In any sport you can take pictures of athletes not participating in the action. While you are taking a picture of this, the jammer is giving all her best while scoring as many points a she can.
This is like taking a picture of a soccer goal keeper while his team scores and complain about the fact he is not participating actively at the game.
A lot of the people who are complaining were around during a time when a Gotham/ Philly game was *all* speed and endurance except for a few jams, not the other way around... that was a different time.
Obviously you restated some of what I put in my comment above about passive offense being legal pack destruction via loophole, but I still wanted to voice my approval. Jammer penalties are different and should be different.
One thing that is never mentioned in the "remove power jams" argument is how much it would change the game. People fail to consider how the game is built around forcing jammer penalties and avoiding power jams. If there's suddenly no real punishment, then what's to stop jammers from just cutting the whole damn pack when they're stuck on the initial pass? Nothing. A jammer who is about to be lapped is always going to trade 1 blocker for getting out of that situation by cutting the whole pack. Always. If you take away power jams, then you suddenly make good blocking much less important. I wouldn't be surprised to see jammers consistently cutting whenever the other jammer gets lead to force a quick call off. I'd do it.
The other thing that isn't considered is the safety issue. Right now, jammers have to approach the pack cautiously to avoid back-blocking penalties. If they didn't have to worry about going to the box, jammers would be coming in at full speed all the time. You'd see a lot more jammers crashing into the backs of blockers' legs and destroying knees. Similarly, you's see more dangerous apex jumps and mid-air collisions. If the worst punishment is losing 1 blocker to the penalty box, jammers would be a lot more likely to try dangerous maneuvers resulting in more injuries for a sport that needs to find more ways of reducing injuries.
"This leads to the inevitable conclusion that jammer penalties are the problem..." I don't get this. AT. ALL. Passive offense is what makes power jams boring. Building a back wall against a crappy jammer with no push is what makes regular jams boring. PACK SPLITTING IS THE THING THAT'S BORING. Not power jams. I really just don't get how you make that leap. "Well, I think this one specific thing is boring, therefore we have to completely change how something else works." Makes no sense.
Imagine what power jams looked like if offensive blockers actually engaged the other team's blockers to get their jammer through. There'd be less points scored per power jam. It would have a smaller overall affect on the game. And, it wouldn't be boring in any way. In fact, it would probably be MORE exciting than an average jam.
How anyone can say that there's nothing wrong with blockers not blocking is beyond me. THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE THERE FOR. It's in their title. They aren't "pack splitters". They're blockers. They should be blocking.
"Teams are punished exponentially more for the same penalty when it's committed by a jammer..." It's NOT the same penalty. It might be called the same thing in the rulebook but it's not the same thing. A jammer committing a penalty is a much bigger crime than a blocker penalty. That's just a fact. A jammer is a more important skater, they're the only one that scores points. A team that sends out an extra blocker instead of a jammer in every jam is guaranteed to lose in a shutout even with five blockers. Jammers are more important, therefore what they do is more important, therefore their penalties should have bigger consequences. You may say that the punishment doesn't fit the crime and that's fine but don't try to say they're committing the same penalties.
Roller derby is not broken. There are some issues that need to be fixed. But the games i saw at the regionals so far were really exciting, strong fast clever play, something happening all the time. Big difference with the few games i saw under Usars rules.
I also agree that the issue we should think about is not the passive offense. It's a skillfull play where the way the jammers have to work themselves trough the pack is really exciting to watch. The powerplays you have in a close game are so exciting because of the jammer action and because they often come as a lead change. So i even wonder if we have to fix it.
But if you want to fix it it's the impact, the number of possible points that has to be fixed. I like the idea of a star pass on the way to the box. Maybe allowing the pivot to pick up the jammer cover not on the way to the box, but as soon as the jammer sits in the box offers more exciting strategic possibilities. It could be the right balance between penalising a jammer commiting a major and not overpenalising the team. It gives your team still the advantage having only your jammer on the track, but the time you have this situation is more limited (as long as you can keep your pivot out of the box).
I am enjoying the debate this has engendered -- as I said, I'm not proposing a solution as a fete accomplit, I'm just trying to put forward some suggestions to get us all thinking about a path to a solution.
Some points raised are good; I too like the fact that powerjams *can* change a game; I don't think we need change that. If we were to leave the penalty box structure as it is even while allowing (for instance) jammer substitutions, I think you'd have a situation closer to the one people are looking for; if you allowed a situation where you had three blockers boxed and one blocker and one jammer on the track, if the team with the numerical advantage wanted to keep things stopped they would *have* to engage with at least one opposing player and hold them to keep the score ticking over at the maximum rate.
I love derby as it is; complicated, variable, and competitive. The Denver v Bay Area game at westerns was one of the fastest, most hard-hitting most competitive games I've seen in a long while. Try telling anyone involved in that game that no-one hits any more...
And John, I agree with you -- current powerjams are boring. But my entire point is that the problem isn't the tactic; the nature of the tactic is simply dictated by the way jammer penalties work. We need to fix those penalties to keep jammers out on the track more or we'll just get variations on this problem as it's immediately in the attacking team's interest to drop the pack speed to as close to 0 as the rules allow.
And Alpha--while I appreciate the presumption in telling Rocky Mountain how to play derby, I'm going to anyway. Talk to your packs. Get them to get the speed up, break those walls up. If you're running 4D and letting dense walls build up and pack speeds drop and you're fighting through walls and getting worn down, get your blockers to run some more aggressive offense. If your team is electing to just run 4D, then that's their call and their problem; but nothing in the rules says you have to run a slow defensive set-up. You run the set-up you want that works best with the players you have and the opposition you're facing.
Seeing blockers running offense deliberately run the pack speeds up from the off to the advantage of their jammers in a pleasure to see--just to think of one recent example, Philly did it really well against London for much of that game last weekend, in the first half especially, letting V-Diva dominate even more than she would have done otherwise. It's one of many things Gotham do well too; when they want the pack speed up, dear sweet lord do those packs go fast.
I like your points, now what can we do to change/fix roller derby?
I am personally tired of the fighting through walls. It's boring.
It is sad to me to hear someone that used to be a spectacular jammer not want to jam anymore because they haven't practiced/do not like the slow walls strategy.
No one is hitting and it seems like the jammers are left to do all the work.
I liked derby when we were hitting and moving forward!
Let's get back to that. It's exciting and what will keep fans coming back, imo.
In any sport you can take pictures of athletes not participating in the action. While you are taking a picture of this, the jammer is giving all her best while scoring as many points a she can.
This is like taking a picture of a soccer goal keeper while his team scores and complain about the fact he is not participating actively at the game.
A lot of the people who are complaining were around during a time when a Gotham/ Philly game was *all* speed and endurance except for a few jams, not the other way around... that was a different time.
Obviously you restated some of what I put in my comment above about passive offense being legal pack destruction via loophole, but I still wanted to voice my approval. Jammer penalties are different and should be different.
One thing that is never mentioned in the "remove power jams" argument is how much it would change the game. People fail to consider how the game is built around forcing jammer penalties and avoiding power jams. If there's suddenly no real punishment, then what's to stop jammers from just cutting the whole damn pack when they're stuck on the initial pass? Nothing. A jammer who is about to be lapped is always going to trade 1 blocker for getting out of that situation by cutting the whole pack. Always. If you take away power jams, then you suddenly make good blocking much less important. I wouldn't be surprised to see jammers consistently cutting whenever the other jammer gets lead to force a quick call off. I'd do it.
The other thing that isn't considered is the safety issue. Right now, jammers have to approach the pack cautiously to avoid back-blocking penalties. If they didn't have to worry about going to the box, jammers would be coming in at full speed all the time. You'd see a lot more jammers crashing into the backs of blockers' legs and destroying knees. Similarly, you's see more dangerous apex jumps and mid-air collisions. If the worst punishment is losing 1 blocker to the penalty box, jammers would be a lot more likely to try dangerous maneuvers resulting in more injuries for a sport that needs to find more ways of reducing injuries.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/nocklebeast/8046161855/
there is something slightly soul killing to edit a sequence like this.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/nocklebeast/8047278943/
Perhaps it would be better to put the camera down and drink beer (like Sharkey and Levar Hurtin' are doing in the background).
AS IF WE NEEDED TO LOVE EITHER TEAM MORE ??? THEY HAD TO GO AND DO THIS!!!! SWOON!
THAT I HAVE EVER SEEN. I HAD TO USE ALL CAPS TO EMPHASIZE HOW GREAT THIS IS.
"This leads to the inevitable conclusion that jammer penalties are the problem..." I don't get this. AT. ALL. Passive offense is what makes power jams boring. Building a back wall against a crappy jammer with no push is what makes regular jams boring. PACK SPLITTING IS THE THING THAT'S BORING. Not power jams. I really just don't get how you make that leap. "Well, I think this one specific thing is boring, therefore we have to completely change how something else works." Makes no sense.
Imagine what power jams looked like if offensive blockers actually engaged the other team's blockers to get their jammer through. There'd be less points scored per power jam. It would have a smaller overall affect on the game. And, it wouldn't be boring in any way. In fact, it would probably be MORE exciting than an average jam.
How anyone can say that there's nothing wrong with blockers not blocking is beyond me. THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE THERE FOR. It's in their title. They aren't "pack splitters". They're blockers. They should be blocking.
"Teams are punished exponentially more for the same penalty when it's committed by a jammer..." It's NOT the same penalty. It might be called the same thing in the rulebook but it's not the same thing. A jammer committing a penalty is a much bigger crime than a blocker penalty. That's just a fact. A jammer is a more important skater, they're the only one that scores points. A team that sends out an extra blocker instead of a jammer in every jam is guaranteed to lose in a shutout even with five blockers. Jammers are more important, therefore what they do is more important, therefore their penalties should have bigger consequences. You may say that the punishment doesn't fit the crime and that's fine but don't try to say they're committing the same penalties.
I agree with your analysis.
Roller derby is not broken. There are some issues that need to be fixed. But the games i saw at the regionals so far were really exciting, strong fast clever play, something happening all the time. Big difference with the few games i saw under Usars rules.
I also agree that the issue we should think about is not the passive offense. It's a skillfull play where the way the jammers have to work themselves trough the pack is really exciting to watch. The powerplays you have in a close game are so exciting because of the jammer action and because they often come as a lead change. So i even wonder if we have to fix it.
But if you want to fix it it's the impact, the number of possible points that has to be fixed. I like the idea of a star pass on the way to the box. Maybe allowing the pivot to pick up the jammer cover not on the way to the box, but as soon as the jammer sits in the box offers more exciting strategic possibilities. It could be the right balance between penalising a jammer commiting a major and not overpenalising the team. It gives your team still the advantage having only your jammer on the track, but the time you have this situation is more limited (as long as you can keep your pivot out of the box).
Shout out to Ginger Kid from Boston as well. I had to play against her!
I am enjoying the debate this has engendered -- as I said, I'm not proposing a solution as a fete accomplit, I'm just trying to put forward some suggestions to get us all thinking about a path to a solution.
Some points raised are good; I too like the fact that powerjams *can* change a game; I don't think we need change that. If we were to leave the penalty box structure as it is even while allowing (for instance) jammer substitutions, I think you'd have a situation closer to the one people are looking for; if you allowed a situation where you had three blockers boxed and one blocker and one jammer on the track, if the team with the numerical advantage wanted to keep things stopped they would *have* to engage with at least one opposing player and hold them to keep the score ticking over at the maximum rate.
I love derby as it is; complicated, variable, and competitive. The Denver v Bay Area game at westerns was one of the fastest, most hard-hitting most competitive games I've seen in a long while. Try telling anyone involved in that game that no-one hits any more...
And John, I agree with you -- current powerjams are boring. But my entire point is that the problem isn't the tactic; the nature of the tactic is simply dictated by the way jammer penalties work. We need to fix those penalties to keep jammers out on the track more or we'll just get variations on this problem as it's immediately in the attacking team's interest to drop the pack speed to as close to 0 as the rules allow.
And Alpha--while I appreciate the presumption in telling Rocky Mountain how to play derby, I'm going to anyway. Talk to your packs. Get them to get the speed up, break those walls up. If you're running 4D and letting dense walls build up and pack speeds drop and you're fighting through walls and getting worn down, get your blockers to run some more aggressive offense. If your team is electing to just run 4D, then that's their call and their problem; but nothing in the rules says you have to run a slow defensive set-up. You run the set-up you want that works best with the players you have and the opposition you're facing.
Seeing blockers running offense deliberately run the pack speeds up from the off to the advantage of their jammers in a pleasure to see--just to think of one recent example, Philly did it really well against London for much of that game last weekend, in the first half especially, letting V-Diva dominate even more than she would have done otherwise. It's one of many things Gotham do well too; when they want the pack speed up, dear sweet lord do those packs go fast.
Classic photo.
Thankyou :)
Thanks Amy! With a surname like 'cox' it won't be long before someone tries to work out where the pun in my name is...
Thanks Lex! Love the term extra-ego :)
I like your points, now what can we do to change/fix roller derby?
I am personally tired of the fighting through walls. It's boring.
It is sad to me to hear someone that used to be a spectacular jammer not want to jam anymore because they haven't practiced/do not like the slow walls strategy.
No one is hitting and it seems like the jammers are left to do all the work.
I liked derby when we were hitting and moving forward!
Let's get back to that. It's exciting and what will keep fans coming back, imo.
Pages