I don’t want to speak as though I’m the decision maker here. Like most things in WFTDA, authorship was a group effort and evolved over the years. I don’t remember who initially included this specific item, but no one has really talked about why it was originally included. From my personal memory:
In every other use of the Line-up Clock (between jams), we do not (can not) start the jam until the 30 seconds completes. After a timeout, the rules instruct us to start the jam as soon as possible, only allowing 30 seconds to pass if necessary. Running a lineup clock is inconsistent with what’s happening in the game at that moment. It presents an inaccurate message that we must wait that amount of time to start when we should be starting as soon as everyone is ready.
In the case of team timeouts specifically, there’s a prescribed amount of time that the clock is allowed to be stopped (60 seconds mandatory with an additional, optional 30 seconds). Switching from one clock to another obfuscates how much time has actually passed and introduces room for error, where a JT/SBO might (and honestly often does) signal the end of the timeout late, which adds to the total time of the stoppage. Letting the timeout clock run keeps the visibility of how long the period clock has been stopped so that we don’t overshoot the total time allowed.
Having said that, there’s no denying that there are good-intentioned reasons for switching to line-up time. I fear that some folks are getting locked into one specific solution when there are other ways to make accommodations for specific needs, especially when using the line-up clock this way isn’t practiced universally.
I understand the procedure to be in place to a) prevent timeouts from exceeding the time stated in the rules by virtually hiding the inevitable human error in the combined timeout and lineup time and b) not to suggest there might be 30 more seconds of lineup by not displaying a lineup clock.
I believe this to be an unfit solution with undesirable side effects for the underlying requirements that ultimately depend on who defines the clock truth in the situation, but i will take my time to think this through thoroughly.
It’s not. Skaters are lining up for the next Jam. Showing a timeout clock is inconsistent because the timeout has ended.
And I do not see how a jam starting with “10” on a count up lineup clock is any more or less confusing than it starting with “1:10” on a count up timeout clock. (I could see it if the clock was counting down and the jam started before it reached zero but that is not what is happening.) Also, it doesn’t seem to be a problem to have a lineup clock running up to a different value than 30 when the game is on the edge and we are about to start an overtime jam.
Wait, what? So in the extreme case of a JT missing the end of the TO by more than 20s you would give a rolling whistle and then go immediately to 5s even if no skater is even on their way to the track yet?
I also don’t see this interpretation supported by the language of the rules. The 60s of (team) timeout and the up to 30s of lineup are referred to as two separate intervals and there is no indication whatsoever that the actually relevant interval would be the combination of those. To me your approach feels like trying to correct an officiating error to the detriment of the teams, who now suddenly have less time than expected to get ready for the next jam. (And if they don’t manage they are getting a penalty or skating short.)
If you insist that a TTO may under no circumstances last longer than 60s then IMO the correct procedure in the case of a missed rolling whistle is to assume that at the 60s mark we switched from TTO to OTO and when the rolling whistle comes, it ends that OTO.
Right now it is OffEd doing the locking in by enforcing one specific solution as a mandatory procedure.
I went back to re-read a few earlier posts, and I realize it might not have ever been made clear. The consolidation of post-season practices into the general practices doc was done at the direction of the Board of Directors. OffEd may have been the hands, but they weren’t the ones making the decision.
Discussing this with some league members recently, they raised the concern as well around the instances where Referees do not follow the correct process and either keep a skater on track because they can see the box is full [which should only be done if they’re the last pack-defining skater on track] or return the skater to the track before the skater has reached the penalty box [again, shouldn’t be done]
I’ve seen both instances happen, and while it’s rare enough for it to happen, it DOES happen because the refs think they’re being helpful to the penalty box…
Personally, I don’t necessarily disagree with handling fouled out skaters slightly differently [over complication maybe, but I understand why], but I think there needs to be some time for this to be let sink in to all officials…
Feedback to the BoD - be a bit more considerate of WHEN you’re dropping these things - especially if there’s already a rules review planned. Why make this “minor” change to procedures now and cause confusion to those of us who haven’t encountered these before, when they could (nay… SHOULD) just be released as part of the rules update
First of all I am irritated about the timing of these “minor” changes. Furthermore, I have my dear problems understanding several of the (highlighted in blue) additions to the Officiating procedures. That leaves me with a impression that these changes have been written hastily.
I personally find the No. 2.7 sentence 1 phrased to complicated. I would prefer a more commonly used language over the mathematical language used here. I am afraid you might loose reads after the words ‘sum of’.
No. 4.7. sentence 1 leaves me with the impression there is a third clock a Jam Timer should operate; I think the clock addressed here is the Period Clock.
Furthermore: this part of the procedure might be better placed in a casebook entry as it interprets the rules and indicates how to handle an officiating shortcoming (not necessarily an error). There the clarification umpire cited could be included as a keep in mind.
On the lineup clock display after TOs: I think umpire’s approach was reasonable when the scoreboard mechanics did not allow to switch to lineup after a TO. As this has changed the handling should be changed, too as this better reflect the status of the game. If precision is a major topic here, one could make the feature request to auto-switch to lineup after Team TO hits 60s.
Hi folks, first off, thanks for sharing these transparently, and for the work that undoubtedly went into the updates.
I think that it’s important to think about how changes such as this are communicated by WFTDA. Sharing this type of update on this forum (although it’s open to all) and nowhere else does not serve the development of WFTDA aligned roller derby and other formats which play and are officiated to the same rulebook. I think it’s vital that changes such as this are communicated proactively, openly and transparently including through accessible means such as social media, and with enough time for the changes to be “practiced and incorporated”. Rolling out these changes a few short weeks before regionals does not leave this time.
In terms of the changes themselves, again, I applaud the desire for clarity and consistency in procedures, and welcome this in theory. I actively like the clarification in terms of overtime jams. However, I have a number of concerns:
2.6 - I agree with Muffin, that the 30 seconds of awkward dead air does not serve a positive goal, for broadly speaking the same reasons
4.8 - I can’t be more eloquent than speedy and others who have spoken to this hotly contested procedure, particularly when a full rewrite is a matter of months away
8.4 - In theory this is great, and is what we do often try to achieve, however as others have noted there is a big difference in achievability between both levels of gameplay and officiating skill/confidence, and the potential for significant negative game impact should a mistake be made.
Edited to clarify comms because I hadn’t realised this particular part of the community is open access.
I was also taught, the first set of 4 whistles ends the jam and points earned or not than the additional 2 sets 4 whistle as a repeat/echo for those who do not hear the first set.
