intruder

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: "Pincer" blocks = multipayer? by Bluebeard
July 11, 2019, 06:30:49 pm

"Pincer" blocks = multipayer? by Rego_Derby
July 11, 2019, 01:08:36 am

Re: Jammer Scoring Theory by Major Wood
June 26, 2019, 09:59:33 pm

Jammer Scoring Theory by Rego_Derby
June 25, 2019, 04:30:03 am

Re: Clamping down with the upper arm by bmd (2113)
June 12, 2019, 07:54:29 pm

Re: Ref facepaint by Major Wood
June 12, 2019, 04:16:34 pm

Re: Ref facepaint by Rego_Derby
June 11, 2019, 11:35:08 pm

Re: Ref facepaint by Axis of Stevil
June 10, 2019, 06:56:10 pm

Re: Ref facepaint by Major Wood
June 10, 2019, 01:49:04 pm

Ref facepaint by Rego_Derby
June 09, 2019, 03:38:38 pm

Author Topic: New jammer "strategy"  (Read 20311 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: New jammer "strategy"
« Reply #30 on: October 15, 2011, 06:19:56 pm »
However, if the person DID place their face IN the crotch of the victim, it would be actioned.

Hence my reasoning that 'touching' had to occur for me to penalize it, specifically since I am not penalizing a block (in which positional is still a block) but actual misconduct.

[rule]6.6.4 Initiating a block with the head, regardless of impact or advantage.[/rule]

Sticking your face in your opponent's junk is already penalizable as a major blocking with the head without having to stretch a misconduct to fit.

Agreed completely, but if there was no 'face to junk' contact we'd be hard pressed to issue a blocking with the head penalty.
Madness Tolls
69¢
Beach Brawl Sk8R Dolls
Fort Walton Beach FL

Offline gnrl grievance

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 41
  • Stats Sheet: 0
Re: New jammer "strategy"
« Reply #31 on: October 16, 2011, 01:29:14 am »
I was at the clinic in question and saw the tactic being suggested


The concept being taught was being more aggresive and assertive in your play, but its up to the individual how she interprets that and integrates it into her actions on the track.


this is true and the instructor suggested the head in crutch as ONE way to psych out an opponent. standing next to them and looking straight at them can have a similar affect, although granted, face in the junk is a whole different level.

In Queensland tort law (where the incident occured) a civil action for assault may be brought for a direct threat by the defendent that causes the victim to reasonably apprehend IMMINENT contact with his or her person. This is an action per se meaning no actual harm need be proved.

In terms of our jurisdiction as officials, I agree that there would need  to be a discussion with captains and alternates if a complaint is made and then if this 'strategy' is repeated this ought to be grounds for Gross Misconduct.

DISCLAIMER: I am not a lawyer so nothing that I've said here can be used as legal advice

Offline mick hawkins

  • Superhero Member
  • **********
  • Posts: 1926
  • Stats Sheet: 61
  • They're covers people. Helmet COVERS!
  • Referee Certification Level: Not Certified
  • NSO Certification Level: Not Certified
Re: New jammer "strategy"
« Reply #32 on: October 17, 2011, 01:55:04 am »
However, if the person DID place their face IN the crotch of the victim, it would be actioned.

Hence my reasoning that 'touching' had to occur for me to penalize it, specifically since I am not penalizing a block (in which positional is still a block) but actual misconduct.

[rule]6.6.4 Initiating a block with the head, regardless of impact or advantage.[/rule]

Sticking your face in your opponent's junk is already penalizable as a major blocking with the head without having to stretch a misconduct to fit.

Agreed completely, but if there was no 'face to junk' contact we'd be hard pressed to issue a blocking with the head penalty.

If there was contact, I reckon I'd be looking at Gross misconduct (in line with the previous discussion)
Sun State Roller Girls (WFTDA Apprentice League)
Brisbane, Australia

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: New jammer "strategy"
« Reply #33 on: October 17, 2011, 02:11:21 pm »
Agreed 100% Mick!
Madness Tolls
69¢
Beach Brawl Sk8R Dolls
Fort Walton Beach FL

Offline Bitches

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 18
  • Stats Sheet: 0
  • I'm always happy when my skates are on.
Mooning
« Reply #34 on: September 22, 2013, 03:05:48 pm »
From a very old thread:

Not entirely off point:  Mooning is deemed to be constitutionally protected free speach in Maryland & not indecent in California (unless proved to be entirely sexually motivated beyond a reasonable doubt).

Violation of 6.15?

In terms of legality: here in Virginia, mooning someone in public is a misdemeanor, and making someone uncomfortable on a sexual level is grounds for sexual harassment charges. This holds some real weight if it happens repeatedly. Also, in Virginia, a head ref could be held liable if he/she allowed this behavior to continue, providing there was evidence that he/she was aware of it. Here, a head referee would be seen as accountable for the ensuring that players may play the game without fear of things like sexual harassment. So, if someone here wanted to make an issue out of it, it could get pretty sticky if someone has a problem, they tell you, and you don't try to do something about it. Pay is immaterial.

I'd like to pick up this thread because this (mooning) happened at our bout last night. The jammer, during a power jam, dropped her drawers at corner 3 to moon the audience and kept them down until she was sent out for a cut track as she engaged the pack in corner 1. She pulled them up on her way to the box as her teammate yelled at her "pull up your f***ing pants."

And it's funny (to me) that the referees here have picked up on regional legalities. The town this happened at is well known for being a town where people will occasionally will walk around naked, even to go shopping. Our state has no laws against being naked in public, but many towns will consider the act of undressing in public "lewd and lascivious". In order to walk around naked you kind of have to undress privately and act civil. You may clothe yourself in public. I also know in a neighboring state this action is protected free speech like Maryland (but then so is giving the finger).

We had some very new referees so they all had different perspectives and most of them didn't find her action offensive/obscene/profane. Our head referee didn't see it until she was in the pack and he considered this a violation of 6.16.9 because she never directed this at the referees and until our Captain complained, he initially didn't think it was excessive and personally considered it on par with speech with the middle finger. But her condition made many of our blockers feel uncomfortable about engaging her, so it did have actual impact on the game.

After consulting with his officials he was advised that that jammer was the one who pulled down her own pants, so he did issue her a major penalty so she served two minutes (the first for her cut track).

I'm reading 6.16.8, 6.16.9, 6.16.13, 6.16.14 with the head referee here and he stands by his call and I agree with him if local culture is taken into account. He also says his referee who saw the whole action never told him she mooned the audience and he would have expelled her had he known that. Her action was not repeated and she did not expose her front. My problem is I have some very irate skates. One is pulling the "but think of the children" card.

Is this a regional/legal call for "excessive" toward the audience based on law and culture?

If this only happened one time toward a team (the head referee's perspective), this would not be "repetitive and excessive" ("and" being the operative logical term). But would it be elevated anyway in an area where it was illegal? Would any official her consider this excessive even in areas where it is legal and/or "protected free speech?"

I'm always happy when my skates are on.

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: New jammer "strategy"
« Reply #35 on: September 22, 2013, 09:29:24 pm »
It could be considered excessive given the length of time that her pants were down. I'd have no problem giving the penalty; nor if the HR wished a Gross Misconduct for such.
Madness Tolls
69¢
Beach Brawl Sk8R Dolls
Fort Walton Beach FL

Offline Shover Ducky

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 12
  • Stats Sheet: 0
  • I'm THE1
  • League Affiliation: Roller Arsenal of Derby
  • Referee Certification Level: Not Certified
  • NSO Certification Level: Not Certified
Re: New jammer "strategy"
« Reply #36 on: September 23, 2013, 01:10:50 am »
I think Roller Derby can take a page out of other professional sports with this. I cannot think of any other major sporting event that would allow its players to purposefully moon the crowd without some sort of penalty or fine--no matter the state, country, or culture.

If we are trying to get people to take the sport seriously, mooning is just a bit too far. Yes people expect the skimpy outfits and fishnets, but people do not expect the flashing of bums, boobs, or vags. Free speech it may be, but so is cussing out the refs or crowd, which is a penalty. "Free Speech" is not the same as "No Consequences."
"So you see, 3 is clearly a smaller number than a million."
"Oh, now I understand."

Offline Shaun Ketterman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 819
  • Stats Sheet: 42
  • Rush Zeta Epsilon Beta! ZEEBS! ZEEBS! ZEEBS!
  • League Affiliation: Rollergirls of Central Kentucky (ROCK)
  • Referee Certification Level: Level 3
  • NSO Certification Level: Not Certified
Re: New jammer "strategy"
« Reply #37 on: September 23, 2013, 04:50:32 am »
Local law or culture doesn't have anything at all to do with this.  If the referee determines that the player's actions fit the bill for 6.16.8, penalize.  In this case, I would've.

[rule]Major Penalty

6.16.8 - The use of obscene, profane, or abusive language or gestures directed at a mascot, announcer, audience member, or other bout production individuals.[/rule]
WFTDA Level 3 Certified Referee
MRDA Recognized Referee
Zebrahuddle.com Moderator
Head Referee, Rollergirls of Central Kentucky
Lexington, Kentucky

You can call me "Shaun". My shirts say "Ketterman" because they're sports jersies. Only kids and mascots put first names on jersies!

Offline Kabong

  • Referee
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 139
  • Stats Sheet: 2
  • League Affiliation: DC Rollergirls
  • Referee Certification Level: Not Certified
  • NSO Certification Level: Not Certified
Re: New jammer "strategy"
« Reply #38 on: September 23, 2013, 01:09:31 pm »
[rule]
Expulsion or Suspension (Gross Misconduct)

Gross Misconduct is defined as an indiscretion so serious that it justifies the instant expulsion of a skater, even on the first occurrence. The following egregious acts will be an automatic game expulsion, even if not during a fight, and can be punished as multi-game suspensions (see Section 7.4.2.2).

6.16.13 - The repeated use of obscene, profane, or abusive language or gestures directed at a mascot, announcer, audience member, or other bout production individuals.

6.16.14 - The repetitive and excessive use of obscene, profane, or abusive language or gestures directed at an opposing skater, teammate, manager, coach, or other support staff.

 [/rule]

Based on the fact that this only occurred once, it seems that Gross Misconduct doesn't really apply. I'd think it'd be an overcall. Misconduct, absolutely.
Kabong
Skating Official/Skater

Offline Nick Bergus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 287
  • Stats Sheet: 10
  • League Affiliation: Old Capitol City Roller Girls
  • Referee Certification Level: Level 2
  • NSO Certification Level: Not Certified
Re: New jammer "strategy"
« Reply #39 on: September 23, 2013, 03:01:25 pm »
Based on the fact that this only occurred once, it seems that Gross Misconduct doesn't really apply. I'd think it'd be an overcall. Misconduct, absolutely.

So if she dropped her pants at turn 3, pulled them up and turn 4 and dropped them at the straightaway, that'd make a difference in your mind?
WFTDA-certified referee, level 2
Zebra Huddle moderator

Offline Kabong

  • Referee
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 139
  • Stats Sheet: 2
  • League Affiliation: DC Rollergirls
  • Referee Certification Level: Not Certified
  • NSO Certification Level: Not Certified
Re: New jammer "strategy"
« Reply #40 on: September 23, 2013, 03:15:48 pm »
Well, much to my dismay (I was thinking "habitual" and hoped that I could say she'd need to also drop them at turn 1 [rule]Habitual
Any behavior that occurs three or more times over the course of a bout. [/rule]) repetitive and repeated are not defined. I think at any point after the initial call, if she'd continued or repeated the action, then I'd recommend the Gross Misconduct.
Kabong
Skating Official/Skater

Offline Riff Reff

  • Superhero Member
  • **********
  • Posts: 1001
  • Stats Sheet: 30
  • League Affiliation: Dublin Roller Derby
  • Referee Certification Level: Not Certified
  • NSO Certification Level: Not Certified
Re: New jammer "strategy"
« Reply #41 on: September 23, 2013, 03:26:57 pm »
Use discretion what is "obscene, profane, or abusive" and make a call (or no call). Sometimes a butt cheek is a butt cheek is a butt cheek. Nothing exists/happens without context. While an exposed nipple causes most Europeans barely to lift their eyebrows somewhere else it might cause an outrage.

So I agree, depending on if that behaviour disrespects/offends/harrasses someone (or the sport itself) it might be punishable. Make a call, ref!
Don't look at the game with rules-tinted glasses; look at the rules with game-tinted glasses!

Offline Bitches

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 18
  • Stats Sheet: 0
  • I'm always happy when my skates are on.
Re: New jammer "strategy"
« Reply #42 on: September 27, 2013, 02:39:25 pm »
A lot of local referees are saying they would expel her from the game, but I'm really appreciating all your input because there is really nothing in the rules that calls for that.

It was not repeated. As soon as she was told to pull them up (by a teammate) she did. There was just over 2 minutes remaining in the bout.

The head referee call was Misconduct (for excessive obscene gestures toward an opposing team/skater).

At the same time, some of the most vocal skaters are claiming fans were "shielding the eyes of their children." To me this sounds more like a production/trespass issue, not an issue with how the penalties were enforced.
I'm always happy when my skates are on.

Offline Shaun Ketterman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 819
  • Stats Sheet: 42
  • Rush Zeta Epsilon Beta! ZEEBS! ZEEBS! ZEEBS!
  • League Affiliation: Rollergirls of Central Kentucky (ROCK)
  • Referee Certification Level: Level 3
  • NSO Certification Level: Not Certified
Re: New jammer "strategy"
« Reply #43 on: September 27, 2013, 02:53:00 pm »
Within the context of the game, it's clear what we're able to do as refs. 

If an audience person was unduly upset by this, that falls outside of a referee's jurisdiction to do anything about.  That person is free to report it to local police if she wanted to try to get an indecent exposure charge issued.  If the league is mad, they could refuse to work with that league again. 

I think some referees and players think of the duties of a referee as beyond what they actually are.  We're not police.  We don't control interleague relations.  The ruleset lays out what we can do in the context of a game.  Outside of that, we cannot and should not, be taking further responsibility.
« Last Edit: September 27, 2013, 02:55:07 pm by Shaun Ketterman »
WFTDA Level 3 Certified Referee
MRDA Recognized Referee
Zebrahuddle.com Moderator
Head Referee, Rollergirls of Central Kentucky
Lexington, Kentucky

You can call me "Shaun". My shirts say "Ketterman" because they're sports jersies. Only kids and mascots put first names on jersies!

Offline HIM-roid

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 849
  • Stats Sheet: 14
  • League Affiliation: Mississippi Rollergirls
  • Referee Certification Level: Level 2
  • NSO Certification Level: Not Certified
Re: New jammer "strategy"
« Reply #44 on: September 27, 2013, 11:33:55 pm »
I guess I am on the other side of the fence. I would have expelled since it was intentional. Yes, a butt cheek is a butt cheek is a butt cheek, but, however, how did this butt cheek get exposed? If it was a wardrobe mishap, I would tell the skater to please fix the situation. This was not the case, she intentionally pulled her pants down to expose both of her butt cheeks, say that with me again, she INTENTIONALLY pulled her pants down to expose her butt cheeks. I don't feel this is a situation that has to happen more than once to be expelled for. I have been in bouts where a body part was exposed, but the skaters immediately fix their self and continued to play derby. And with her team mate telling her to pull up her fucking pants, that would tell me that her team wasn't too fond of the idea either.
HIM-roid
WFTDA Apprentice Officials Area Coordinator
Head of Officiating
Mississippi Rollergirls
WFTDA-Certified Referee, Level 2
WFTDA Officials Apprentice Program Area Coordinator

 

Featured Product

 

Zebra Huddle Head Referee Bout Booklet

 

Featured Classifieds


ZH Files

How to Score a Point in Roller Derby
Rating: *****
Downloads: 3210
Views: 5104
Filesize: 327.61KB
Date: January 17, 2017, 04:21:03 am
Comments (0)
By: AdamSmasher
June 2013 Ruleset situational questions
Rating: *****
Downloads: 2310
Views: 4756
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: 2466
Views: 5303
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: 3248
Views: 5299
Filesize: 28.07KB
Date: April 25, 2013, 05:45:34 pm
Comments (0)
By: Shaun Ketterman

Powered by EzPortal