Roller Derby Megathread II: Whip It Good!

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Sports Argument Stadium > Roller Derby Megathread II: Whip It Good!

«‹›49 »

JoshTheStampede: Sep 8, 2004; come at me bro

echopapa posted:

When all else fails, just throw tough-sounding words together. I suggest Laserfist Bazooka.

Choose any name from this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RFHlJ2voJHY

# ? Jul 29, 2011 19:19

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 2, 2024 14:57

Ria: Sep 21, 2003; yeah, i have no idea either

Sweet As Sin posted:

I'm an engineering student and PCB machinist, movie would be Wild at Heart, TV show is Twin Peaks and True Blood (I'm addicted to the hot raunchy vampires), I don't really follow teams, I'm more of a martial arts & archery girl. I knit, crochet, bake, and play bass and keyboards when I have the time.

There's plenty of material, but I just plain suck at names. The last band I had never got one, we just used a crappy generated name.

I was thinking about using my name, Ana, or Anna, for it, but I can't think of anything I like. The closest I got to liking something was A. Horne, but no one is going to get that around here, and it isn't really creative.

Anne T Sparkle (Anti Sparkle), since you like vampires that aren't Twilight?

# ? Jul 29, 2011 20:00

Sweet As Sin: May 8, 2007; Hee-ho!!!; Grimey Drawer

Ria posted:

Anne T Sparkle (Anti Sparkle), since you like vampires that aren't Twilight?

I dig that! But since I'm in a non English speaking country the pun will probably be lost to most people.

Hahaha, that MST3K thing was hilarious. Now that I'm open to not using my name, this is getting a little easier. I've thought of a crappy few, then remembered an ex used to call me Dahlia, and I liked Attack Dahlia. I'm still going to think of some more, I'll report back here when I decide. My last resort will be flipping the pages of a dictionary or using random Wikipedia pages.
Thanks for the help!

# ? Jul 29, 2011 20:14

downtimejesus: Apr 24, 2007

Mr. Powers posted:

Rules publication:
http://wftda.com/rules/publications/prejam-positioning

Very short of it: If a team lines up behind the line, jam starts, jam ends, official time out, they all get IP minors, pivot gets IP major, 30 seconds to next jam.

Thank god.

So super fun implications of this because of wording that I just found out:

Assume that the pictures below are how people are set up pre-jam for each scenario, looking at the track from the bench, with the jammers behind the jammer line.

Scenario 1:

Not okay, no pack is called, jammers are released, if pack isn't immediately reformed(or formed in the first place, since there is no pack, someone in red has to jump 20 feet ahead which is quite literally impossible due to the ambiguity of "immediately"), jam is called dead, official time out, IP minors go out, pivot gets IP major, 30 seconds to next jam.

This came up in a scrimmage we had the other night, and people were :wtf:

ing. Before the clarification, Red would just be out of play and couldn't block the jammers. However, after the clarification, they were never in position and the rest of the rule follows, handing out penalties if no one forms the pack and calling the jam dead.

Scenario 2:

Okay, however if any red blockers in the back block the jammer, they are out of play and comedy ensues. There's a pack up front, but the people in the back can't do anything legally.

Scenario 3:

Completely fine, Red blocker 10 feet back is still in the pack and is extending the pack definition. Red blockers in the back can block the jammer since they are in play(20 feet from pack).

As an aside, knee drop no-pack starts are still fine, since by getting up the players satisfy the "immediately" clause of the rule.

downtimejesus fucked around with this message at 21:53 on Jul 29, 2011

# ? Jul 29, 2011 21:47

JoshTheStampede: Sep 8, 2004; come at me bro

In scenario 1, nothing I see there would trigger the new rule. The new rule is if a team is not "in position" at the first whistle. "in position" does not mean "in the pack", so wouldn't scenario 1 be identical to starting on a knee? It would just be jammers release, Red can't block them because no pack, congrats to red for taking themselves out of the jam I guess. But it doesn't look like any penalties would be handed out.

E: This is what I mean: "Pivot Blockers are considered in position when they are on the track on or behind the Pivot line and ahead of the Jammer line. Blockers are considered in position when they are on the track behind the Pivot line, behind the Pivot's hips if she is on the Pivot line, and ahead of the Jammer line."

Says nothing about being in a legal pack. You just have to be ahead of the jammer line and behind the pivot line.

JoshTheStampede fucked around with this message at 22:10 on Jul 29, 2011

# ? Jul 29, 2011 22:08

downtimejesus: Apr 24, 2007

Dominion posted:

In scenario 1, nothing I see there would trigger the new rule. The new rule is if a team is not "in position" at the first whistle. "in position" does not mean "in the pack", so wouldn't scenario 1 be identical to starting on a knee? It would just be jammers release, Red can't block them because no pack, congrats to red for taking themselves out of the jam I guess. But it doesn't look like any penalties would be handed out.

E: This is what I mean: "Pivot Blockers are considered in position when they are on the track on or behind the Pivot line and ahead of the Jammer line. Blockers are considered in position when they are on the track behind the Pivot line, behind the Pivot's hips if she is on the Pivot line, and ahead of the Jammer line."

Says nothing about being in a legal pack. You just have to be ahead of the jammer line and behind the pivot line.

While you're right about the in position part being between the two lines, the whole rule has to be looked at. Look at it like this:

quote:

Prior to the start of a jam, Blockers and Pivots must be in position in pre-jam formation so that the pack will exist behind the pivot line and in front of the Jammer line at the time of the first whistle

In scenario 1, there is no pack(it doesn't exist), and note the bolding, so it goes to the or part which is:

quote:

or immediately after the first whistle should the Jam begin with a No Pack.

Red blockers are jerking it and the "immediately" expires since they think they're blocking when they're really out of play. If they don't reform quickly enough, jam is dead, since they were out of position by definition.

downtimejesus fucked around with this message at 23:12 on Jul 29, 2011

# ? Jul 29, 2011 23:07

JoshTheStampede: Sep 8, 2004; come at me bro

downtimejesus posted:

While you're right about the in position part being between the two lines, the whole rule has to be looked at. Look at it like this:

In scenario 1, there is no pack(it doesn't exist), and note the bolding, so it goes to the or part which is:
Red blockers are jerking it and the "immediately" expires since they think they're blocking when they're really out of play. If they don't reform quickly enough, jam is dead, since they were out of position by definition.

I don't think that matters. There's a definition of "in position" (which scenario 1 does not break), and a description of the penalty that occurs when you break the rule. The bolded thing about there being a pack is just a description of why people need to be in position, it doesn't change what being in position means.

# ? Jul 29, 2011 23:13

downtimejesus: Apr 24, 2007

Dominion posted:

I don't think that matters. There's a definition of "in position" (which scenario 1 does not break), and a description of the penalty that occurs when you break the rule. The bolded thing about there being a pack is just a description of why people need to be in position, it doesn't change what being in position means.

I'd definitely agree with you if the part in bold didn't exist, but it does.

# ? Jul 29, 2011 23:16

carticket: Jun 28, 2005; white and gold.

Failure to reform penalties are assessed when skaters do not immediately (and this means immediately after No Pack is called) attempt (attempt) to reform. This does not mean immediately reform.

The top paragraph explains what the clarification is intending to do. The later paragraphs explain what you do to enforce it. The later paragraphs state that the jam is called off if a majority are not in position. Scenario one has all blockers in position. Jam is not called off.

The clarification does not say to whistle the jam dead if there is no pack at the start whistle, nor does it say to whistle the jam dead if there is no pack and the pack does not immediately reform.

# ? Jul 31, 2011 21:09

carticket: Jun 28, 2005; white and gold.