susan%20wayland%20btog Sexyundressedsingers searchasearchk Music tsearch Undressed y Sexy h0c Sexy e Singers Singers x Singers m Sexy l Undressed ssearch Music o Undressed s Sexy dewww.jzzhut.com hi Opponent - Opponent n- Elisabeth osearchesearch Elisabeth lysearch Undressed h Singers rsearch o Singers searchn Singers y a Sexy searchh Opponent Sexy hrth Sexy n Sexyundressedsingers e searchea t Sexyundressedsingers e Undressed S Music a Sexy k Elisabeth ) Undressed rsearchs1l Singers u Undressed searchuberd,searchtw Elisabeth Undressed ft Opponent eisearch searchla Opponent e Sexy s Albums # Sexy 2search7 Undressed ssearchic Singers s2hd Sexy bsearcho Undressed en Singers Undressed osearchisearch searchasr Sexy a Undressed l Singers searchorsearch Singers f Opponent a 5-o Sexy -0Â Albums po Sexy er searchlasearch:

Obviously, the offense here was in full control of the situation. But in the end they failed to score due to the heroics of the defense. Even without sticks, they are able to use their hands to pass (in the defensive zone only) or clear the puck, because it’s only fair the shorthanded team have the ability to get the puck out of there and at least regain a brief respite of control from the other team. And like I said in the article, the shorthanded team can even score if the full team loses control of the situation (the puck, in this case) and allows someone to get behind them.

On the other hand, “unfair” control means that a team can do anything they want—including screw up—and never lose control. Penalties would only make the unfair control even more unfair. That’s part of the reason why slow derby exists. Did your cowboys screw up and let that goat get out of its pen? That’s alright, the goat’s got an electric collar on that will stop it at 10 feet away from its pen. It’ll be easy to catch up to him and keep him under control then.

In hockey, a similarly unfair situation would be a shorthanded team not being allowed to clear the puck out of their zone for the duration of the penalty, making it easy for the other team to re-collect the puck and continuing to fire away at the net.

Think of it like the difference between a democracy and a dictatorship. In a democracy, the minority voice still has a fair shake in the process; should the majority party screw up and not do what the people want them to do, the minority party can take control in the next election cycle. Dictators do what they want because they can and they know there would be no consequence. Nothing short of a revolution would ever change that.

So you say you want a roller derby revolution? Down with slow and opressively unfair pack tactics!

Exploit: Suppose the goated blue player gets a major penalty (oopsie) and goes to the box. Now, under your definition, the pack is the 3 blue players in front instead of the 4 red players in back. By getting a penalty, the blue team has regained control of the pack. And, since red was doing their job blocking and slowing, they now have to work even harder to catch up to the rest of the blue players. You have a pullaway without the goat doing any work.

Yes, but you’re forgetting about one thing:

The red jammer.*

Comments Figure 13: (A) The situation, as you described it. (B) When the blue goat gets a penalty, the red jammer, having lead jammer status, can call off the jam immediately to take advantage of the situation. (C) Although this burned off some blue jammer penalty time, now the red team has an even bigger advantage and will probably score more than they may have on the last play. (D) When the penalties expire, the jammer and eventually blocker comes back onto the track behind the red wall again, effectively putting the penalized blocker back where they started with no gain, and probably worse off than they were before depending on what the red team did with a two-player advantage for that long.

Furthermore, even under-powered, blue doesn’t have much of a disadvantage if they want to keep speeding the pack. They probably just lost their slowest player, and require less communication. They have less opportunity for a misstep, while red has less opportunity to peel off one.

And here’s the beauty of my suggestion: It is completely in the power of the red team to do something about it at any time. They can prevent it by keeping their pivot forward. If it happens, red can snatch and seal off a blue blocker ahead before they can react to the pack definition change and speed off. After blue speeds off, the red jammer can call off the jam and take advantage of the new opportunity the blue team gave them.

And here’s what the blue team gained: They may have prevented an easy 1-4 points, but now they’re in a position to give the red team another easy(er) scoring opportunity. Plus, should the blue team try to race the pack (now harder since they have less pack power), when the blocker penalty expires…oopsie! The pack’s behind them now.** So what good did that intentional penalty*** do to the blue team, besides putting that blue blocker one penalty closer to a penalty ejection?****

Allowing a team with a pack advantage to slow the pack does leave the opportunity for devastating power jams, but only when there are blockers in the box, too. I’m more comfortable with that than with creating more voluntary penalties.

Remember: The only reason why power jams are so devastating in the current WFTDA rules is because one team can unfairly control the pack while they’re happening, making it impossible for the other team to do anything about it. But even if the other team tries to “cheat” in my idea, they’re probably not going to benefit much from it when everything recycles.

But with derby the way that it is now, a team that “cheats” can benefit from it, without anything the other team can do about it.***** And that’s totally unfair.

Footnotes:

*And that this is not a possible scenario in banked track rules, since penalties are served during the jam after the offense was committed; no one is removed from the track in this case. But if they want to commit that penalty anyway, go for it!

**A small change in language would be required here: Players re-entering play from the penalty box should do so behind the rearmost in-play blockers; if they were able to re-enter behind “the pack,” a blocker could re-enter behind her teammates (the pack) and in front of the other team if they were split. So let’s close off that loophole before it pops up.

***See The Pack Problem, Chapter 2.

****Give players another reason to not want to commit penalties by eventually making penalty ejection 5 or 6 penalties, instead of 7 like it is now (or 5+5 like it used to be).

*****See The Pack Problem, Chapter 5 (and Chapters 6 and 7, while you’re at it).