Zebra Huddleâ„¢

WFTDA => Hypothetical Rules Discussion => Topic started by: The Doc on October 18, 2012, 12:40:17 am

Title: both jammers meet lead bc block goes oop
Post by: The Doc on October 18, 2012, 12:40:17 am
On the initial pass of both jammer (black and white teams) have passed all blockers but one in play white blocker.

So front is white blocker (in play)  then behind is black jammer and then behind is white jammer, and behind that skater is the rest of the pack.

The formost white blocker on her own accord takes a knee, therefore both jammers have now passed all in play blocker (all assuming no illegal passes or NPNP) then both jammers have meet the requirements to become lead jammer at the same time then there will be no lead for that jam,

My question is, is the a penalty for the white blocker, i dont think there is. is there something I'm missing?
Title: Re: both jammers meet lead bc block goes oop
Post by: FNZebra on October 18, 2012, 03:06:43 am
My question is, is the a penalty for the white blocker, i dont think there is. is there something I'm missing?

Maybe the official WFTDA word (http://www.wftda.com/rules/qa/jammers-simultaneously-meet-all-requirements-for-lead-jammer) on how to handle Lead Jammer in such a scenario?
Title: Re: both jammers meet lead bc block goes oop
Post by: The Gorram Reaver on October 18, 2012, 04:59:41 am
On the initial pass of both jammer (black and white teams) have passed all blockers but one in play white blocker.

Jammers must pass all Blockers and Pivots legally and in-bounds, even those Blockers and Pivots who are down or out of bounds.  Only Blockers and Pivots who have been directed to the penalty box, or who have exited the Engagement Zone need not be passed to earn Lead Jammer status.

3.4.1  Lead Jammer is a strategic position established on the Jammers' initial pass through the pack during each jam. The Lead Jammer is the first Jammer to pass the foremost in-play Blocker legally and in bounds, having already passed all other Blockers legally and in bounds.

The first Jammer to pass the downed white Blocker in your scenario will be Lead Jammer.
Title: Re: both jammers meet lead bc block goes oop
Post by: RawShark on October 18, 2012, 07:38:16 am
3.4.1  Lead Jammer is a strategic position established on the Jammers' initial pass through the pack during each jam. The Lead Jammer is the first Jammer to pass the foremost in-play Blocker legally and in bounds, having already passed all other Blockers legally and in bounds.

The first Jammer to pass the downed white Blocker in your scenario will be Lead Jammer.

Emphasis modified.
It's my understanding that a downed Blocker is not in-play.

I've always called this in a similar manner as the Simultaneous Jammer rules publication that FNZ linked.
Before the event, both Jammer have met the second clause of 3.4.1 (pasing all other blockers legally and in-bounds). They are vying to meet the first.
When the white blocker takes a knee, it's effectively the same as the foremost-in-play blocker going OOP (in the rules publication). Both jammers have met the first clause of 3.4.1 at the same time (passing the foremost in-play blocker - who is now behind them both), hence - neither is lead.

However, none of this discussion is answering the OP's question.

Depending on the result of the white blocker taking a knee, it is possible for her to be breaking the rules.
e.g. Is she destroying the pack? Is she initiating a low block? Or something else?
On the face of it - her actions are legal.
Title: Re: both jammers meet lead bc block goes oop
Post by: Anton Deck on October 18, 2012, 09:19:17 am
3.4.1  Lead Jammer is a strategic position established on the Jammers' initial pass through the pack during each jam. The Lead Jammer is the first Jammer to pass the foremost in-play Blocker legally and in bounds, having already passed all other Blockers legally and in bounds.

The first Jammer to pass the downed white Blocker in your scenario will be Lead Jammer.

Emphasis modified.
It's my understanding that a downed Blocker is not in-play.

I've always called this in a similar manner as the Simultaneous Jammer rules publication that FNZ linked.
Before the event, both Jammer have met the second clause of 3.4.1 (pasing all other blockers legally and in-bounds). They are vying to meet the first.
When the white blocker takes a knee, it's effectively the same as the foremost-in-play blocker going OOP (in the rules publication). Both jammers have met the first clause of 3.4.1 at the same time (passing the foremost in-play blocker - who is now behind them both), hence - neither is lead.

However, none of this discussion is answering the OP's question.

Depending on the result of the white blocker taking a knee, it is possible for her to be breaking the rules.
e.g. Is she destroying the pack? Is she initiating a low block? Or something else?
On the face of it - her actions are legal.

From the glossary

[rule]Downed players are not in play[/rule]

So yes I agree, once she takes herself OOP they have both already passed the formeost in play blocker.
Title: Re: both jammers meet lead bc block goes oop
Post by: Eject You Later on October 18, 2012, 02:04:40 pm
3.4.1  Lead Jammer is a strategic position established on the Jammers' initial pass through the pack during each jam. The Lead Jammer is the first Jammer to pass the foremost in-play Blocker legally and in bounds, having already passed all other Blockers legally and in bounds.

The first Jammer to pass the downed white Blocker in your scenario will be Lead Jammer.

Emphasis modified.
It's my understanding that a downed Blocker is not in-play.

I've always called this in a similar manner as the Simultaneous Jammer rules publication that FNZ linked.
Before the event, both Jammer have met the second clause of 3.4.1 (pasing all other blockers legally and in-bounds). They are vying to meet the first.
When the white blocker takes a knee, it's effectively the same as the foremost-in-play blocker going OOP (in the rules publication). Both jammers have met the first clause of 3.4.1 at the same time (passing the foremost in-play blocker - who is now behind them both), hence - neither is lead.

However, none of this discussion is answering the OP's question.

Depending on the result of the white blocker taking a knee, it is possible for her to be breaking the rules.
e.g. Is she destroying the pack? Is she initiating a low block? Or something else?
On the face of it - her actions are legal.

From the glossary

[rule]Downed players are not in play[/rule]

So yes I agree, once she takes herself OOP they have both already passed the formeost in play blocker.

You are not seeing the trees.

Yes, she has passed the foremost in play blocker.  But she has not passed all blockers.  The blocker that is down is still a blocker.  She is not the foremost, but the "other blockers" do not have to be in play.  They are only not counted if they are a NOTT point or if they are ahead of the Engagement Zone.

Reaver is correct.
Title: Re: both jammers meet lead bc block goes oop
Post by: RawShark on October 18, 2012, 02:54:52 pm
You are not seeing the trees.

Yes, she has passed the foremost in play blocker.  But she has not passed all blockers.  The blocker that is down is still a blocker.  She is not the foremost, but the "other blockers" do not have to be in play.  They are only not counted if they are a NOTT point or if they are ahead of the Engagement Zone.

Reaver is correct.

Woah. Ok. I can totally see that interpretation. :)

To play devil's advocate, however:
The following Rules Publication (http://wftda.com/rules/qa/jammers-simultaneously-meet-all-requirements-for-lead-jammer) tells us that a foremost blocker who takes themselves OOP (by exiting the engagement zone) causes both Jammers to be declared not-lead.

Why treat the situation differently when a foremost blocker takes themselves OOP (by taking a knee)?

EDIT - I've just re-read the publication carefully. It states that both Jammers have already passed all blockers while in-play. That fact, and 3.4.1.3 that reflmao quoted below pretty much nullifies my argument.

Thanks for the re-education!  :)
Title: Re: both jammers meet lead bc block goes oop
Post by: reflmao on October 18, 2012, 03:01:31 pm
Because the rules tell us to.

[rule]3.4.1.3 Jammers do not need to pass Blockers ahead of the legal Engagement Zone in
order to become Lead Jammer.[/rule]
Title: Re: both jammers meet lead bc block goes oop
Post by: reflmao on October 18, 2012, 03:50:40 pm
EDIT - I've just re-read the publication carefully. It states that both Jammers have already passed all blockers while in-play.

That the bit in the publication is not important to this discussion.   If it had said "both Jammers have legally passed all other blockers while in play, and the foremost blocker goes Out of Play by exiting the Engagement Zone in front" the results would be the same.   (italics is an addition to the actual publication)

Once the foremost blocker goes out of play ahead 3.4.1.3 kicks in and that blocker no longer counts towards the awarding of lead jammer.  That blocker no longer needs to be passed and can no longer be the "the foremost in-play Blocker".   No need to have already passed that blocker.
Title: Re: both jammers meet lead bc block goes oop
Post by: Cliquework on October 18, 2012, 04:52:29 pm
This is yet another good moment to illustrate similarities and differences. Yes, taking a knee, just as going OOP, or even going out of bounds are equal as far as some rules are concerned. A trigger for a change in state. And yet, sometimes they are different and not equal. Some rules are very specific. Take getting lead in general as it relates to OOP opponents:

Going OOP ahead of the pack - they no longer count. Award lead.
OOP because of No Pack - Still count. Do not award lead yet.

They are both OOP, but they are different.

And yes, "all others" must be passed. The skater taking a knee is not longer the foremost in play, but she is a member of "all others".

As for a penalty for taking the knee, look towards pack destruction and if it applies.