Zebra Huddleâ„¢

WFTDA => Rules Discussion => You Make The Call... => Topic started by: Bluebeard on May 15, 2018, 10:08:49 pm

Title: Cut, or not?
Post by: Bluebeard on May 15, 2018, 10:08:49 pm
Okay, so here's a "fun" one that came up this weekend. 
Loud room. 
Only one black blocker on the track. 
Said sole black blocker knocks white jammer out of bounds. 
Another ref issues a penalty to black blocker -- only black blocker on the track - "Remain on the track".
White jammer re-enters the track in front of said black blocker who was remaining on the track. 

Cut, or no?




Having not heard the penalty called on black blocker (loud room)  I, as jam ref, issued the cut to the white jammer.  It, of course, got reviewed after the jam.  The HR upheld the call, I suspect as much as anything to keep the game moving.

So, with time to think and debate about it -- cut, or not?
Title: Re: Cut, or not?
Post by: Ref Leppard on May 16, 2018, 01:05:45 am
I would agree with the cut call. 

The blocker was not on the way to the penalty box (being last one on the track and directed to remain in play) and therefore maintained their position.  They remain in play until a referee directs them to the box to serve their penalty. 
Title: Re: Cut, or not?
Post by: AdamSmasher on May 16, 2018, 03:35:56 am
My understanding of the current consensus is that this is NOT a cut, as the black blocker loses superior position when they commit the penalty.
Title: Re: Cut, or not?
Post by: Vanilla VICE on May 16, 2018, 06:06:39 pm
I have been no calling these. In my mind once Superior position is lost, there is no way to regain it as an initiator.

Now what is more contentious is what would you do if it was a non-initiator. I would expect that to be more controversial.

Imagine this:
2 Black Blockers on the Track

Black 1 Initiator Knocks Out White Jammer and the Black 1 leaves the track on a penalty to go to the box.

Black 2 is now the last blocker on the track commits a penalty and is told to remain on the track. They were ahead of White Jammer when the white jammer went oob and they recycle in a way behind the white jammer.

White Jammer re-enters in front of Black 2.



THIS I THINK WOULD BREAK PEOPLES MINDS

Most people agree non initiators can re-gain superior position if they go oob or oop, but then would you apply that to getting a penalty and remaining on the track. I probably would.
Title: Re: Cut, or not?
Post by: Ref Leppard on May 17, 2018, 05:56:37 am
Consider this scenario:

One black blocker left on track(in front of white jammer)
Black blocker is called on a penalty and told to remain on the track.
White jammer straddles and goes around black blocker. (not fully out of bounds and still targetable so no Skating OOB call)

By the reasoning of black automatically losing superior position on a penalty, the white jammer is now allowed to freely cut the black blocker intentionally. (obviously wouldn't earn a point but maybe they already had and gotten recycled a few times)

When can the black blocker regain their position if they remain in front of the white jammer?  Do they have to go behind the white jammer and then back in front?

My understanding was that the loss of position was a result of being sent off the track to serve a penalty.  If they are not being sent off the track, they should have an established position on the track.  The point of keeping the last blocker on the track was to maintain derby.  If the last blocker is hamstrung on being able to establish a position, it seems like it would defeat the purpose of keeping them there. 


Title: Re: Cut, or not?
Post by: Divide by Zero on May 17, 2018, 07:36:03 am
the black blocker loses superior position when they commit the penalty.
In my mind once Superior position is lost, there is no way to regain it as an initiator.

Do you have any rules reference for superior position being lost when committing a penalty without being sent to the box?
Title: Re: Cut, or not?
Post by: Vanilla VICE on May 18, 2018, 11:09:36 pm
The only thing the rules gives us on non initiators regaining position is Scenario C4.2.2.H

I bolded the part you would need to base that part of the debate on.

[rule]Scenario C4.2.2.H
White Pivot, White Blocker, and Red Jammer are 18 ft (5.48m) ahead of a stopped Pack. Red Jammer is blocked out of bounds by White Pivot. White Pivot and White Blocker roll forward, and both are given an Out of Play warning. White Pivot and White Blocker skate clockwise back to the Pack. Red Jammer re-enters the track ahead of both Skaters.

Outcome: Red Jammer is penalized.

Rationale: White Pivot, as initiator of the block, lost their superior position on Red Jammer by leaving the Engagement Zone. Although White Blocker lost their superior position briefly by going out of play, they regained it by returning to the Engagement Zone before Red Jammer re-entered. White Blocker was not the initiator of the block that forced Red Jammer out of bounds, and thus is able to re-establish their superior position.[/rule]