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: (3.1) SOOB Penalty enforcement  (Read 13107 times)

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: (3.1) SOOB Penalty enforcement
« Reply #15 on: April 30, 2009, 12:50:59 am »

The only thing I saw that you could draw a comparison was talking about OOP

IMO - A penalty that is related to SOOB penalties is track cutting.  The reason being that SOOB OOP penalties do not usually result in a clear competitive advantage.  Track cutting has clear competitive advantage because of the improvement in relative position.  SOOB (on the outside) with no improvement in relative position does not have a competitive advantage.     

This makes no sense, you are saying that they are related, and then stating just how different they are.


In this case, you would be making up a rule, in direct violation of 8.3.1.2 (or 9.3.1.2 for 4.0). How are you going to give a major in this case? The rules simply don't support it.
Your friendly Zebra Huddle admin.

Nashville Roller Derby Head Ref
WFTDA Level 5 Certified Referee

I speak only of my opinions and interpretations.

Offline Bishop

  • Superhero Member
  • **********
  • Posts: 1626
  • Stats Sheet: 51
  • Quoth the raven, "Nevermore."
  • League Affiliation: Unaffiliated
  • Referee Certification Level: Level 2
  • NSO Certification Level: Not Certified
Re: (3.1) SOOB Penalty enforcement
« Reply #16 on: April 30, 2009, 02:28:04 am »
IMO - A penalty that is related to SOOB penalties is track cutting.  The reason being that SOOB OOP penalties do not usually result in a clear competitive advantage.  Track cutting has clear competitive advantage because of the improvement in relative position.  SOOB (on the outside) with no improvement in relative position does not have a competitive advantage.     

This makes no sense, you are saying that they are related, and then stating just how different they are.

In this case, you would be making up a rule, in direct violation of 8.3.1.2 (or 9.3.1.2 for 4.0). How are you going to give a major in this case? The rules simply don't support it.
That's a nice catch on the inconsistency of the language, Bishop -- it is odd that 6.2.11.3 specifies a minor while the rest of the set specifies a penalty (presumably with reference to the minor and major criteria set down immediately following). Also 6.2.11.2 is more or less the same penalty, but reversed, but does not specify a minor. My bet is it's an oversight.  4.0 will continue to clear such stuff up, hopefully.

That said, responding to the above stuff on my call for more than a minor, sure -- the 6.2.11.3 rule as written stipulates a minor, but I imagine the major/minor criteria immediately following would trump that if major impact occurs. That seems to be the intended operating logic for all of 6.2.11 rules -- and as the discussion notes, there are plenty of analogous rules to consider for guidance.

And that said, it sometimes comes down to basic common sense over the explicit language of the rules. Sure the rules say a minor in 6.2.11.3. And if she just rejoins the pack illegally and nothing else is really going on, a minor it probably should be.  But if a player uses illegal means to then be in position to perform a legal block that has major impact, it should be called a major. As a corollary, you can execute a block that uses legal target and blocking zones, but if your position beginning momentum for that block was from out of bounds (i.e. illegal), that block, no matter how legal in form, is going to result in a penalty based on impact.

~j.z.

Or when Stegoscorus said this:

Not exactly.  What you described earlier should to more like this: you issue a minor, she doesn't correct her position, so you upgrade it to a major version of the same penalty.  Like, you assess a minor IP for a false start, she doesn't yield, so you make it a major IP (and only report the major, by the way; the minor "goes away").  Or you assess a minor Out of Play for being out of the Engagement Zone, she doesn't rejoin the Engagement Zone and instead speeds up, so you upgrade it to a major Out of Play. 
« Last Edit: April 30, 2009, 02:35:23 am by Bishop »
Recommended Resources:WFTDA Rules Central, WFTDA officiating & Successful Sports Officiating
Propose rule changes at timeout.wftda.com.

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: (3.1) SOOB Penalty enforcement
« Reply #17 on: April 30, 2009, 03:30:48 am »
You are taking examples from other threads about different topics and different penalties.
In the case of skating out of bounds:

Quote

Where do you see anything that suggests that a skater staying out-of bounds should get a major? Going with the spirit of the rules alone, where is the major impact?

And to answer your question, I didn't call them out because they are referring to penalties where upgrading to a major is an acceptable practice. You are not showing me anything that suggests a major penalty is awarded based on either the letter of the rules, or the spirit.
Your friendly Zebra Huddle admin.

Nashville Roller Derby Head Ref
WFTDA Level 5 Certified Referee

I speak only of my opinions and interpretations.

Offline Jessticular Fortitude

  • Referee
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 798
  • Stats Sheet: 27
  • SOLID
  • League Affiliation: Nashville Rollergirls
  • Referee Certification Level: Level 2
  • NSO Certification Level: Not Certified
Re: (3.1) SOOB Penalty enforcement
« Reply #18 on: April 30, 2009, 04:23:17 am »
Bishop, I don't think you quite understand SOOB penalties.

They aren't as rare as you think. The skater who is SOOB doesn't have to pass any skaters from OOB, she doesn't have to cut anybody, it's just the fact that she is SOOB (maintaining or increasing speed) that is the penalty.

Example of a skater getting a SOOB minor penalty: skater gets blocked to the outside. She skates hard to keep up with the pack to be able to re-enter the pack where she got blocked out. Bam- SOOB minor. She didn't cut anybody. She didn't block anybody from OOB, but she gained a small advantage by forcefully skating to re-enter where she did so she wouldn't have to drop back and re-enter at the back of the pack. Why would you give her a major penalty for that?

Or, skater gets blocked out. She's SOOB. She continues skating out of bounds. What major advantage is she getting over her opponents? Her opposing Jammer is getting free points from her during scoring passes. She's one less opposing Blocker for their team to deal with. She can't block from OOB. What is the major advantage here?
Hey look, a search function! Right up there! No on the left

Perhaps we should all spend a little more time reading and a little less time making shit up.

Offline noidd

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 972
  • Stats Sheet: 28
  • Start with 100% accuracy and get better over time.
Re: (3.1) SOOB Penalty enforcement
« Reply #19 on: April 30, 2009, 06:01:47 am »

Forgive me, and I'm in no way speaking on behalf of anyone else but this is the exact question that spurred me asking it in the first place so I wanted to show you my workings on that question.

8.3.1 The consensus of the referees will be the final decision on any disputed point that is not clearly spelled out in these rules. The referee may increase the severity of a penalty at his or her discretion (i.e. in response to potentially harmful game play, an illegal block that normally results in a minor foul could be called as a major foul). Similarly, the referee may decrease the severity of a penalty to a warning as s/he sees fit.

The emphasis of i.e. is mine.  So, the discretion is allowed (as per 8.3.1) only in cases of harmful game play or an illegal block.

I think we all agree that SOOB is neither of those.

Further:

8.3.1.2 Referee discretion is intended ONLY to allow referees to keep the game safe, fair, and consistent in the event that an unexpected situation arises. Discretion does not allow referees to change rules.

Safe, fair, consistent in the event of an unexpected situation.

Quote

I think because in those two examples, those specific penalty areas involved harmful gameplay or blocking and therefore available for discretion.  fwiw, I really think that discretion should be extremely rare, maybe twice a year rare.

Quote

My concern with that is that it puts way too much discretion in the hands of referees.  We have problems enough keeping refs constistently calling explicitly defined rules without including another level of discretion.
--
Referees are not here to legislate, dictate, pontificate or participate.  We are there only to facilitate.

 

Featured Product

 

Zebra Huddle Head Referee Bout Booklet

 

Featured Classifieds


ZH Files

How to Score a Point in Roller Derby
Rating: *****
Downloads: 4411
Views: 7379
Filesize: 327.61KB
Date: January 17, 2017, 04:21:03 am
Comments (0)
By: AdamSmasher
June 2013 Ruleset situational questions
Rating: *****
Downloads: 2919
Views: 6003
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: 3121
Views: 6900
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: 3945
Views: 8931
Filesize: 28.07KB
Date: April 25, 2013, 05:45:34 pm
Comments (0)
By: Shaun Ketterman

Powered by EzPortal