Menu

ZH Classifieds
ZH Files
ZH Staff
WFTDA 12/1/2014 Rules
WFTDA 3/1/2014 Rules

Donate

Please Support Zebra Huddle!

Recent Posts

Re: Jammer's time in penalty box by 3Beers
April 26, 2020, 09:46:33 pm

Getting officials attention by Rego_Derby
March 03, 2020, 04:05:02 am

Re: Jammer's time in penalty box by Major Wood
February 05, 2020, 05:52:31 pm

Jammer's time in penalty box by 3Beers
January 29, 2020, 03:33:20 am

Nashville Roller Derby 2020 Scrimmage-A-Thon - 7/11/2020 by Major Wood
January 27, 2020, 09:36:38 pm

Re: Rule clarification by 3Beers
January 26, 2020, 08:09:00 pm

Re: Rule clarification by Bluebeard
January 17, 2020, 05:26:46 am

Rule clarification by 3Beers
December 28, 2019, 06:04:00 pm

Re: Resources for new referees. by Destructor
November 29, 2019, 01:13:40 pm

Resources for new referees. by Destructor
November 26, 2019, 06:01:48 pm

Author Topic: block to the back?  (Read 19912 times)

Offline Darkjester

  • Has Too Much Damn Time Member
  • ********************
  • Posts: 3067
  • Stats Sheet: 39
  • "When in doubt, RTFM"
  • League Affiliation: Beach Brawl SK8R Dolls
  • Referee Certification Level: Not Certified
  • NSO Certification Level: Not Certified
Re: block to the back?
« Reply #15 on: October 28, 2010, 12:25:48 am »
Only WFTDA Refs and WFTDA Apprentice League refs were allowed into the Clinics so the rest of us don't understand what you are meaning by 'established position' as the rules say absolutely nothing about "Established position" so that is a new one, unless they are trying to discuss 'initiating' in a different perspective.

Your example sited :
Quote
If you are holding your position, and as the jammer comes around, you move to be in front of her and she slams into your back, that's your fault.  It's not the jammer's fault you fell down; you should have hit her harder, or not attempted to positionally block her if you were not skilled enough to do so.

Has 3 different options within itself.

Did the blocker "hit" the jammer when she went in front of her? If so the Blocker initiated a block and is responsible for the contact.

Did the blocker position herself in front of the jammer? If yes, and the jammer hit her in the back, Its a blocking to the back, based on impact.

Did the blocker 'miss' the positional block and the two collide ? Yes, then both can be responsible for initiating contact, in which case the jammer is STILL responsible for counter blocking to a legal zone.

FWIW, Even though there may have been clinics where it was explained the several regional tournament bouts I watched on DNN had Block to the Back calls on jammers who were hit from players who were not only at a standstill or CW, but had to step clockwise.

By established position do they mean similar to 'basketball' for a blocking/charging foul as in whoever 'gets there' first establishes position?
Madness Tolls
69¢
Beach Brawl Sk8R Dolls
Fort Walton Beach FL

Offline Noah Tall

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 761
  • Stats Sheet: 25
Re: block to the back?
« Reply #16 on: October 28, 2010, 12:49:08 am »
Well, I don't watch basketball, so I don't know.  Let me see if I can explain it better.

First is the easy one.  Jammer has made it out of the engagement zone, when she is positionally blocked OOP, and brought back into the EZ.  Her established position was out of the EZ, and the block changed that.  That one is pretty clear cut.

The second is harder.  So, say a blocker is stopped on the track.  She's just standing there, not moving, and the jammer sees her and runs into her anyway.  The jammer had plenty of time to adjust, but she didn't.  Since the blocker had established her position, the penalty is on the jammer.  Now, say the blocker is skating in front of the jammer, then stops.  Since there is no time for the jammer to adjust, there would be no penalty call.  The blocker did not have an established position; she initiated contact by stopping in front of the jammer.

If the blocker stays where she is, on her current trajectory, she is establishing her position on the track.  If she moves from that position, she is initiating.  Positional blocking is blocking and by moving she is engaging her opponent.

There's an additional discussion about jammer trajectory and her established position, but I'm not clear on that one.  Hopefully someone else will jump in to clarify that point.

And, the call at regionals should have been BB on the jammer if she hit the stopped blocker, or DoGP minor if she had gone around the blocker.
WFTDA Ref Rep
WFTDA AP Area Coordinator
Arkansas

"We may not be skilled, but at least we're impartial!"

Offline Darkjester

  • Has Too Much Damn Time Member
  • ********************
  • Posts: 3067
  • Stats Sheet: 39
  • "When in doubt, RTFM"
  • League Affiliation: Beach Brawl SK8R Dolls
  • Referee Certification Level: Not Certified
  • NSO Certification Level: Not Certified
Re: block to the back?
« Reply #17 on: October 28, 2010, 01:58:41 am »
I think I'm understanding more now, Thanks Noah.. When I get home from work I'll delve into the examples for any confusion and PM you if thats ok?
Madness Tolls
69¢
Beach Brawl Sk8R Dolls
Fort Walton Beach FL

Offline Noah Tall

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 761
  • Stats Sheet: 25
Re: block to the back?
« Reply #18 on: October 28, 2010, 02:32:09 am »
You betcha!  This was new to a lot of us, too.  I know, personally, when I was a skater, I pulled the "jump in front of the jammer to get a back block call" move myself :).
WFTDA Ref Rep
WFTDA AP Area Coordinator
Arkansas

"We may not be skilled, but at least we're impartial!"

Offline noidd

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 972
  • Stats Sheet: 28
  • Start with 100% accuracy and get better over time.
Re: block to the back?
« Reply #19 on: October 28, 2010, 04:19:09 am »
If you are holding your position, and as the jammer comes around, you move to be in front of her and she slams into your back, that's your fault.  It's not the jammer's fault you fell down; you should have hit her harder, or not attempted to positionally block her if you were not skilled enough to do so.

 :o

I'm not doubting you in the slightest Noah but I'm having a really hard time understanding how your example meshes with the rules as currently written.

It *sounds* like you're suggesting (or more accurately, communicating from others) that the jammer's trajectory is "protected".

Is this the kind of thing you're talking about?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4uDx5FnL668
--
Referees are not here to legislate, dictate, pontificate or participate.  We are there only to facilitate.

Offline Noah Tall

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 761
  • Stats Sheet: 25
Re: block to the back?
« Reply #20 on: October 28, 2010, 04:47:39 am »
exactly.  that would not be a BB call, as the black blocker moved into the position in front of white.  she had no established position.

Oh, I would have called that a minor, though.
WFTDA Ref Rep
WFTDA AP Area Coordinator
Arkansas

"We may not be skilled, but at least we're impartial!"

Offline Rocktimus Prime

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 69
  • Stats Sheet: 2
Re: block to the back?
« Reply #21 on: October 28, 2010, 06:07:04 am »
I wouldn't say it's "protected." It just that her entire trajectory through the pack counts as her "established position." I think WFTDA wants to make the distinction for good reasons. After all, the jammer wants to pass through the pack, not establish a position within it.  It sounds like they are trying to create a consistent way to accurately identify which skaters are accountable for their actions and when.
Nothing is Free

Offline mark madden

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 77
  • Stats Sheet: 0
  • sun state roller girls
Re: block to the back?
« Reply #22 on: October 28, 2010, 06:47:59 am »
the block in that  clip -i agree with with no call on the white blocker,
the one thing i see is get her forearms out of the way


what if the white blocker had her fore arms up and countered blocked with them  , would you call anythign on the counter block?

if so  are you saying when the black skater engaged the white skater, you watch for what blocking zones the white skater used and as the black skater is the initiator ,the target zone the white skater hit on the black skater is irrelevant???
sun state roller girls , brisbane australia

Offline The Gorram Reaver

  • Referee
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 875
  • Stats Sheet: 60
  • League Affiliation: Mad Rollin' Dolls
  • Referee Certification Level: Level 2
  • NSO Certification Level: Not Certified
Re: block to the back?
« Reply #23 on: October 28, 2010, 07:11:11 am »
I wouldn't say it's "protected." It just that her entire trajectory through the pack counts as her "established position." I think WFTDA wants to make the distinction for good reasons. After all, the jammer wants to pass through the pack, not establish a position within it.  It sounds like they are trying to create a consistent way to accurately identify which skaters are accountable for their actions and when.
+1 for Rocktimus Prime!

As discussed in the WFTDA ref clinincs, there are four concepts at work here:
1) Established Position
2) Established Trajectory
3) Temporary Position
4) Temporary Trajectory

As the words used imply, there is a temporal aspect to the concepts of established & temporary; how long you've been in that position or following that trajectory matters.  There is also a an implication of movement with the terms position & trajectory; a position is static within the context of the pack & relative position, trajectory implies movement on a definite path. 

Also, the list is hierarchical in nature (the numbers are not just there for cenvenience - honest! :)).  If you start at the top with 1) and work your way down the list, you develop a sense of how to gauge initiation of contact.  For example, if a Jammer has an Established Trajectory (2) through the pack, and an opposing Blocker who had been moving parallel to that Jammer's trajectory suddenly moves into the Jammer's path, that opposing Blocker has just used a Temporary Trajectory (4) to intercept the Jammer's Established Trajectory (2).  Because an Established Trajectory is higher on the list than a Temporary Trajectory, the Jammer has supremacy of position/trajectory, and the Blocker is considered the initiator of any contact (the Blocker moved in to the Jammer's path).  Result: the Blocker is responsible for the legality of any contact that occurs.

Similarly, if a Jammer with an Established Trajectory (2) is approaching an opposing Blocker who has an Established Position (1) on the track/within the pack, and the Jammer does nothing to maneuver around that Blocker, the Jammer has used an Established Trajectory (2) to intercept a Blocker with an Established Position (1).  Because Established Position is higher on the list than Established Trajectory, the Blocker has supremacy of position/trajectory, and the Jammer is considered the initiator of any contact (the Jammer did not adjust her trajectory to avoid the Blocker who had an Established Position).  Result: the Jammer is responsible for the legality of any contact that occurs.

(Please note, these examples are written, for the sake of simplicity, without consideration of counterblocks.)
The Gorram Reaver
Mad Rollin' Dolls, Madison, WI

Offline Major Wood

  • Administrator
  • Has Too Much Damn Time Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2665
  • Stats Sheet: 77
  • League Affiliation: Nashville Rollergirls
  • Referee Certification Level: Level 5
  • NSO Certification Level: Not Certified
Re: block to the back?
« Reply #24 on: October 28, 2010, 01:20:16 pm »
the block in that  clip -i agree with with no call on the white blocker,
the one thing i see is get her forearms out of the way


what if the white blocker had her fore arms up and countered blocked with them  , would you call anythign on the counter block?

if so  are you saying when the black skater engaged the white skater, you watch for what blocking zones the white skater used and as the black skater is the initiator ,the target zone the white skater hit on the black skater is irrelevant???


It all depends on impact. If the white blocker pushed off with her forearms, it could still be a back block penalty on her as well. More often than not, it tends to cause impact to one skater. The important thing is to watch the impact.
Your friendly Zebra Huddle admin.

Nashville Roller Derby Head Ref
WFTDA Level 5 Certified Referee

I speak only of my opinions and interpretations.

Offline mark madden

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 77
  • Stats Sheet: 0
  • sun state roller girls
Re: block to the back?
« Reply #25 on: October 28, 2010, 02:27:54 pm »
ok cool i'm with it now ,
 yes watch the impact, i must have read it wrong i thought they were saying ,there couldn't be penalty for a counter block from the non-initiator, hence my confusion , i have been calling it right ..

thanks


sun state roller girls , brisbane australia

Offline SeerSin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 993
  • Stats Sheet: 55
  • League Affiliation: Minnesota Rollergirls
  • Referee Certification Level: Level 5
  • NSO Certification Level: Not Certified
Re: block to the back?
« Reply #26 on: October 28, 2010, 04:12:49 pm »
I think one of the points of confusion on this is that we(myself included) used to incorrectly separate initiation for contact blocks and positional blocks. We(I) didn't consider a positional block initiator to also be the initator of a contact block. So a blocker that jumps directly in front of another skater who is moving at high speed is initiating the block by positioning herself to block.

The "established position" phrase isn't meant to be in the rules, it's not written. Eastablished position is a phrase that's been used to assist in teaching and understanding these concepts. We're not making up new rules, nor stating that a jammer's trajectory is "protected" somehow. It is solely about initiation.

Offline noidd

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 972
  • Stats Sheet: 28
  • Start with 100% accuracy and get better over time.
Re: block to the back?
« Reply #27 on: October 28, 2010, 04:28:51 pm »
Oh, I would have called that a minor, though.

I called it as a Major as I saw it as causing the receiving skater to lose her established position relative to skaters towards the outside of the track.

I don't want to fork this thread so I'll make a new one in the "You make the call" section.
--
Referees are not here to legislate, dictate, pontificate or participate.  We are there only to facilitate.

Offline Darkjester

  • Has Too Much Damn Time Member
  • ********************
  • Posts: 3067
  • Stats Sheet: 39
  • "When in doubt, RTFM"
  • League Affiliation: Beach Brawl SK8R Dolls
  • Referee Certification Level: Not Certified
  • NSO Certification Level: Not Certified
Re: block to the back?
« Reply #28 on: October 28, 2010, 08:07:45 pm »
I still don't get it.

Perhaps its just because its text and I'm not "seeing" it to understand the concept.

from my understanding, the initiator of the impact is responsible for the legality of the contact.

If the blocker 'sweeps ahead' of the jammer ( no contact) but puts themselves in front of the jammer, then they've 'beaten' the jammer. They've established their position in front of the jammer. If the jammer then is moving at a higher rate of speed and hits the blocker in the black, the Jammer should be responsible for where/how they hit the jammer.

Now.. If the blocker 'pops back' into the Jammer, the blocker is initiating the contact, and they are responsible for the legality of the hit.

The way the 1-4 Established Position description sounds.. If the Blocker moves in front of the jammer, and 'slows'.. Their act of slowing is considered the 'initiation' of the block, therefore even if the Jammer hits them square in the back, its the Blockers "fault" not the Jammers ergo no penalty?

That's the best description I can come up with (I've had a flu all week so my mind isn't 100% cognitively).

It sounds to me, personal feelings only, that this is a way for players to say "Well it wasn't my fault I hit her illegally, she moved right in front of me!" Well.. yeah, that's what a block is supposed to do, but you still have to engage her legally within the Blockingzones/Target Zones?
Madness Tolls
69¢
Beach Brawl Sk8R Dolls
Fort Walton Beach FL

Offline SeerSin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 993
  • Stats Sheet: 55
  • League Affiliation: Minnesota Rollergirls
  • Referee Certification Level: Level 5
  • NSO Certification Level: Not Certified
Re: block to the back?
« Reply #29 on: October 28, 2010, 09:11:02 pm »
Imagine a blocker already committed to a legal block but hasn't made contact yet. The receiving skater turns her back to the block at the last second before contact. In this case the receiving skater did not have established position, so no back block penalty.

In the instance where a skater legally steps in front of another and initiates a positional block by slowing down she has established position.

Calling it this way doesn't give anyone free reign to back block and go unpenalized. Counter blocking rules still apply. Lack of established position doesn't mean a skater can simply be shoved out of the way without penalty. It's about not penalizing skaters who have no opportunity to hit legally.

 

Featured Product

 

Zebra Huddle Head Referee Bout Booklet

 

Featured Classifieds


ZH Files

How to Score a Point in Roller Derby
Rating: *****
Downloads: 4463
Views: 7511
Filesize: 327.61KB
Date: January 17, 2017, 04:21:03 am
Comments (0)
By: AdamSmasher
June 2013 Ruleset situational questions
Rating: *****
Downloads: 2977
Views: 6086
Filesize: 29.71KB
Date: February 07, 2014, 04:57:32 pm
Comments (2)
By: Crash Test Ref
Rules Q&A and Publications for 6/15/13 Document
Rating: (None)
Downloads: 3182
Views: 7011
Filesize: 26.27KB
Date: August 02, 2013, 04:10:40 pm
Comments (0)
By: Shaun Ketterman
Rules Q&A and Publications for 1/1/13 Document (4/24/13 Updates)
Rating: *****
Downloads: 3990
Views: 9035
Filesize: 28.07KB
Date: April 25, 2013, 05:45:34 pm
Comments (0)
By: Shaun Ketterman

Powered by EzPortal