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: JAMMER HELMET COVER by Stray Taco
October 03, 2019, 12:54:03 pm

Clover Cup 2020 - March 20-22 - North Richland Hills, TX USA by SodOff
September 28, 2019, 10:09:13 am

JAMMER HELMET COVER by 3Beers
September 22, 2019, 12:35:26 pm

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

Author Topic: new ruleset  (Read 7461 times)

Offline Bluebeard

  • Referee
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 109
  • Stats Sheet: 0
  • League Affiliation: Independent
  • Referee Certification Level: Level 1
  • NSO Certification Level: Not Certified
new ruleset
« on: December 02, 2016, 10:55:09 pm »
I'm looking through the new ruleset,  can people check me on what I'm seeing so far.

1)  the domino rule  -- we knew this was coming.  if a skater is forced to commit an illegal block because of an illegal block committed to them, do not penalize the secondary action.

2)  most "delay of game" penalties become team timeouts for the offending team.  If no TTO available, official review.  if no OR available, issue the "delay of game." 

3)If a team fails to field a jammer, even if the opposing jammer is on the track, call a team timeout for the team whose jammer did not make the track, instead of starting the jam without a jammer for that team

I am not completely through the case book, yet.  I'll probably have more later. 

EDIT:  oh yeah, and it looks to me like award NOTT points at jam end, even if jammer has not made any legal passes that scoring pass   
« Last Edit: December 02, 2016, 11:06:51 pm by Bluebeard »

Offline Triop

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 20
  • Stats Sheet: 0
Re: new ruleset
« Reply #1 on: December 03, 2016, 06:16:46 pm »
I'm actually kind of confused on the new impact spectrum. It seems like every illegal action is called similarly to how previously a multi or forearm would have been called... as in, rather than a relative position change you just have to have some impact on the opponent. Am I reading that correctly?

Offline llama of death

  • Referee
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 306
  • Stats Sheet: 1
  • Referee
  • League Affiliation: Rollling Hills Derby Dames, WheatWhackers (JRDA)
  • Referee Certification Level: Not Certified
  • NSO Certification Level: Not Certified
Re: new ruleset
« Reply #2 on: December 03, 2016, 11:50:02 pm »
I'm actually kind of confused on the new impact spectrum. It seems like every illegal action is called similarly to how previously a multi or forearm would have been called... as in, rather than a relative position change you just have to have some impact on the opponent. Am I reading that correctly?

Close. Seems to me, the rules now give "significant impact" as the requirement for a penalty for an illegal action. This includes changes in relative or established position for ALL contact penalties now and a few select special cases where impact is also significant but no one was passed or fell etc etc.
I play devils advocate a lot, it is always because I desire a complete understanding of the rule/scenario. I do make changes to my reffing often as a direct result of discussions resulting in a consensus. Particularly if it is contrary to my previous understanding.

Offline Bluebeard

  • Referee
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 109
  • Stats Sheet: 0
  • League Affiliation: Independent
  • Referee Certification Level: Level 1
  • NSO Certification Level: Not Certified
Re: new ruleset
« Reply #3 on: December 04, 2016, 01:23:40 am »
I'm really confused on item 2 there.  The casebook examples say penalize the captain.  4.2.3 in the rules says that if a team with legal means to stop the period clock commits an action that stops the period clock, presume that they used legal means to stop the clock.   Either 4.2.3 is wrong, or the examples in the casebook need some more work.

Offline llama of death

  • Referee
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 306
  • Stats Sheet: 1
  • Referee
  • League Affiliation: Rollling Hills Derby Dames, WheatWhackers (JRDA)
  • Referee Certification Level: Not Certified
  • NSO Certification Level: Not Certified
Re: new ruleset
« Reply #4 on: December 04, 2016, 08:22:45 am »
I'm really confused on item 2 there.  The casebook examples say penalize the captain.  4.2.3 in the rules says that if a team with legal means to stop the period clock commits an action that stops the period clock, presume that they used legal means to stop the clock.   Either 4.2.3 is wrong, or the examples in the casebook need some more work.

The error may just be in how we are reading 4.2.3

The rules under 4.2.3 say [rule]Any inappropriate action that causes the period clock to stop, prevents a Jam from starting, or ends a Jam prematurely should be penalized.[/rule]

Then in the next paragraph explains that the team commits an action which causes the period clock to stop will be charged a TtO or OR instead of a penalty, IF they have any remaining.

Now it is possible that the Casebook for 4.2.3 failed to mention that the team had not timeouts remaining, OR there is an error in the rules as written. Either is possible but I would bet it is casebook that is missing info as the rule for 4.2.3 is clear and consistent with the intention of the new rule.

A good time to ask WFTDA @ rules@WFTDA.com or report it via timeout.wftda.com just be clear and concise if you want a fast answer there are a ton of us and very few reading these emails, it's a lot of work to be done.
« Last Edit: December 04, 2016, 08:41:01 am by llama of death »
I play devils advocate a lot, it is always because I desire a complete understanding of the rule/scenario. I do make changes to my reffing often as a direct result of discussions resulting in a consensus. Particularly if it is contrary to my previous understanding.

Offline General Hellativity

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 70
  • Stats Sheet: 1
  • League Affiliation: Ithaca League of Women Rollers
  • Referee Certification Level: Level 1
  • NSO Certification Level: Not Certified
Re: new ruleset
« Reply #5 on: December 04, 2016, 05:11:06 pm »
I'm actually kind of confused on the new impact spectrum. It seems like every illegal action is called similarly to how previously a multi or forearm would have been called... as in, rather than a relative position change you just have to have some impact on the opponent. Am I reading that correctly?

Not every illegal action, only blocks with illegal blocking zones, by my reading.

New Rule 4.1 says:

[rule]4.1 Gaining position on an opponent, or causing an opponent to lose position to another teammate, due to illegal contact is always considered to have sufficient impact on the game.[/rule]

4.1.1, discussing contact to illegal target zones, does not go any farther than that. Therefore, a change of relative position is required for blocks to illegal target zones.

4.1.2, discussing contact with illegal blocking zones, adds:
[rule]4.1.2 Using an illegal blocking zone also has sufficient impact to warrant a penalty if the contact puts an opponent significantly off balance, or significantly alters their trajectory or speed (for example, significantly holding them back).[/rule]

Therefore, illegal blocking zone penalties only need to change the momentum of the receiving opponent.

High Blocks / Blocks with the Head are discussed in the casebook and their impact spectrum remains "forceful contact." Forceful intentional jabbing with knee or elbow is now added to this spectrum as well (C4.11).

Offline llama of death

  • Referee
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 306
  • Stats Sheet: 1
  • Referee
  • League Affiliation: Rollling Hills Derby Dames, WheatWhackers (JRDA)
  • Referee Certification Level: Not Certified
  • NSO Certification Level: Not Certified
Re: new ruleset
« Reply #6 on: December 04, 2016, 07:33:42 pm »
I'm actually kind of confused on the new impact spectrum. It seems like every illegal action is called similarly to how previously a multi or forearm would have been called... as in, rather than a relative position change you just have to have some impact on the opponent. Am I reading that correctly?

Agreed, though it does seem to move safety penalties like positional blocking with the head to unsporting conduct. Though we [general public] will findout what changed for signals in February.

Not every illegal action, only blocks with illegal blocking zones, by my reading.

New Rule 4.1 says:

[rule]4.1 Gaining position on an opponent, or causing an opponent to lose position to another teammate, due to illegal contact is always considered to have sufficient impact on the game.[/rule]

4.1.1, discussing contact to illegal target zones, does not go any farther than that. Therefore, a change of relative position is required for blocks to illegal target zones.

4.1.2, discussing contact with illegal blocking zones, adds:
[rule]4.1.2 Using an illegal blocking zone also has sufficient impact to warrant a penalty if the contact puts an opponent significantly off balance, or significantly alters their trajectory or speed (for example, significantly holding them back).[/rule]

Therefore, illegal blocking zone penalties only need to change the momentum of the receiving opponent.

High Blocks / Blocks with the Head are discussed in the casebook and their impact spectrum remains "forceful contact." Forceful intentional jabbing with knee or elbow is now added to this spectrum as well (C4.11).
I play devils advocate a lot, it is always because I desire a complete understanding of the rule/scenario. I do make changes to my reffing often as a direct result of discussions resulting in a consensus. Particularly if it is contrary to my previous understanding.

Offline Bluebeard

  • Referee
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 109
  • Stats Sheet: 0
  • League Affiliation: Independent
  • Referee Certification Level: Level 1
  • NSO Certification Level: Not Certified
Re: new ruleset
« Reply #7 on: December 04, 2016, 08:08:31 pm »
I'm really confused on item 2 there.  The casebook examples say penalize the captain.  4.2.3 in the rules says that if a team with legal means to stop the period clock commits an action that stops the period clock, presume that they used legal means to stop the clock.   Either 4.2.3 is wrong, or the examples in the casebook need some more work.

The error may just be in how we are reading 4.2.3

The rules under 4.2.3 say [rule]Any inappropriate action that causes the period clock to stop, prevents a Jam from starting, or ends a Jam prematurely should be penalized.[/rule]

Then in the next paragraph explains that the team commits an action which causes the period clock to stop will be charged a TtO or OR instead of a penalty, IF they have any remaining.

Now it is possible that the Casebook for 4.2.3 failed to mention that the team had not timeouts remaining, OR there is an error in the rules as written. Either is possible but I would bet it is casebook that is missing info as the rule for 4.2.3 is clear and consistent with the intention of the new rule.

A good time to ask WFTDA @ rules@WFTDA.com or report it via timeout.wftda.com just be clear and concise if you want a fast answer there are a ton of us and very few reading these emails, it's a lot of work to be done.

I agree.  I'm going with 4.2.3 as written and submitted a ticket to timeout to add verbiage to the casebook examples to call a timeout instead of issuing the penalty,  if they have a timeout (or OR) available.

Offline Bluebeard

  • Referee
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 109
  • Stats Sheet: 0
  • League Affiliation: Independent
  • Referee Certification Level: Level 1
  • NSO Certification Level: Not Certified
Re: new ruleset
« Reply #8 on: December 04, 2016, 08:27:44 pm »
Does the language of the new ruleset lead other people see to suspect that penalty categories are being consolidated?

I see insubordination going away and being rolled into unsporting conduct.

I see blocking to the head and blocking with the head being rolled together in high block.

I see forearms and elbows being rolled together as illegal blocking (zone)

I see back block and low block being rolled together.  I am unsure if that will be a separate Illegal target zone, or part of illegal blocking with forearms and elbows.

I see delay of game and skating out of bounds being rolled into illegal procedures.

I see Multi-player block, out of bounds engagement, and direction of gameplay being rolled into unexpected contact.  I'm not sure if the out play family (or part of that family) will go into there also.

does anyone else have thoughts about penalty consolidation?

Offline llama of death

  • Referee
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 306
  • Stats Sheet: 1
  • Referee
  • League Affiliation: Rollling Hills Derby Dames, WheatWhackers (JRDA)
  • Referee Certification Level: Not Certified
  • NSO Certification Level: Not Certified
Re: new ruleset
« Reply #9 on: December 04, 2016, 09:29:04 pm »
does anyone else have thoughts about penalty consolidation?

Yes, I suspect they will be consolidating but I don't think it will be the way you describe. Example: MPB, Forearms, elbows, blocking with the head, and lowblocks (with the leg/foot) would more likely be compiled into Illegal Blocking zone penalties.

My opinion aside, we [non cert refs] don't and can't know until February what the WFTDA will do with the signals, not much point in worrying about it though.

*edit for clarity*
« Last Edit: December 05, 2016, 06:17:00 pm by llama of death »
I play devils advocate a lot, it is always because I desire a complete understanding of the rule/scenario. I do make changes to my reffing often as a direct result of discussions resulting in a consensus. Particularly if it is contrary to my previous understanding.

Offline AdamSmasher

  • Referee
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 230
  • Stats Sheet: 3
  • League Affiliation: Lansing Derby Vixens
  • Referee Certification Level: Level 1
  • NSO Certification Level: Level 3
Re: new ruleset
« Reply #10 on: December 05, 2016, 05:08:01 pm »
My opinion aside, we don't and can't know until February what the WFTDA will do with the signals, not much point in worrying about it though.

Not quite true.  Those of us who are affiliated with WFTDA leagues should talk to our skater reps and official reps to make sure we are offering feedback on the drafts of these documents as they are posted to the WFTDA forums for internal feedback. Unaffiliated / Uncertified officials do have to just wait and see.
I'm better at remembering "Smasher" is me than "Adam."
Rules Colored Glasses - Useful Officiating Stuff

Offline llama of death

  • Referee
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 306
  • Stats Sheet: 1
  • Referee
  • League Affiliation: Rollling Hills Derby Dames, WheatWhackers (JRDA)
  • Referee Certification Level: Not Certified
  • NSO Certification Level: Not Certified
Re: new ruleset
« Reply #11 on: December 05, 2016, 06:23:40 pm »
My opinion aside, we don't and can't know until February what the WFTDA will do with the signals, not much point in worrying about it though.

Not quite true.  Those of us who are affiliated with WFTDA leagues should talk to our skater reps and official reps to make sure we are offering feedback on the drafts of these documents as they are posted to the WFTDA forums for internal feedback. Unaffiliated / Uncertified officials do have to just wait and see.

Much appreciated. We [non-certs] are often left to our imagination on what is happening. Not for a lack of trying or care but to a lack of access. If I could  help in any capacity I would do so in a heartbeat (hard to offer help currently when you're a non-certified ref, and can't afford the travel/time required to ref sanc or reg games out of area).
I play devils advocate a lot, it is always because I desire a complete understanding of the rule/scenario. I do make changes to my reffing often as a direct result of discussions resulting in a consensus. Particularly if it is contrary to my previous understanding.

Offline Bluebeard

  • Referee
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 109
  • Stats Sheet: 0
  • League Affiliation: Independent
  • Referee Certification Level: Level 1
  • NSO Certification Level: Not Certified
Re: new ruleset
« Reply #12 on: January 09, 2017, 09:05:08 pm »
I'm really confused on item 2 there.  The casebook examples say penalize the captain.  4.2.3 in the rules says that if a team with legal means to stop the period clock commits an action that stops the period clock, presume that they used legal means to stop the clock.   Either 4.2.3 is wrong, or the examples in the casebook need some more work.

The error may just be in how we are reading 4.2.3

The rules under 4.2.3 say [rule]Any inappropriate action that causes the period clock to stop, prevents a Jam from starting, or ends a Jam prematurely should be penalized.[/rule]

Then in the next paragraph explains that the team commits an action which causes the period clock to stop will be charged a TtO or OR instead of a penalty, IF they have any remaining.

Now it is possible that the Casebook for 4.2.3 failed to mention that the team had not timeouts remaining, OR there is an error in the rules as written. Either is possible but I would bet it is casebook that is missing info as the rule for 4.2.3 is clear and consistent with the intention of the new rule.

A good time to ask WFTDA @ rules@WFTDA.com or report it via timeout.wftda.com just be clear and concise if you want a fast answer there are a ton of us and very few reading these emails, it's a lot of work to be done.

I agree.  I'm going with 4.2.3 as written and submitted a ticket to timeout to add verbiage to the casebook examples to call a timeout instead of issuing the penalty,  if they have a timeout (or OR) available.

Hmmm..  they issued an errata to remove that language from 4.2.3

 

Featured Product

 

Zebra Huddle Head Referee Bout Booklet

 

Featured Classifieds


ZH Files

How to Score a Point in Roller Derby
Rating: *****
Downloads: 3489
Views: 6312
Filesize: 327.61KB
Date: January 17, 2017, 04:21:03 am
Comments (0)
By: AdamSmasher
June 2013 Ruleset situational questions
Rating: *****
Downloads: 2504
Views: 5177
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: 2695
Views: 5787
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: 3478
Views: 5765
Filesize: 28.07KB
Date: April 25, 2013, 05:45:34 pm
Comments (0)
By: Shaun Ketterman

Powered by EzPortal