, the referee must immediately end the jam...
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: ShoNuff on July 15, 2011, 06:22:39 pm
Those of you (and there's more than one, mind) with concerns: how would you reword this publication to be more precise?

I think it depends on what the rule is supposed to allow and what is supposed to prohibit.

1) Is a blocker who false starts by being in front of a pivot but behind the pivot line out of pre-jam position or is it possible to false start and still be in pre-jam position?

2) Majority.  With the relatively small number of blockers, a single person moves the percentage in position a lot, does 50/50 in position/out of position require a jam to be called or does it satisfy the requirement for a jam to proceed?

It doesn't really matter what the answer are, as long as they are known.

For the first question, if the answer is that a blocker in front of the pivot but behind the pivot line is out of pre-jam position, then teams will use that to try to force the opposing pivot to draw a major penalty and we will see a lot of dancing around at the start line.  If a blocker in front of the pivot but behind the pivot line is false starting but still in pre-jam position, then we will see no more playing around at the start line than we currently see.

If the goal is to allow a blocker to false start without potentially calling the jam, then:

[rule]Blockers are considered in position when they are lined up behind the Pivot and ahead of the Jammer line.[/rule]

Could change to:
Blockers are considered in position when they are lined up behind the Pivot line and ahead of the Jammer line.  Note: Blockers lined up in front of the pivot may still be subject to false start penalties.

For the majority question, just a short subsection stating that exactly half of the blockers from a team is or is not a majority.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Interrobang Yerdehd on July 15, 2011, 06:47:27 pm
No one has mentioned this confusion, but I initially read the repeated use of the phrase "Pivot Blockers and Blockers" and its reverse to either mean that pivots and non-pivot blocker had to be counted separately or that pivots had to be counted separately and as part of "blockers". It would be clearer just to say "blockers" which includes pivots by definition.

I'd also say that players are in position if they line up as described in 4.2 (assuming that's the intent). It's less wordy and removes any possible confusion about differences in wording between the rules and clarification.

I also support either of these wordings, after removing "and Pivot Blockers":
If at the first whistle, there is not a majority of on the track Blockers and Pivot Blockers from each team in position, the referee must immediately end the jam...

OR, if the powers-that-be want evenly-split teams to be allowed to play-on, then it can be:

If at the first whistle, the majority of on the track Blockers and Pivot Blockers from each team are out of position, the referee must immediately end the jam...
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Grim Griefer on July 15, 2011, 07:07:43 pm
If, at the jam start whistle, 50% or more of the on-the-track blockers from either team are not in a legal starting position as defined in 4.2 (i.e., 2 false starters for a team with 3 or 4 on-the-track blockers; 1 false starter for a team with 2 or 1 on-the-track blockers), the call-off-the-jam ruling applies.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: JoeXCore on July 15, 2011, 07:14:45 pm
Woah! Was just reading this again... hit refresh and it changed!

[rule]  July 14, 2011

Prior to the start of a jam, Blockers and Pivots must be in position in pre-jam formation so that the pack will exist behind the pivot line and in front of the Jammer line at the time of the first whistle or immediately after the first whistle should the Jam begin with a No Pack. Pivot Blockers are considered in position when they are on the track on or behind the Pivot line and ahead of the Jammer line. Blockers are considered in position when they are lined up behind the Pivot and ahead of the Jammer line. Jammers are considered in position when they are behind the Jammer line and ahead of the Pivot line. (See Sections 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, and 4.2 for reference.)

It is required that the majority of on the track Pivot Blockers and Blockers from each team begin in this pre-jam positioning.

If at the first whistle, the majority of on the track Blockers and Pivot Blockers from each team are not in position, the referee must immediately end the jam and an Official Timeout will be called. A minor illegal procedure false start penalty will be assessed to all skaters who were out of position at the start of the jam. Additionally, a major illegal procedure false start penalty will be assessed to the Pivot in that jam of the team(s) that did not field enough skaters in proper pre-jam position. If there is no Pivot in that jam, the penalty is issued to the last Non-Pivot Blocker to enter the track out of position to the extent that the referee is able to determine who that skater was. If there is not a Pivot in the jam and the referee is unable to determine the last skater out of position to enter the track, the referee issuing the illegal procedure must penalize the Blocker on the track closest him/her.

After the Official Timeout, a new jam will start as soon as possible (with no more than 30 seconds elapsing) once both teams are lined up in the proper pre-jam position (2.6.3.1). If at the start of a new jam there are not enough skaters on the track from each team in proper pre-jam formation, the referee will end the jam and additional penalties will be assessed.
    [/rule]
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: JoeXCore on July 15, 2011, 07:18:44 pm
So... more than one player from a team out of position results in the jam ending and a major penalty.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Anton Deck on July 15, 2011, 07:46:10 pm
So... more than one player from a team out of position results in the jam ending and a major penalty.



Unless the team has 5 blockers on the track at the start.....? ( I assume you'd just discount the illeagal one )




Ignoring that from reading the latest wording it appears quite clear that blockers who are infront of the pivots hips at the whistle are not "in position", but that still seems against the spirit of what was apparently intended here.
Surely it shouldnt be that the jam is whistled dead if a pivot catches the opposition out by shooting their hips back false starting two blockers, and one of those is then majored as well?

Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Megapickle on July 15, 2011, 07:50:18 pm
... if a pivot catches the opposition out by shooting their hips back false starting two blockers, and one of those is then majored as well?

Not quite. Those "caught" Blockers get minors, and the major goes to the Pivot. And Pivots explicitly can't be "caught" by opposing Pivots' hips.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: ShoNuff on July 15, 2011, 11:18:24 pm
As it stands, if a pivot gets behind enough blockers, they are all given minors, the jam is whistled dead and the opposing pivot is given a major.  So it is an obvious strategy for a pivot to try to force enough opposing blockers out of position by making a last second move so that the jam is called the opposing pivot is sent to the box and then a new jam starts with the other team down a player.

The key to it is getting enough blockers that over half of the opposing blockers are out of position and the jam is whistled dead.  With the current wording this will almost certianly become a bread and butter pivot ploy at the start of any jam.  The advantage gained is to great to not try it whenever possible.

If it remains a viable strategy it will probably mean most starts will have only the pivots near the line and the blockers back far enough that the opposing pivot would have to leave the line to get behnd them.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Megapickle on July 16, 2011, 12:04:42 am
The key to it is getting enough blockers that over half of the opposing blockers are out of position and the jam is whistled dead.

At least half, by my understanding.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Graeme on July 16, 2011, 12:37:36 am
 I think you have misinterpreted the rule, they have missed the 'line' in the portion if the rule you are quoting, since they had put 'line' in after Pivot and Jammer in other parts. This will not cause the jam to be called off and the pivot will not get a Major. The offending blockers will be given false start minors like normal as long as the Pivot is on the line.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Natepalm on July 16, 2011, 12:41:48 am
Quote
Blockers are considered in position when they are lined up behind the Pivot and ahead of the Jammer line.

I don't think this is intended to supersede these:

[rule]4.2.3 ...Blockers line up behind the Pivots as demarked by the hips. If a Pivot is not on the Pivot line, Non-Pivot Blockers are not required to line up behind her.[/rule]

[rule](A Non-Pivot Blocker false starts for being out of position at the pack starting whistle when she:) lines up in front of a Pivot Blocker who is on the Pivot line.[/rule]

So if the majority of on the track blocker(s) from either team do not false start in some way the jam is on, else you call the jam, assess IP minors to false starts and a major on the pivot, else the last blocker on the track, else the nearest blocker. Yes?
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Grim Griefer on July 16, 2011, 01:16:46 am
So if the majority of on the track blocker(s) from either team do not false start in some way the jam is on, else you call the jam, assess IP minors to false starts and a major on the pivot, else the last blocker on the track, else the nearest blocker. Yes?

Not quite: the majority must be in position for the jam not to be called off.

My restatement: If, at the jam start whistle, 50% or more of the on-the-track blockers from either team are not in a legal starting position as defined in 4.2 (i.e., 2 false starters for a team with 3 or 4 on-the-track blockers; 1 false starter for a team with 1 or 2 on-the-track blockers), the call-off-the-jam ruling applies and penalties should be assessed in a similar fashion as if the jam had been called off for having too many skaters in the jam (6.13.17).
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Black Adder on July 16, 2011, 01:26:54 am
I honestly can't imagine a ref calling off a jam because two blockers still behind the pivot line have false started in front of a pivot hips (a pivot who is touching the line).

That seems to have more negative impact on the game than giving two IP minors.

Can we have a penalty for a ref that does that? Maybe the mythological 'Buys the other refs beer' rule :)
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Grim Griefer on July 16, 2011, 02:25:55 am
Maybe so, but the WFTDA and their skaters, via the rules committee, have indicated that this is how they want this specific instance to be called. Common sense officiating is definitely important, but when they give specific instruction on how to handle a given scenario, we should call it that way.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Graeme on July 16, 2011, 02:47:12 am
I would hope not that will now make everyone lining up all the way back just infront of the Jammer line trying to lean as far back as the can...
I'm sticking to they have omitted the 'line' after pivot.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Grim Griefer on July 16, 2011, 03:19:21 am
I have received confirmation from an authoritative source that they mean it to be "behind the Pivot [skater]" if that Pivot skater is on the Pivot line. Even after the revision was posted, the language stands, and the omission of "Pivot line" in favor of "Pivot" when describing non-pivot blockers remains.

The clarification specifically states to use 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, and 4.2 as sources. Look at the language in 4.2, specifically 4.2.3, and you will see the following:

[rule]
4.2.3 Non-Pivot Blocker Starting Positions: Blockers line up behind the Pivots as demarked by the hips. If a Pivot is not on the Pivot line, Non-Pivot Blockers are not required to line up behind her.
[/rule]

However, I will bring it up at the officiating clinic tomorrow here in Boston, and I can ask our rules rep face-to-face while there.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Cliquework on July 16, 2011, 03:38:33 am
The source is corect. Theses are false starts. A false start is being out of position at jam start. Such is the IP penalty we give.

[rule]6.13.5.2A Non-Pivot Blocker false starts for being out of position at the pack starting whistle when she:
6.13.5.2.1is touching on or beyond the Pivot line.
6.13.5.2.2is touching behind the Jammer line.
6.13.5.2.3lines up in front of a Pivot Blocker who is on the Pivot line.[/rule]
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Darkjester on July 16, 2011, 03:56:53 am
ok, after 5 pages I'm now confused..


Is it..

Majority of skaters from each team out of position ala ahead of pivot line (behind jammer line)?

or

Majority of skaters from each team out of position ala ahead of pivot on the lines hips,

That causes a Call Off, Minor Penalty AND 1 Major penalty due to the call off?

Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Megapickle on July 16, 2011, 04:06:49 am
Is it..

Majority of skaters from each team out of position ala ahead of pivot line (behind jammer line)?

or

Majority of skaters from each team out of position ala ahead of pivot on the lines hips,

That causes a Call Off, Minor Penalty AND 1 Major penalty due to the call off?

None of the above. The majority from each team must be IN POSITION for us to NOT call it off. If the majority OR HALF of a team's blockers False Start, then call it off.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Natepalm on July 16, 2011, 04:51:25 am
Well, I gotta ref tomorrow. WFTDA said
Quote
Blockers and Pivots must be in position in pre-jam formation
, and
Quote
Blockers are considered in position when they are lined up behind the Pivot and ahead of the Jammer line
. The rules say a non-pivot blocker is out of position if [rule]6.13.5.2.3 - lines up in front of a Pivot Blocker who is on the Pivot line.[/rule] and [rule]4.2.3 - Non-Pivot Blocker Starting Positions: Blockers line up behind the Pivots as demarked by the hips.[/rule] In the unlikely situation the majority of either team isn't in position we should be calling the jam, assessing penalties.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: FNZebra on July 16, 2011, 05:00:54 am
Is it..

Majority of skaters from each team out of position ala ahead of pivot line (behind jammer line)?

or

Majority of skaters from each team out of position ala ahead of pivot on the lines hips,

That causes a Call Off, Minor Penalty AND 1 Major penalty due to the call off?

None of the above. The majority from each team must be IN POSITION for us to NOT call it off. If the majority OR HALF of a team's blockers False Start, then call it off.

^DING!

Majority is more than 50%, and then rounded up to the next whole Blocker.

For a majority of Pivot/Blockers, how many may false start:
if 4, then 3 must not, not 2.
if 3, then 2 must not.
if 2, then 2 must not.
if 1, she's the pack.

Careful with those poodles, all y'all.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: mick hawkins on July 16, 2011, 08:02:50 am
Careful with those poodles, all y'all.
... and accidental false starts
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Black Adder on July 16, 2011, 09:26:47 am

Majority is more than 50%, and then rounded up to the next whole Blocker.

For a majority of Pivot/Blockers, how many may false start:
if 4, then 3 must not, not 2.
if 3, then 2 must not.
if 2, then 2 must not.
if 1, she's the pack.


Can we add this bit to the clarification...
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: FNZebra on July 16, 2011, 01:54:59 pm
Majority is more than 50%, and then rounded up to the next whole Blocker.

For a majority of Pivot/Blockers, how many may false start:
if 4, then 3 must not, not 2.
if 3, then 2 must not.
if 2, then 2 must not.
if 1, she's the pack.
Can we add this bit to the clarification...

Let's simplify this, and make this easier to recognize on the track, then.

For a majority of Pivot/Blockers, how many may false start from one team:
if 4 or 3, then 1 may.
if 2 or 1, then none may.

no more flooding the box with poodles.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: gnrl grievance on July 16, 2011, 02:23:04 pm

Let's simplify this, and make this easier to recognize on the track, then.

For a majority of Pivot/Blockers, how many may false start:
if 4 or 3, then 1 may.
if 2 or 1, then none may.

no more flooding the box with poodles.
Thanks that makes heaps more sense now  ;D
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Natepalm on July 16, 2011, 04:50:19 pm
Quote
For a majority of Pivot/Blockers, how many may false start from one team:
if 4 or 3, then 1 may.
if 2 or 1, then none may

But that's not majority. Majority is "the greater number".

Quote
...the majority of on the track Blockers and Pivot Blockers from each team are not in position
emphasis mine.

Which means the most that can false start from one team without ending the jam:
if 4, then 2 may.
if 3 or 2, then one may.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Interrobang Yerdehd on July 16, 2011, 04:57:00 pm
It can be read as "majority are (not in position)" or are "majority (are not) in position". FNZ's numbers are correct for the second reading, which standard English usage suggests (but by no means proves) is the intended one.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Interrobang Yerdehd on July 16, 2011, 05:02:34 pm
I think the reason for the "majority" wording is to ensure a pack exists (or will as soon as kneeling skaters rise), which further suggests the publication is intended to require a majority in position rather than not-a-majority out of postion. Allowing only half of each team's skaters to line up in position makes the following packless scenario a "legal" starting position:

|xx          |*  xx
|oo          |*  oo
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Megapickle on July 16, 2011, 05:17:09 pm
Both good comments, Yerdehd. To clarify the ambiguity to you demonstrated well with parentheses, just read the previous sentence:
[rule]It is required that the majority of on the track Pivot Blockers and Blockers from each team begin in this pre-jam positioning.[/rule]

In this wording, it's clear that the "burden of majority" is on the legally in-position skaters. Get MORE than half of your team in-place, or we can't let you play.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: mick hawkins on July 18, 2011, 01:50:32 am
As mention previously (by Seersin I think) the whole thing's got to be taken as a whole. No point picking on individual lines and taking them out of context.

I really can't see any sense in calling a jam dead because skaters line up...

|bbb        p  |*
|pbbb          |*

where p is the blue team's pivot

Likewise what possible reason would there be to call the jam dead if a pivot is touching the line and 2 blockers from the opposing team are ahead of her hips but still behind the pivot line?
After all... there's still a pack.

Surely the point of this clarification is that we have a pack immediately after the whistle.
That's it.
I might be way off, but I doubt this makes for a new way for a team to draw a major on the opposing pivot.




Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Interrobang Yerdehd on July 18, 2011, 02:34:10 am
The publication specifies blockers have to be "lined up behind the Pivot" to be in position (with "if the Pivot is on the line" implied by the reference to Section 4.2), and the publication requires the jam be called off if at least half of either team's blockers are out of position.

Does it make sense to call off the jam for two false starting blockers? Not especially, no. But the publication is clear that the jam is to be called off, and saying as much isn't taking individual lines out of context. On the contrary, your argument requires the reader to assume an unstated intent on the part of the publication's authors and ignore portions of the publication that contradict it.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: mick hawkins on July 18, 2011, 02:54:39 am
The publication specifies blockers have to be "lined up behind the Pivot" to be in position (with "if the Pivot is on the line" implied by the reference to Section 4.2), and the publication requires the jam be called off if at least half of either team's blockers are out of position.

Does it make sense to call off the jam for two false starting blockers? Not especially, no. But the publication is clear that the jam is to be called off, and saying as much isn't taking individual lines out of context. On the contrary, your argument requires the reader to assume an unstated intent on the part of the publication's authors and ignore portions of the publication that contradict it.

I disagree.
You're overlooking the line...
Quote
Prior to the start of a jam, Blockers and Pivots must be in position in pre-jam formation so that the pack will exist behind the pivot line and in front of the Jammer line at the time of the first whistle or immediately after the first whistle should the Jam begin with a No Pack.
The point of the publication is to ensure we have a pack at the start (or immediately after the whistle)

It follows that if we don't have a pack at the start of the jam THEN call it off and award penalties to the out of position blockers and pivot.
To call the jam off because 2 blockers from a team false start seems to go against the point of the whole thing.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Grim Griefer on July 18, 2011, 03:01:53 am
Mick, I have discussed this with our rules rep, and they have indicated that the rules committee want it called as written. If at least half of a team's blockers are false starting, the jam must be called off.

There is a difference between understanding the background of why the rule exists and applying the normative text that makes up the rule. The rules committee chose to use language that encompasses a more general circumstance because they want the jam to be called off in that more general circumstance.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: mick hawkins on July 18, 2011, 03:05:57 am
Folks, the sky is not falling, the apocalypse is not coming, and there should be a lot less hyperbole from the pedant gallery.  A number of people here seem intent on repeating the same point, over and over - seemingly more concerned on being recognized as "right" than actually finding a solution or proposing alternative wording.  

We're still DIY, people.  You can make suggestions and even send them to Rules yourselves.  Are you trying to improve the game and consistency of officiating, or are you trying to get yourselves over?

EDIT: Let me phrase things this way.  Would you rather have this clarification or not?  As someone who had to handle this specific scenario in a no minors game at ECDX, guidance is preferred to no guidance.

A suggestion (for discussion)...

Prior to the start of a jam, Blockers and Pivots must be in position in pre-jam formation so that the pack will exist behind the pivot line and in front of the Jammer line at the time of the first whistle or immediately after the first whistle should the Jam begin with a No Pack. Pivot Blockers are considered in position when they are on the track on or behind the Pivot line and ahead of the Jammer line. Blockers are considered in position when they are lined up behind the Pivot line and ahead of the Jammer line. Jammers are considered in position when they are behind the Jammer line and ahead of the Pivot line. (See Sections 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, and 4.2 for reference.)

It is required that there be a pack between the behind the pivot line and in front of the Jammer line at the time of the first whistle or immediately after the first whistle should the Jam begin with a No Pack.the majority of on the track Pivot Blockers and Blockers from each team begin in this pre-jam positioning.

If at the first whistle, there is no pack between the pivot and jammer lines because skaters are out of position, the majority of on the track Blockers and Pivot Blockers from each team are not in position, the referee must immediately end the jam and an Official Timeout will be called. A minor illegal procedure false start penalty will be assessed to all skaters who were out of position at the start of the jam. Additionally, a major illegal procedure false start penalty will be assessed to the Pivot in that jam of the team(s) that did not field enough skaters in proper pre-jam position. If there is no Pivot in that jam, the penalty is issued to the last Non-Pivot Blocker to enter the track out of position to the extent that the referee is able to determine who that skater was. If there is not a Pivot in the jam and the referee is unable to determine the last skater out of position to enter the track, the referee issuing the illegal procedure must penalize the Blocker on the track closest him/her.

After the Official Timeout, a new jam will start as soon as possible (with no more than 30 seconds elapsing) once both teams are lined up in the proper pre-jam position (2.6.3.1). If at the start of a new jam there are not enough skaters on the track from each team in proper pre-jam formation, the referee will end the jam and additional penalties will be assessed.



A question... if a team's pivot is one of the skaters out of position causing the jam to be called, the pivot receives a minor IP AND the major IP?
right?
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Grim Griefer on July 18, 2011, 03:07:04 am
A question... if a team's pivot is one of the skaters out of position causing the jam to be called, the pivot receives a minor IP AND the major IP?
right?

Yes.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: mick hawkins on July 18, 2011, 03:10:13 am
Mick, I have discussed this with our rules rep, and they have indicated that the rules committee want it called as written. If at least half of a team's blockers are false starting, the jam must be called off.

There is a difference between understanding the background of why the rule exists and applying the normative text that makes up the rule. The rules committee chose to use language that encompasses a more general circumstance because they want the jam to be called off in that more general circumstance.

There are certified refs in this discussion who seem to think otherwise.
I guess time will tell
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Graeme on July 18, 2011, 03:38:47 am
So if it's to be called as written, that means 1 team will line up just off the hammer line and their pivot barely infront of the rest of the team and the force the other team to line up infront of them, thus being out of position, in line with the new clarification thus forcing the jam to be called?

This contradicts the pivot on pivot line rule and somewhat umm yeah...  If this is the case a bout is going to go on much longer then it should with every 2nd or 3rd Jam where this is likely to occur so one team can force another team to skate short from this rule. Doesn't that go against what derby is???? Kind of no different to the reason to why this clarification come about???
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: mick hawkins on July 18, 2011, 03:41:20 am
Yep, unless I'm mistaken called as written means...

|bbb        p|*
|pbbb         |*

(where p is the blue team's pivot)
...would be a time to call off the jam and award the both pivots a major.

and
bb|pbb      |*
   |pbbb        |*

...would be a time to call off the jam and award the blue pivot a major.


Which is certainly surprising (and not what I think it means at all)
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Natepalm on July 18, 2011, 03:48:43 am
I really can't see any sense in calling a jam dead because skaters line up...

|bbb        p  |*
|pbbb          |*

where p is the blue team's pivot
The clarification stating
Quote
Blockers are considered in position when they are lined up behind the Pivot...
is consistent with rules 4.2.3 that says [rule]Blockers line up behind the Pivots...[/rule] but it's still only a false start if the pivot's on the line. You do not have to line up behind a pivot that's not on the line, per 4.2.3 and 6.13.5.2.1.

I do see Interrobang Yerdehd's point that the rule isn't explicit enough regarding the word 'majority'. Our league has chosen to interpret majority to apply to the number not in position; half the team in position will not result in calling off the jam.

Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: mick hawkins on July 18, 2011, 03:51:34 am
I really can't see any sense in calling a jam dead because skaters line up...

|bbb        p  |*
|pbbb          |*

where p is the blue team's pivot
The clarification stating
Quote
Blockers are considered in position when they are lined up behind the Pivot...
is consistent with rules 4.2.3 that says [rule]Blockers line up behind the Pivots...[/rule] but it's still only a false start if the pivot's on the line. You do not have to line up behind a pivot that's not on the line, per 4.2.3 and 6.13.5.2.1.

I do see Interrobang Yerdehd's point that the rule isn't explicit enough regarding the word 'majority'. Our league has chosen to interpret majority to apply to the number not in position; half the team in position will not result in calling off the jam.

Sure... but this is about the definition of "in position".
The publication is inconsistent with the glossary which states
[rule]Blockers are in position when they are on the track, between the Pivot and Jammer start lines[/rule]

Calling it "as written" says blockers are out of position if they are in front of a pivot.

Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Megapickle on July 18, 2011, 03:55:25 am
Actually, Mick, if you want to take the "behind the Pivot" phrase 100% literally (gawd, please don't), then you'd call it off & give Majors to both Pivots, because all six Blockers are ahead of "the Pivot" (the Blue one, that is).
Gah! Quit editing the content of your posts while I'm replying!  ;)

I have no qualms with accepting the implied "behind any Pivot on the Pivot line", taken from the referenced rules.

But for some reason, I still cannot get on board with the two or three certified refs here who see an implication that the 1st sentence of the publication is the most important. That is, that if the Pack is (or will immediately be) in position, then we let them play, regardless of the "majority" situation. I just don't see that in the text.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Grim Griefer on July 18, 2011, 03:56:04 am
Blockers need not line up behind a "Pivot not on the Pivot Line" according to 4.2. This clarification does not change that. The first paragraph is not a change to the rules but a rewording of the source material in 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, and 4.2. You will find the same language in 4.2 regarding lining up between the Pivot and Jammer lines; the clarification in paraphrasing that source did not include the rest of the statement regarding not needing to line up behind a pivot not on the pivot line.

The first paragraph is not normative, but a paraphrasing of the current rule source. Normative text begins at the second paragraph.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: mick hawkins on July 18, 2011, 04:03:01 am
Actually, Mick, if you want to take the "behind the Pivot" phrase 100% literally (gawd, please don't), then you'd call it off & give Majors to both Pivots, because all six Blockers are ahead of "the Pivot" (the Blue one, that is).

Indeed. Again I'm certainly not saying that I think that's what we're supposed to do.

Quote
But for some reason, I still cannot get on board with the two or three certified refs here who see an implication that the 1st sentence of the publication is the most important. That is, that if the Pack is (or will immediately be) in position, then we let them play, regardless of the "majority" situation. I just don't see that in the text.
Really?
There are other parts of the rules where the context given by other sections matters.
Why is this different?
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Megapickle on July 18, 2011, 04:28:03 am
There are other parts of the rules where the context given by other sections matters.
Why is this different?

It just seems so blatantly clear to me, that if they wanted us to go by "Where's the pack?" as the over-arching criterion, they would've explicitly said, "If at the first whistle or immediately thereafter, the pack does not exist between the Pivot Line & Jammer line, then the referee must immediately end the jam..." The fact that they didn't include such an obvious sentence means that I just can't believe that they meant for it to be the case. No amount of "context" would make up for such a silly omission.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Interrobang Yerdehd on July 18, 2011, 04:35:33 am
To call the jam off because 2 blockers from a team false start seems to go against the point of the whole thing.
On that point, we are in agreement.
If at the first whistle, there is no pack between the pivot and jammer lines because skaters are out of position...
How do we define the location of the pack? Is it between the lines if one pack skater is across the pivot line? Half of them? All but one of them? I'm sure we could find an answer, but I'd like to suggest a different revision:
Quote
Prior to the start of a jam, Blockers and Pivots must be in position in pre-jam formation so that the pack will exist behind the pivot line and in front of the Jammer line at the time of the first whistle or immediately after the first whistle should the Jam begin with a No Pack. Pivot Blockers are considered in position when they are on the track ahead of the Jammer line and with at least one foot on or behind the Pivot line. and ahead of the Jammer line. Non-Pivot Blockers are considered in position when they are lined up ahead of the Jammer line and with at least one foot behind the Pivot line. and ahead of the Jammer line. Jammers are considered in position when they are behind the Jammer line and ahead of the Pivot line. (See Sections 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, and 4.2 for reference.)

It is required that the majority of on the track Pivot Blockers and Blockers from each team begin in this pre-jam positioning.

If at the first whistle, there is not a majority of on the track Blockers and Pivot Blockers from each team are not in position, the referee must immediately end the jam and an Official Timeout will be called. A minor illegal procedure false start penalty will be assessed to all skaters Blockers who were out of position at the start of the jam. Additionally, a major illegal procedure false start penalty will be assessed to the Pivot in that jam of the team(s) that did not field enough skaters in proper pre-jam position. If there is the responsible team(s) have no Pivot in that jam, the penalty is issued to the last out of position Non-Pivot Blocker from that team(s) to enter the track out of position to the extent that the referee is able to determine who that skater was. If there is not a Pivot in the jam and the referee is unable to determine the last skater out of position Blocker to enter the track, the referee issuing the illegal procedure must penalize the Blocker of the appropriate team(s) on the track closest to him/her.

After the Official Timeout, a new jam will start as soon as possible (with no more than 30 seconds elapsing) once both teams are lined up in the proper pre-jam position (2.6.3.1). If at the start of a new jam there are not enough skaters on the track from each team in proper pre-jam formation, the referee will end the jam and additional penalties will be assessed.
That's actually several revisions, all but one of them minor. The big revision is considering blockers with one foot across the pivot line to still be considered "in position". They still get a false start penalty, but it prevents accidental false starts from triggering jam call offs.

Minor revisions:
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: mick hawkins on July 18, 2011, 04:57:45 am
good point about skaters ahead of the pivot line being in the pack

I don't think this has to be complicated.
Requiring blockers to have one foot behind the jammer line seems unecessary (and a bit like making up a rule).

Is the publication saying any more than...
A pack at or immediately after the whistle is required.
The pack has to be able to move forward at the jam starting whistle.
Skaters can still false start intentionally.
There can still be no pack starts
?
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: mick hawkins on July 18, 2011, 05:30:39 am
It's hard to believe that asking a question to improve understanding warrants losing a stat point... but whatever.

It's pretty clear that there are indeed too many people here who are only interested in proving theyre correct and aren't interested in discussion or learning.

Think I'll just back away slowly and not make any loud noises or sudden movements.

Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: ShoNuff on July 18, 2011, 05:46:48 am
I think at this point it has to be accepted that in fact you are supposed to call off a jam if more than 2 blockers false start.  Whether or not it fits our varied visions, it is a clear result of the rule.

If I try to meta-game this I would say it is an effort to increase the strategic importance of the pivot as the pivot can safely line up at the pivot line without fear of false starting and counting towards possibly calling off the jam.  The likely result is that it will encourage the already common practice of lining up to control the back of the pack since blockers well back from the line are in no danger of being shifted into a false start by a last second move by the opposing pivot.

Yes, a pivot can try to shift at the last second to make the other team draw a ton of penalties.  But this is a very obvious ploy and the defense against it is simple, don't put all your blockers near the pivot line.  So all this rule really does is insure that no team will line up to fight for control of the front of the pack if their pivot begins the jam in the box and in general, lining up to control the rear of the pack will be encouraged.


The issue of lining up behind the pivot is simply use of the same language already contained within the rules and clarified in the Q&A.  But there already is a pre-jam positioning section, 4.2 and 4.2.3 already provides the exception that a blocker need not be behind the pivot if the pivot is not touching the pivot line.

They've used the same language as used in 3.1, 4.2 and the glossary.  So whether or not you like the language, it is appropriate to keep the language consistant and changing it will need to wait until the next update cycle.  But 4.2.3 already provides a clear exception to all these other points and there really isn't a reason to read this new usage of the same language as being exempt from 4.2.3 which applies to every other use of that language.

[rule]4.2.3 - Non-Pivot Blocker Starting Positions: Blockers line up behind the Pivots as demarked by the hips. If a Pivot is not on the Pivot line, Non-Pivot Blockers are not required to line up behind her.[/rule]
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: FNZebra on July 18, 2011, 05:53:27 am
I'm enjoying this thread much more now. I spent a long, overly warm day driving from a nice but distant bout.

Some people may now be realizing exactly how difficult is is to write a sound rule that prohibits the non-desired action, but permits the other, permissible activity. I think this is valuable for every to notice.

As a technical writer in part of my salaried position, I have previously taken shots at some the rules in this and prior rulesets. And now in hindsight, I have done so with poor vision.

I want to point out how difficult it is to write a good rule that stands the test of time, and groups of people trying to both enforce it and break it. And remember that we have about 20k words to go, to meet what the NFL rules encompass, and we need to do it with much less stoppage of play.

PS: Mick, I'ma give you a plus one, just because I appreciate you being a great bloody mick, in all senses of the phrase, because I appreciate your time and efforts to make derby better for you, but sharing so well that it may also improve derby for everyone. Cheers, mate.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Interrobang Yerdehd on July 18, 2011, 06:16:41 am
good point about skaters ahead of the pivot line being in the pack
Thank you.
I don't think this has to be complicated.
Requiring blockers to have one foot behind the jammer line seems unecessary (and a bit like making up a rule).
Well, it is making up a rule, but isn't that what rules comm does? I hope I didn't give the impression that I advocate anyone interpretting the publication as-written in that manner.
Is the publication saying any more than...
A pack at or immediately after the whistle is required.
The pack has to be able to move forward at the jam starting whistle.
Skaters can still false start intentionally.
There can still be no pack starts
?
I agree with that assessment mostly, but the trouble is writing the rule in such a way as to exclude accidental false starts from the factors that can result in jams being called off without relying on ref discretion to tell the difference. Although the WFTDA doesn't appear to be interested in that result, so I suppose discussion of how to achieve it is beside the point. (I say I "mostly" agree because I don't see anything in it that requires the ability for the pack to move immediately forward. I don't see anything that says the opposite either, mind you. I just don't see it being addressed at all.)

----

If I try to meta-game this I would say it is an effort to increase the strategic importance of the pivot as the pivot can safely line up at the pivot line without fear of false starting and counting towards possibly calling off the jam.  The likely result is that it will encourage the already common practice of lining up to control the back of the pack since blockers well back from the line are in no danger of being shifted into a false start by a last second move by the opposing pivot.

Yes, a pivot can try to shift at the last second to make the other team draw a ton of penalties.  But this is a very obvious ploy and the defense against it is simple, don't put all your blockers near the pivot line.  So all this rule really does is insure that no team will line up to fight for control of the front of the pack if their pivot begins the jam in the box and in general, lining up to control the rear of the pack will be encouraged.
I'm not sure that's intentional, though I agree it will be the effect, which I find a bit troublesome, since focus on controlling the back of the pack seems to have been a major cause of the "jam that wasn't" in the recent Gotham/Philly game. (An extreme case, obviously.)

I also know from experience that it can take a while for strategic implications of rule changes to be understood by smaller leagues,  newer leagues, and leagues that aren't looking to join the WFTDA, so I suspect there will be more incidents of pivots pulling this off than you seem to think, even if not at the higher levels of play.

----

I want to point out how difficult it is to write a good rule that stands the test of time, and groups of people trying to both enforce it and break it.
Hahaha. You aren't kidding. I was a nomic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nomic) player for a long time. At least derby girls don't try to sneak in game-breaking loopholes intentionally so they can pull off a surprise backdoor win. What a nightmare that would be.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Graeme on July 18, 2011, 08:50:06 am
Are we or aren't we to be applying the rules relating to Pivots on the Pivot line or not in relation to this clarification and position Blockers need to be????

this has been raised a few times as well as the wording, like a 'line' missing from a sentence.
Being a non certified Ref I'm confussed since I'm sure I have other non certified saying they have clarification that it is applied as written and Certified Refs saying different :/ hmmm

Looks like I be taking note of this and asking the question, if someone else doesn't (looks for Mick Hawkins) at the up coming Officials clinic in Australia...
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: gnrl grievance on July 18, 2011, 10:47:59 am
Are we or aren't we to be applying the rules relating to Pivots on the Pivot line or not in relation to this clarification and position Blockers need to be????

I'd also like to know this because I have girls telling me they are intending to try this pivot strategy in the game I'm HRing this weekend and the WFTDA officials clinic will be too late...
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: reflmao on July 18, 2011, 01:36:11 pm
I'd also like to know this because I have girls telling me they are intending to try this pivot strategy in the game I'm HRing this weekend and the WFTDA officials clinic will be too late...

Eventually you're going to need to get comfortable with an interpretation. Even if you're not currently confident in what the right answer is you need something for now.

What I would do is pick an interpretation for the bout that you are comfortable with, that you can officiate, and that you can explain to refs, skaters, and announcers easily.   During the officials meeting and during the captains meeting explain the interpretation you are using and how you will be calling it.  If there are complaints or arguments you can explain that this is a new publication and that the proper interpretation is still being discussed and you are reaching out for answers but until that happens this is the interpretation you are using.

You might also want to write this up in email and send it to the teams ahead of time so that there are no surprises for anyone on game day.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Cliquework on July 18, 2011, 02:24:27 pm
Mick, I have discussed this with our rules rep, and they have indicated that the rules committee want it called as written. If at least half of a team's blockers are false starting, the jam must be called off.

There is a difference between understanding the background of why the rule exists and applying the normative text that makes up the rule. The rules committee chose to use language that encompasses a more general circumstance because they want the jam to be called off in that more general circumstance.

There are certified refs in this discussion who seem to think otherwise.
I guess time will tell

I know I made a less punitive judgement of this new publication earlier on in this thread. That was an interpretation consistent with the wording at the time and still fitting with the idea of what is trying to be prevented by this publication.

That was before the wording changed on Friday. And in one word, it is called very differently. Fom "both" to "each". It is now indeed far more restrictive than simply needing a pack in the proper position.

Here's how I called it this weekend. False starts as per normal. The rules themselves define false start as being out of position. 2 or more from a team false start, jam is dead. That included getting caught by a pivot. It is after all written (if generally) in the publication itself.

I was candid to the captains and referees as to how it was to be called. I realize players are expected to know the rules, but this was very new and changed within that time of existence. Everyone was made clear with no disagreement.

Not one false start for 3 games incidentally. Strong encouragement to be in position?
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: reflmao on July 18, 2011, 02:49:54 pm
We made the same decision.  In two full games we had one false start (in the first jam of night) and one poodle.

You might be right that the skaters are being a lot more conscious of false starts.  But that might also be related to the fact that we discussed it specifically at the captains meeting.   Bouts may go back to a more typical rate of false starts when we stop mentioning it explicitly.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Frank Necrosis on July 18, 2011, 04:46:26 pm
Say the pack lines up like this:

|pb                    pb| j
|  b                       b| j
|  b                       b|


There is a no pack situation.

Who gets the penalties? Red, teal, both?

Nothing states who is responsible for forming a pack.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Cliquework on July 18, 2011, 04:50:59 pm
No immediate penalties. You can still start with a no pack situation. They are in position as defined by the publication and not false starting.

They just need to immediately attempt to reform. Both teams are responsible in their own way.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: HIM-roid on July 19, 2011, 12:08:31 am
I would like to see a clarification stating that a false start due to pre jam positioning be separate from a false start due to a pivot catching someone off guard at the pivot line. I think that would have less effect on game play and called jams or the jam sheets are going to need way more blocks to track the jam number. At first I didn't agree with the 3 or more skaters lined up in pre jam positioning since all it takes is one skater from each team to form a pack, but I could see where that could lead to a no pack situation in a hurry and agree to it. Not that I would call anything differently rather I agree with the rules or not, if WFTDA says it WILL be called this way, then so be it. I also have to give the rules committee a lot of credit as what might seem like a no brainer to us, could however have multiple game strategies applied to their clarification. I have total faith in the "powers to be" since I am sure they have seen every masterminded strategy under the sun where the majority of the refs have only watched it on you tube or read about it. I have no firm facts, but I am sure they have EVERY referee in mind when they clarify or write a rule to keep it as simple as they can. As for the "jam that wasn't", I would like to see a time limit in place that if at least one skater does not cross the pivot line in a given time, the jammers are released. A team could still delay a start with a staggered start but it would keep the game moving and the skaters skating. Of course these are my opinions and we all know what they say about opinions, sorry to derail there.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: mick hawkins on July 19, 2011, 12:18:19 am
I know I made a less punitive judgement of this new publication earlier on in this thread. That was an interpretation consistent with the wording at the time and still fitting with the idea of what is trying to be prevented by this publication.

That was before the wording changed on Friday. And in one word, it is called very differently. Fom "both" to "each". It is now indeed far more restrictive than simply needing a pack in the proper position.

Here's how I called it this weekend. False starts as per normal. The rules themselves define false start as being out of position. 2 or more from a team false start, jam is dead. That included getting caught by a pivot. It is after all written (if generally) in the publication itself.

I was candid to the captains and referees as to how it was to be called. I realize players are expected to know the rules, but this was very new and changed within that time of existence. Everyone was made clear with no disagreement.

Not one false start for 3 games incidentally. Strong encouragement to be in position?

CW, thanks for sharing how you're calling this.
To be honest the changed wording didnt speak that clearly to me so your comment's appreciated


And a personal thought...Hopefully we don't see a resurgence of pivots touching the line between opponents legs etc and the opposing pivot getting a major as a result.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Black Adder on July 19, 2011, 12:28:01 am
And a personal thought...Hopefully we don't see a resurgence of pivots touching the line between opponents legs etc and the opposing pivot getting a major as a result.

Yes I saw a Pivot get down on hands and knees and reach through a skaters legs and put her hand on the line. I thought it was a dodgey play. I hope the pivot on the ground issue gets sorted also.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Black Adder on July 20, 2011, 05:14:03 am
No offence to cliquework (who I know knows his shit).

But it's been 5 days and a change in the wording of the clarification since anyone over level 2 Certification has had anything to say on this subject (and even then they didn't say much).

A little more info from the top might be handy for us plebs out in the trenches.
There has been questions asked and people are locking themselves into habits of calling this and educating their skaters quickly because they need to run bouts a day or two after this came out.
I want to know we are calling this correctly before the whole region starts calling it the same way. Or worse start calling it differently.

Yes, I'm Head Reffing this Saturday night so I don't want to be screwing up.....
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: FNZebra on July 20, 2011, 05:31:51 pm
No offence to cliquework (who I know knows his shit).

But it's been 5 days and a change in the wording of the clarification since anyone over level 2 Certification has had anything to say on this subject (and even then they didn't say much).

A little more info from the top might be handy for us plebs out in the trenches.
There has been questions asked and people are locking themselves into habits of calling this and educating their skaters quickly because they need to run bouts a day or two after this came out.
I want to know we are calling this correctly before the whole region starts calling it the same way. Or worse start calling it differently.

Yes, I'm Head Reffing this Saturday night so I don't want to be screwing up.....

@BA, I think there is sufficient information in this thread regarding how to call the new rules publication.

Remind the captains and the officials in your pre-bout meeting about the salient parts of the publication, that that is how things will be called, and ask if there are any questions about it.

The only changes this really brings about are:

It builds on existing rules that you should already be enforcing, even the concerns about Pivot vs Pivot Line (see 4.2 for how to handle that).

I've already reffed a double-header under this new publication, and it didn't even come up during the bouts.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Shaun Ketterman on July 20, 2011, 06:24:41 pm
I've already reffed a double-header under this new publication, and it didn't even come up during the bouts.

Same here except not a double header. 

I wager this clarification is going to put blockers starting behind the jammer line to rest and not a whole lot else.  I really don't think it's going to cause a maelstrom of new problems.  I rarely see more than one member of a team poodling at a time anyway, to the point that I can't recall any specific instances of it happening.  Likewise for a pivot getting "gotcha" false starts on enough blockers to cause the jam to end.   
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Megapickle on July 20, 2011, 06:57:15 pm
I rarely see more than one member of a team poodling at a time anyway, to the point that I can't recall any specific instances of it happening.  Likewise for a pivot getting "gotcha" false starts on enough blockers to cause the jam to end.   
Agreed: 2 teammates poodling or 2 teammates being caught behind a pivot's hips are each extremely unlikely. Which is precisely why I began us down this rabbit-hole by pointing out the fact that when of 1 of each type (from a single team) happens simultaneously, we have to call it off. As I see it, that's a real-world scenario that we may someday actually see.

(And PS, if a team does nonsensically try to poodle 2 skaters, that will leave them instantly with 3 Minutes to be served (2 4th-minors and 1 Pivot Major). Presumably the Poodlers sit first, we make sure the Pivot stays out for the re-started jam, so she can sit when a chair opens up. Bad news all around. :-)
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Cliquework on July 20, 2011, 07:09:33 pm
Edit: The below was based on a possible incorrect interpretation of what you are saying. If by "1 of each type" you meant a poodle and a pivot based false start from an individual team, then agreed on that interpretation. I originally thought you meant 1 false start from each team. If so...

Quote
the fact that when of 1 of each type (from a single team) happens simultaneously, we have to call it off

I don't believe I agree with that. That is not a majority from either team false starting. That is counting both teams false starting, but using the metric (2 or more) derived from the "majority of each team" wording.

If we count both, which we do not do due to the new wording, we need to use the majority metric of both.

If we use the metric for "each team", we need to count "each team" individually.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Megapickle on July 20, 2011, 07:23:45 pm
If by "1 of each type" you meant a poodle and a pivot based false start from an individual team, then agreed on that interpretation.
Sorry, yes, that's what I meant. A white-team poodler and a white-team pivot-hip false start. Two white skaters remaining "in-position", which is not a majority, so call-off. Again, go back to page 1 to see that that was my instant gut reaction to this publication.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: ShoNuff on July 20, 2011, 08:23:46 pm
If the team picked up 3 penalty box visits simultaneously, I believe they get to choose who they have sit down first and whoever sits down third gets sent back.  It could be, but doesn't have to be the pivot.

It's kind of like musical chairs with choreography.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: reflmao on July 20, 2011, 09:39:59 pm
A white-team poodler and a white-team pivot-hip false start. Two white skaters remaining "in-position", which is not a majority, so call-off.

Yes correct.   In fact the text of the publication has been updated again.  THe update makes this clear.

New text from: http://wftda.com/rules/publications/prejam-positioning
[rule]
[...] Blockers are considered in position when they are on the track behind the Pivot line, behind the Pivot's hips if she is on the Pivot line, and ahead of the Jammer line. (See Sections 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 4.2, 6.13.5, 6.13.5.1-3, and 6.13.16 for reference.)

It is required that the majority of on the track Pivot Blockers and Blockers from each team begin in this pre-jam positioning.

If at the first whistle, the majority of on the track Blockers and Pivot Blockers from each team are not in position, the referee must immediately end the jam and an Official Timeout will be called. [...]
[/rule]
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Megapickle on July 20, 2011, 09:44:33 pm
[rule]
[...]If at the first whistle, the majority of on the track Blockers and Pivot Blockers from each team are not in position, the referee must immediately end the jam and an Official Timeout will be called. [...]
[/rule]
Awesome! Now, the last step to squash the remaining ambiguity is to make this sentence say "there is not a majority ... in position".
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: JoeXCore on July 20, 2011, 10:31:48 pm
Small details have once again been edited in the latest release.

It is now quite clear (to me at least) that ANY false start = out of position including those behind the pivot line and in front of the pivot that is touching the line hips.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: HIM-roid on July 20, 2011, 11:36:54 pm
From what I am reading, the only reason to call the jam is if the majority of a teams skaters are not lined up in the pre-jam position. So a pivot can still catch two or more blockers lining up behind her hips without the jam being called. And never say never or extremely unlikely as I have called it myself at a bout where two blockers were too occupied discussing strategy to see the pivot stretch out. All I can say is thank you WFTDA for that clarification.   ;D
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: reflmao on July 20, 2011, 11:52:06 pm
So a pivot can still catch two or more blockers lining up behind her hips without the jam being called.

It seems very clear to me that this is wrong. 

I'll repost the snippet I posted earlier plus the line before it.   Bolding mine.
[rule][...] Pivot Blockers are considered in position when they are on the track on or behind the Pivot line and ahead of the Jammer line.  Blockers are considered in position when they are on the track behind the Pivot line, behind the Pivot's hips if she is on the Pivot line, and ahead of the Jammer line. (See Sections 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 4.2, 6.13.5, 6.13.5.1-3, and 6.13.16 for reference.)

It is required that the majority of on the track Pivot Blockers and Blockers from each team begin in this pre-jam positioning.

If at the first whistle, the majority of on the track Blockers and Pivot Blockers from each team are not in position, the referee must immediately end the jam and an Official Timeout will be called. [...][/rule]

In position for a blocker is defined as behind a pivot who is on the line (and other things).  Then later is says we must call it if enough aren't are not in position. 

I"m not sure how you read that differently.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: HIM-roid on July 21, 2011, 02:43:54 am
OOPS, I missed the behind the Pivot's hips if she is on the Pivot line  Thanks. Guess my eyes are faster than my mind today. Thanks for the correction.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Major Wood on July 21, 2011, 01:13:37 pm
[rule]
[...]If at the first whistle, the majority of on the track Blockers and Pivot Blockers from each team are not in position, the referee must immediately end the jam and an Official Timeout will be called. [...]
[/rule]
Awesome! Now, the last step to squash the remaining ambiguity is to make this sentence say "there is not a majority ... in position".

I'm not seeing anything ambiguous about that. There has to be a majority of blockers from each team in position for the jam to continue.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: reflmao on July 21, 2011, 02:43:47 pm
I'm with pickle on this one.  I read that sentence as if the majority is out of position call it off.  I understand that the previous text clarifies that and I understand that there are two ways of interpreting it and I know what the right one is; but the wrong one is the more natural reading to me.

It's a problem of where that 'not' binds.
A. If the majority are not (in position).
vs
B. If the majority are (not in position).

You see A, I see B.

I like Pickle's suggestion of "there is not a majority ... in position" as I don't think that version can be mis-read.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: HIM-roid on July 21, 2011, 03:54:44 pm
I don't know how that can be misread, unless you miss a part like I did. Even yourself stated it in your earlier post. If the majority is not in position, the jam is called dead, this is to include any type of false starting blockers.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Celtic Raider on July 21, 2011, 05:03:15 pm
So I'm going to be going over this tonight with my refs, and wanted to make sure that I'm not giving them incorrect information.  Can someone tell me if there is anything wrong with what I'm going to be giving them, or if I'm missing anything you feel is important?  I will be giving them the official wording from the WFTDA site as well as the below in their league ref book handout.

[WFTDA new clarification goes here]

So what does this mean?

Basically it means that if the majority of blockers and the pivot from either team are not in position when the jam is started the jam is immediately called off.  Once the jam is called off, the refs call an official time out, issue a major IP to the Pivot of the jam (or last blocker to enter the track that was out of position, or the blocker closest to the ref) and all the minor IP penalties to the appropriate skaters are issued as well.

What is a majority of skaters out of position?

In each case below, the Pivot is being counted as a blocker for majority purposes

If there are 4 blockers on the track then 2-4 is the majority.
If there are 3 blockers on the track then 2 is the majority.
If there are 2 blockers on the track, then 1 is the majority.

What is out of position?

•   Lining up behind the Jammer line (poodling)
•   Lining up ahead of the Pivot line
•   Lining up in front of a Pivot who has possession of the Pivot Line (i.e. touching the Pivot Line but not over)

What is not out of position?

•   Lining up between the Pivot and Jammer line
•   Lining up in front of a Pivot who is not touching the Pivot Line
•   Taking a knee before the start of the jam
•   Lining up more than 10 feet away from the Pack
•   One entire team lining up more than 10 feet away from the entire other team
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: JoeXCore on July 21, 2011, 05:16:49 pm
2 is not a majority of 4, 3 is a majority of 4
other than that looks solid a a quick read
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Grim Griefer on July 21, 2011, 05:26:39 pm
JoeXCore is right, Majority means greater than 50%, and we always round up to the nearest whole blocker.

So:

If there are 4 blockers on the track for a given team, then at least 3 blockers must be in position.
If there are 3 blockers on the track for a given team, then at least 2 blockers must be in position.
If there are 2 blockers on the track for a given team, then both blockers must be in position.
If there is 1 blocker on the track for a given team, then that blocker must be in position.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Interrobang Yerdehd on July 21, 2011, 05:29:50 pm
You may want to add "lining on up one knee" to the list of things that aren't out of position.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: JoeXCore on July 21, 2011, 05:42:48 pm
You may want to add "lining on up one knee" to the list of things that aren't out of position.

He did.

•   Taking a knee before the start of the jam

Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: FNZebra on July 21, 2011, 06:02:54 pm
So I'm going to be going over this tonight with my refs, and wanted to make sure that I'm not giving them incorrect information.  Can someone tell me if there is anything wrong with what I'm going to be giving them, or if I'm missing anything you feel is important?  I will be giving them the official wording from the WFTDA site as well as the below in their league ref book handout.

[WFTDA new clarification goes here]

So what does this mean?

Basically it means that if the majority of blockers and the pivot from either team are not in position when the jam is started the jam is immediately called off.  Once the jam is called off, the refs call an official time out, issue a major IP to the Pivot of the jam (or last blocker to enter the track that was out of position, or the blocker closest to the ref) and all the minor IP penalties to the appropriate skaters are issued as well.

What is a majority of skaters out of position?

In each case below, the Pivot is being counted as a blocker for majority purposes

If there are 4 blockers on the track then 2-4 is the majority.
If there are 3 blockers on the track then 2 is the majority.
If there are 2 blockers on the track, then 1 is the majority.

Remember that a Pivot is just a "fancy" Blocker, who may receive a star pass, and may line up on the Pivot line at the start of a jam, and may be the recipient of penalties for actions of their teammates.

Your counts for what constitutes a majority are off. Here, a majority is more than 50%, then round up to the next whole Pivot/Blocker.

The following makes it easier for pack refs to recognize when something is wonky, and to call off the jam.

To have majority of Pivot/Blockers from each team, of the skaters on the track at the jam start whistle, how many may be lined up in a false starting position from each team?
If 4 or 3 from a team, then 1 may from that team;
Else if 2 or 1 from a team, then none may from that team;
Else call the jam, and issue appropriate penalties.


What is out of position?

•   Lining up behind the Jammer line (poodling)
•   Lining up ahead of the Pivot line
•   Lining up in front of a Pivot who has possession of the Pivot Line (i.e. touching the Pivot Line but not over)


"Lining up behind the Jammer line (poodling)" and "Lining up ahead of the Pivot line" are the same thing. A skater taking an intentional fourth minor by lining up behind the Jammer line is actually lining up very very far in front of the Pivot line. The response (http://www.zebrahuddle.com/index.php?topic=1723.msg25936#msg25936) from the Rules Committee still must be heeded.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Celtic Raider on July 21, 2011, 07:03:15 pm
2 is not a majority of 4, 3 is a majority of 4
other than that looks solid a a quick read
I was going more for the "How many skaters need to be out of position in order to call of the jam" rather than "This many players must be in position to allow the jam to continue."

So the numbers there are an indication of how many players (or more) that false start in order qualify for the jam to be called and penalties chucked about.  So it's right, it's just not written properly.  THAT I can change.  Thanks for the advice everyone, glad I got this one down after 10 pages of discussion :P
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: ShoNuff on July 21, 2011, 08:23:00 pm
It sounds like people are still not in agreement on what is meant by

[rule]the majority of on the track Blockers and Pivot Blockers from each team are not in position[/rule]

If you read it as saying that the majority of skaters must be properly positioned in order for a jam to continue, then there must be 3 out of 4 skaters in position for a full pack.

If you read it as saying that the majority of skaters must be out of position for a jam to be called off, then there must be 2 out of 4 skaters in position for a full pack.

It took me a while of staring at what megapickle and reflmao were saying but they're right, you can parse that statement two different ways and they have very different results.

The first case reads it with the idea that in position is a single concept and the not negates it.  So a team must have a majority in position of they fail to meet the condition.

The other reading says that not in position is a single idea that could also be written as out of position.  In that reading the majority of skaters must be out of position in order for a jam to be called so only 50% must be in position for a jam to continue.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Mr.EsoTerror on July 21, 2011, 08:36:31 pm
hmm... getting my head around this...

per team:
in all cases, 2 or more out of position will end jam.
if there are only 2 or less blockers on track, both must be in position, or the jam gets called

okay. I had it backwards at first.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Megapickle on July 21, 2011, 08:39:42 pm
per team:
in all cases, 2 or more out of position will end jam.
if there are only 2 or less blockers on track, both must be in position, or the jam gets called

Correct.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Celtic Raider on July 21, 2011, 08:56:09 pm
"Lining up behind the Jammer line (poodling)" and "Lining up ahead of the Pivot line" are the same thing. A skater taking an intentional fourth minor by lining up behind the Jammer line is actually lining up very very far in front of the Pivot line. The response (http://www.zebrahuddle.com/index.php?topic=1723.msg25936#msg25936) from the Rules Committee still must be heeded.

to be technical, lining up ahead of the Pivot line is not necessarily poodling.  A skater can be over the line unintentionally where as poodling is going out of your way to actively attract the attention of the referees to say "HELLO!  I'M DOING SOMETHING AGAINST THE RULES OVER HERE YOU SHOULD MAKE ME FEEL BAD!".  That's why I put that distinction in there, so that the refs on my team will know that if they intentionally get a penalty or don't intentionally get a penalty for being between the two lines, it still counts.

I know it's picky, but I wanted to make sure that I covered all possible situations so that there is no confusion if/when it will happen.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: HIM-roid on July 21, 2011, 09:22:34 pm
being technical, lining up in front of the pivot line is a false start, lining up behind the jammer line is a false start, lining up in front of a pivots hips that is on the line is a false start. Any combination of these falls back into the majority of skaters must legally be in place at the start of the jam or the jam is called off.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: FNZebra on July 21, 2011, 09:39:36 pm
"Lining up behind the Jammer line (poodling)" and "Lining up ahead of the Pivot line" are the same thing. A skater taking an intentional fourth minor by lining up behind the Jammer line is actually lining up very very far in front of the Pivot line. The response (http://www.zebrahuddle.com/index.php?topic=1723.msg25936#msg25936) from the Rules Committee still must be heeded.

to be technical, lining up ahead of the Pivot line is not necessarily poodling.  A skater can be over the line unintentionally where as poodling is going out of your way to actively attract the attention of the referees to say "HELLO!  I'M DOING SOMETHING AGAINST THE RULES OVER HERE YOU SHOULD MAKE ME FEEL BAD!".  That's why I put that distinction in there, so that the refs on my team will know that if they intentionally get a penalty or don't intentionally get a penalty for being between the two lines, it still counts.

I know it's picky, but I wanted to make sure that I covered all possible situations so that there is no confusion if/when it will happen.

Uh, that is bringing skater intent into the picture, and over the past several rules revisions, they have been vigorously trying to eliminate that. It is a good idea to not have your newer refs trying to decide whether someone was trying to do an illegal action or not. ;-) Call a penalty based on the illegal action and the impact.

The act of being beyond the Pivot line at the jam start whistle is the same, whether the skater did so on purpose or accidently. They are beyond the Pivot line if their toestop is nudged just beyond it, or if they have decided to line up behind the Jammers who are at the Jammer line.

A successful poodle gets the skater sent off immediately, because they have just earned their 4th minor. An unsuccessful poodle attempt (usually because the skater actually did not have 3 minors -- doh!) must now be treated just like a false start and involve yielding advantage, because that's what a poodle is anyway -- a false start.

Derby legend has it that it was created by one Sarah Hipel as a non-douchey way (i.e., not hitting an opponent) to earn a minor for a skater -- hopefully the 4th minor, if the whiteboard is accurate, to clear off their penalty count yet still permit them to participate in the jam.

When explaining the current rules to newer refs, I try to reduce the amount of variations whenever possible -- the rules themselves have enough branching and exceptions, and my purposely adding more often causes additional cognitive load to someone who is already overloaded.

And we all know that feeling of "I just saw something that looked wrong, now was it actually, and what do I call it?" Giving your newer refs those two things, which are to be treated similarly by the ref crew, adds one more thing for them to have to think about. And I'd posit there's always enough of that once the jam start whistle blows.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: JoeXCore on July 21, 2011, 10:39:59 pm
Small details have once again been edited in the latest release.

It is now quite clear (to me at least) that ANY false start = out of position including those behind the pivot line and in front of the pivot that is touching the line hips.


Well... it has been explained to me now by a good source... no matter how clear it seemed...

Jams should not be called off if blockers false start due to being in front of the pivots hips while behind the pivot line.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Grim Griefer on July 21, 2011, 10:43:12 pm
Well... it has been explained to me now by a good source... no matter how clear it seemed...

Jams should not be called off if blockers false start due to being in front of the pivots hips while behind the pivot line.

Woah, woah. Your first instinct was correct. This one is not. The clarification was updated to make it even more clear: ANY false start counts towards the jam call-off limit.

From http://wftda.com/rules/publications/prejam-positioning:
[rule]
Blockers are considered in position when they are on the track behind the Pivot line, behind the Pivot's hips if she is on the Pivot line, and ahead of the Jammer line.
[/rule]
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: JoeXCore on July 21, 2011, 10:44:55 pm
Well... it has been explained to me now by a good source... no matter how clear it seemed...

Jams should not be called off if blockers false start due to being in front of the pivots hips while behind the pivot line.

Woah, woah. Your first instinct was correct. This one is not. The clarification was updated to make it even more clear: ANY false start counts towards the jam call-off limit.

From http://wftda.com/rules/publications/prejam-positioning:
[rule]
Blockers are considered in position when they are on the track behind the Pivot line, behind the Pivot's hips if she is on the Pivot line, and ahead of the Jammer line.
[/rule]

That's what I thought too....
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: mick hawkins on July 21, 2011, 11:45:30 pm
Small details have once again been edited in the latest release.

It is now quite clear (to me at least) that ANY false start = out of position including those behind the pivot line and in front of the pivot that is touching the line hips.


Well... it has been explained to me now by a good source... no matter how clear it seemed...

Jams should not be called off if blockers false start due to being in front of the pivots hips while behind the pivot line.

JXC.... can you elaborate?

Because[rule]Blockers are considered in position when they are on the track behind the Pivot line, behind the Pivot's hips if she is on the Pivot line, and ahead of the Jammer line.[/rule]
seems pretty clear
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Major Wood on July 22, 2011, 12:09:11 am
It took me a while of staring at what megapickle and reflmao were saying but they're right, you can parse that statement two different ways and they have very different results.

Not if you read the rest of the publication for context. There are two sentences that use the word "majority", one right after the other:

[rule]It is required that the majority of on the track Pivot Blockers and Blockers from each team begin in this pre-jam positioning.

If at the first whistle, the majority of on the track Blockers and Pivot Blockers from each team are not in position, the referee must immediately end the jam and an Official Timeout will be called.[/rule]

I suspect that you are focusing on the second sentence and seeing that it could be read as:

Quote
If at the first whistle, the majority of on the track Blockers and Pivot Blockers from each team are not in position out of position, the referee must immediately end the jam and an Official Timeout will be called.


It certainly could be read that way. To do so would be neglecting the prior sentence which states that the majority of on the track blockers and pivot blockers from each team must begin in the pre-jam positioning explained in the first paragraph.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Black Adder on July 22, 2011, 01:03:39 am
sooooo.......
The Majority must be in position or the jam gets called.

so for the jam not to be called off there must be
3 in position in a 4 blocker set
2 in position in a 3 blocker set
2 in position in a 2 blocker set (1 is not a majority of 2)

And to call it off
2 false starts in a 4 blocker set
2 false starts in a 3 blocker set
1 false start in a 2 blocker set


Right ??????????

Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Grim Griefer on July 22, 2011, 03:37:46 am
Yes. And don't forget the very uncommon 1 blocker on-the-track option. At our last bout weekend, we actually had a jam start with both teams having only 1 on-the-track blocker (3 in the box for each team, one of each who was on their last ten seconds when the prior jam had ended). So it's important to also remember that in that situation if the lone blocker false starts, the jam gets called, and the box gets that much more complicated.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: reflmao on July 22, 2011, 03:43:22 am
It certainly could be read that way.

The wrong interpretation was the first interpretation I had of that sentence and is still the meaning I get the first time.   I'm not the only one, look through the rest of the thread to see others that have.

It's obvious we can get the right interpretation out of this text but to get there takes some thinking for some of us.

I know there's nothing I can do about it.  The only reason I'm arguing the point at all is that if we point it out enough people having trouble will hopefully catch the thread and get it right.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Megapickle on July 22, 2011, 08:33:26 am
I know there's nothing I can do about it.

Not true. Anyone can use WFTDA's Q&A contact form: http://wftda.com/rules/qa/submit to suggest that they reword the offending sentence so that it can only be read one way: If at the first whistle, there is not a majority of on the track Blockers and Pivot Blockers from each team in position, the referee must immediately end the jam and an Official Timeout will be called.

It was almost certainly our collective suggestions that caused the other two updates to happen. No reason to think they'll ignore us the third time.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Anton Deck on July 22, 2011, 09:36:42 am
OK so from what I can see now reading through this we are at a psoition where we require a majority of on track blockers (including the pivot in this calculation) to be in position, with each team calculated seperatly.

In position means not false starting (whether that poodling, having a foot over the pivot line , or lineing up behind the jam line )

Taking a knee prior to the jam start has no bearing on this.


The oustanding issue still seems to be the blockers being false started by a pivot pushing their hips back. Whilst the ruling seems to be quite explicit in considering these players out of position JoeXCore says he has it on good authority that this shoudlnt trigger a call off.
If that is the case, then the rule does need rewording. We still seem to be stuck in a circle with this one between what people assumed was the intent of the rule ( to penalise teams for intentional false starts and stop the practise of lineing up ahead of the pivot line) and the wording of the clarification.
Or is Joes "source" just wrong?




Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Interrobang Yerdehd on July 22, 2011, 04:59:17 pm
Or is Joes "source" just wrong?

Given a choice between the extremely clear wording of an official WFTDA document and an anonymous source you're hearing about second hand, always side with the document.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Bishop on July 22, 2011, 06:04:08 pm
Or is Joes "source" just wrong?

Given a choice between the extremely clear wording of an official WFTDA document and an anonymous source you're hearing about second hand, always side with the document.
Au contraire, mon frθre, Joe is correct.  

Also, I'm not sure I agree with your sentiment regarding an Official WFTDA document.  Joe's been in this a game long time and has good sources.  He's ones of those Right People to Ask.*  Besides, he's just trying to be helpful.  

*See Professor Murder's "Referee Behavior" article for more information about "asking the right people."
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Megapickle on July 22, 2011, 07:09:37 pm
Also, I'm not sure I agree with your sentiment regarding an Official WFTDA document.  Joe's been in this a game long time and has good sources.

Bishop, I'd happily accept this explanation if we were between jams, in an official time-out, or even at half-time. In the heat of the moment, Joe's extensive experience & good reputation are more than enough for me to trust him, even if I don't understand exactly how he came to a conclusion different than my own. But here, in an at-your-leisure forum pace, even "Right People" should at least try to justify their comments when they're asking us to flatly contradict the letter of the law.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Major Wood on July 22, 2011, 07:13:38 pm
Ok everyone, I want to stop this thread right where it is.
You should be following the wording of the publication and its referenced rules.

Until something changes, this thread will be locked.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Major Wood on July 28, 2011, 09:07:29 pm
Since something changed, this thread is re-opened.

Rules has added the following to the bottom of the publication:

[rule]Note: The Pre-Jam Positioning Publication is not to be applied if a skater false starts by lining up in front of a Pivot Blocker's hips or jumping the start whistle. In these situations the penalties for false starting should be enforced, but the jam should not be called off (See Sections 6.13.5 and 6.13.16).[/rule]
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: ShoNuff on July 28, 2011, 09:56:55 pm
Does jumping the start whistle mean that a skater slightly ahead of the pivot line is only exempt from the pre-jam publication if they are in motion at the time of the start whistle?
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: HIM-roid on July 28, 2011, 10:22:32 pm
Jumping the start whistle, if I am reading this right, means moving over the pivot line before the first whistle. They can be in motion, just not over the pivot line before the first whistle.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Graeme on July 28, 2011, 10:29:28 pm
Does jumping the start whistle mean that a skater slightly ahead of the pivot line is only exempt from the pre-jam publication if they are in motion at the time of the start whistle?


I'd go with issuing a IP false start penalty, since she had lined up in te correct position and as long as she was the only one in the area infront of the pivot line and behind the Jammer line.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Major Wood on July 28, 2011, 11:06:35 pm
Does jumping the start whistle mean that a skater slightly ahead of the pivot line is only exempt from the pre-jam publication if they are in motion at the time of the start whistle?


It means that if a skater actually false starts, as opposed to lining up out of position. Let's not worry about applying metrics to something that is an obvious "you know it when you see it" thing.
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: Black Adder on July 29, 2011, 12:22:03 am
Thank you... Just in time for the WFTDA ref clinic this weekend, this will eliminate an hours worth of painful questions !!
Title: Re: Entire Pack starting behind jammer line
Post by: FNZebra on July 29, 2011, 01:10:39 am
Thank you... Just in time for the WFTDA ref clinic this weekend, this will eliminate an hours worth of painful questions !!

Oh, I'm sure that hour will be taken up by more than an hour's worth of other painful questions.  ::)