4. Penalties

For the following scenarios, the following information should be assumed.

  • The home team is wearing red uniforms.
  • The visiting team is wearing white uniforms.
  • Both teams have legally fielded three Blockers, a Pivot, and an Active Jammer, unless otherwise noted.
  • The Jam begins and the Pack is defined.
  • All Skaters move counterclockwise, unless otherwise noted, and begin to block one another.

4.1. Contact Penalties

4.1.1. Impact to an Illegal Target Zone

Making contact to an illegal target zone should be penalized based on the impact it has on the target. (see Section 2.4.1)

—Origin: Section 4.1.1

Scenario C4.1.1.A

White Blocker, falling as a result of contact with Red Blocker’s skates, “falls small” by tucking their arms and legs close into their body. Red Jammer, skating close behind, trips over White Blocker and falls.

Outcome: No penalty.

Rationale: White Blocker did everything in their power to prevent themself from being a hazard.

Keep in Mind: Were this the third time White Blocker had caused an opponent to fall in this manner, they should receive a penalty. While “falling small” mitigates the safety risk of a Skater falling on the track, excessively falling with impact represents a larger safety risk that should result in a penalty.

Scenario C4.1.1.B

Red Jammer skates along the inside line and attempts to jump the apex to pass the Pack. White Pivot legally initiates a block to Red Jammer’s upper arm, which knocks Red Jammer off balance, and their jump comes up short. Red Jammer falls out of bounds. They fall small, but their momentum causes them to slide back onto the track, into White Blocker’s legs. White Blocker trips over Red Jammer and falls.

Outcome: Red Jammer is penalized.

Rationale: Red Jammer is considered in bounds when White Pivot initiates a legal block. Though Red Jammer fell small, their forward momentum back onto the track means that they are a safety risk for more than just a “small” space. White Blocker’s loss of position as a result of that risk is enough to warrant a penalty.

Scenario C4.1.1.C

Red Pivot and two Red Blockers form a three-person wall. White Blocker initiates a block to the back of Red Pivot with a legal blocking zone. Red Pivot does not fall but is pushed out of the center of the wall. White Jammer is able to pass the other two Red Blockers at the hips before Red Pivot reclaims their position.

Outcome: White Blocker is penalized.

Rationale: White Blocker did not gain advantage from their block to an illegal target zone, but a teammate did: White Jammer earned passes and therefore scored points.

Keep in Mind: If White Blocker had fully moved through the wall and continued on, that would also justify a penalty for gaining position, even though they were not scoring points.

Keep in Mind: If White Jammer did not score a point, and didn’t fully establish a superior position, this would not warrant a penalty on its own, even if they were momentarily ahead of the Red Blocker, because no real advantage (such as points or position) was gained.

Scenario C4.1.1.D

Red Blocker initiates a block, chest-to-chest, against White Blocker. The force of the impact causes secondary contact of Red Blocker’s upper arm to White Blocker’s neck. White Blocker’s head jerks back, but they do not fall off balance or go down.

Outcome: Red Blocker is penalized.

Rationale: Though Red Blocker’s hit was to a legal target zone with a legal blocking zone, and though White Blocker lost neither position nor advantage, forceful contact to the head or neck should always result in a penalty.

Keep in Mind: Incidental contact to the neck or head that is not forceful and does not have any other impact should not result in a penalty.

Scenario C4.1.1.E

Red Blocker skates clockwise when White Blocker steps behind them, positionally blocking Red Blocker’s back with a legal target zone. Red Blocker stops skating clockwise.

Outcome: No penalty.

Rationale: A Skater cannot be penalized just for positionally blocking an illegal target zone. Skaters may be oriented and be moving in various directions during a game.

Scenario C4.1.1.F

White Jammer approaches the rear of the Pack, targeting Red Blocker. Well before impact is made, Red Blocker side-steps, presenting their back (an illegal target zone). White Jammer makes contact anyway and knocks Red Blocker down.

Outcome: White Jammer is penalized.

Rationale: Red Blocker established a new position before White Jammer made contact. White Jammer is responsible for their initiated block, regardless of what their original target had been.

Keep in Mind: If White Jammer had no reasonable opportunity to avoid Red Blocker’s illegal target zone because Red Blocker had presented an illegal target zone at the last moment, Red Blocker would then be initiating with their back, a legal blocking zone. Because White Jammer would not be considered the initiator, no penalty is warranted.

Scenario C4.1.1.G

White Jammer skates fast and directly into Red Blocker’s back, who was not prepared for the contact. Red Blocker falls wildly and slides into the skates of the wall of White Blockers in front of them, who fall.

Outcome: White Jammer is penalized. Red Blocker is not penalized.

Rationale: White Jammer made illegal contact to the Red Blocker. Due to this illegal contact, Red Blocker was unable to avoid committing their illegal action. As such, Red Blocker should not be penalized.

Keep in Mind: If White Jammer had pushed Red Blocker forward into a White Blocker’s back, causing said White Blocker to fall but not Red Blocker, nobody would receive a penalty. In this case, the White Jammer’s illegal action is what caused their own teammate to fall. Red Blocker should not be penalized for this.

Scenario C4.1.1.H

Red Jammer skates around the track at a high rate of speed. They slam very forcefully into White Blocker’s back without making any attempt to avoid illegal contact. White Blocker, however, does not fall and Red Jammer does not gain position on anybody as a result of this action.

Outcome: Red Jammer should be considered for an expulsion.

Rationale: Contact to an opponent’s back is illegal, in no small part because it is unsafe. A flagrant violation of this rule poses a safety hazard to White Blocker, which has sufficient impact on the game to expel Red Jammer if judged to be negligent, intentional, or reckless, regardless of if White Blocker lost position.

4.1.2. Impact with an Illegal Blocking Zone

Making contact with an illegal blocking zone should be penalized based on the impact it has on the target. (see Section 2.4.2)

—Origin: Section 4.1.2

Scenario C4.1.2.A

Red Jammer initiates a block with their forearms tucked into their torso, to a legal target zone of White Blocker. White Blocker is knocked out of bounds.

Outcome: No penalty.

Rationale: Red Jammer’s forearms were fully tucked into their torso. While forearms are an illegal blocking zone, tucking them into the torso effectively makes them part of the torso, and thus a legal blocking zone.

Scenario C4.1.2.B

White Blocker initiates a block against Red Jammer, using their upper arm against a legal target zone. The natural momentum of the impact causes additional contact, sliding down to White Blocker’s elbow. Red Jammer ends up out of bounds as a result of the action.

Outcome: No penalty.

Rationale: White Blocker used their upper arm to initiate the block. Red Jammer’s loss of position was a result of a block from a legal blocking zone and not the additional contact that resulted from the momentum of the impact. Both examples are legal play.

Keep in Mind: Many legal blocks include incidental or meaningless contact using an illegal blocking zone, or to an illegal target zone. If the illegal contact does not have further impact, no penalty should be assessed.

Scenario C4.1.2.C

White Jammer is stuck behind a Red wall. They push forward, but cannot find a way to break through. They drive their knee into Red Blocker’s buttocks. Red Blocker stumbles but does not go down or out. White Jammer fails to break through the wall.

Outcome: White Jammer is penalized.

Rationale: A Skater who intentionally and forcefully jabs an opponent with their elbow or strikes with their knee should receive a penalty regardless of whether it leads to a loss of position or advantage. This action is unsafe and unsporting.

Keep in Mind: The fact that this action was intentional is only part of the reason a penalty is warranted. Intentional illegal action is not always penalized even though it is tacitly unsporting. Intentional actions designed to harm an opponent should always be penalized.

Scenario C4.1.2.D

As White Jammer advances, Red Blocker is knocked off balance and into White Jammer’s path, bending over and positionally placing their head in front of White Jammer. White Jammer comes to a complete stop to avoid contact with Red Blocker’s head.

Outcome: No penalty.

Rationale: Though White Jammer lost significant momentum as a result of Red Blocker’s positional block with an illegal blocking zone (head), unintentional positional blocking with the head does not warrant a penalty.

Keep in Mind: If Red Blocker had intentionally presented their head in order to slow White Jammer’s momentum, or continued to use the threat of harm to their own head as a barrier, Red Blocker should be penalized for unsafe and unsporting conduct.

Scenario C4.1.2.E

White Blocker is knocked off balance and grabs hold of Red Blocker’s jersey in an attempt to regain their balance. Red Blocker remains standing, but is significantly slowed by the pulling at their jersey. White Blocker regains their balance.

Outcome: White Blocker is penalized.

Rationale: Assists taken from an opponent, such as whips or braces, are penalizable if they result in some kind of advantage for the initiator or disadvantage for the opponent. White Blocker significantly slowed Red Blocker by using an illegal blocking zone.

Scenario C4.1.2.F

White Pivot attempts to join the other White Blockers but is held back by a wall of Red Blockers. White Pivot wiggles past Red Blocker on the outside line, using their forearms on those Red Blockers to hold themself in bounds.

Outcome: White Pivot is penalized.

Rationale: White Pivot gained superior position to Red Blocker by using their forearms to remain in bounds during an action that would have otherwise taken them out of bounds.

Keep in Mind: The fact that White Pivot’s forearms were used to keep them in bounds is not why this warrants a penalty; rather, it was that maintaining in bounds status resulted in a gain of position.

Scenario C4.1.2.G

Red Jammer has passed all but the foremost White Blocker. White Blocker faces clockwise with their arms outstretched and initiates a block against Red Jammer with the entirety of their arm: upper, elbow, and forearm. Red Jammer is not knocked down, but they are brought to a stop.

Outcome: White Blocker is penalized.

Rationale: Though Red Jammer did not lose position, their progress was significantly impeded by illegal blocking zones.

Keep in Mind: If White Blocker had dropped their forearm and elbow as soon as contact was made, no penalty should be called. It was the prolonged impact of the forearm and elbow that made the action penalizable.

4.1.3. Other Illegal Contact

Initiating a block is legal when a Skater is moving counterclockwise, in play, upright, and in bounds during a Jam using legal contact zones.

—Origin: Section 4.1.3

Scenario C4.1.3.A

White Pivot stands still on their toe stops and initiates a block against Red Jammer. Red Jammer does not fall, but is brought to a stop. Red Jammer counter-blocks, but White Pivot continues to block while on their toe stops and Red Jammer is unable to get past.

Outcome: White Pivot is penalized.

Rationale: If Red Jammer loses position or has their momentum or trajectory severely affected by a block initiated in an unexpected way, the initiator should receive a penalty. In this example, if White Pivot had not maintained their stopped block but instead returned to counterclockwise skating, allowing Red Jammer to maintain part of their momentum, it would not have resulted in a penalty.

Scenario C4.1.3.B

Red Blocker uses a legal blocking zone to initiate a block to a legal target zone of White Blocker. White Blocker is pushed until one skate is in bounds and one skate is out of bounds. Red Blocker continues to block until White Blocker is fully out of bounds. Red Blocker re-initiates a new block that knocks White Blocker down.

Outcome: Red Blocker is penalized.

Rationale: A Skater should not expect to be blocked while out of bounds. It is only legal to block a Skater who is in bounds or straddling. The additional new block is what warrants the penalty.

Scenario C4.1.3.C

Red Blocker is knocked out of bounds and recycled to the rear of the Pack. They accelerate and move in bounds, directly into White Blocker, who falls.

Outcome: Red Blocker is penalized.

Rationale: Even if the target and blocking zones were legal and both Skaters were in bounds, Red Blocker gained an unexpected advantage by accelerating while out of bounds into the block. White Blocker should not expect to be blocked by an out of bounds opponent.

Scenario C4.1.3.D

Red Blocker is knocked out of bounds by White Blocker, who also goes out of bounds, leaving an opening on the inside line. The out of bounds Red Blocker grabs the in bounds Red Jammer by the hips and pushes them past the in bounds White Blockers.

Outcome: Red Blocker is penalized.

Rationale: The threshold for penalization of assists follows similar metrics to blocks. They cannot come from a place where one’s opponent would not expect an assist to happen, such as out of bounds, while down, or while stopped. Because the Red Blocker could not legally be blocked, it would also be illegal to prevent the assist, giving Red Blocker another unfair advantage.

Scenario C4.1.3.E

White Blocker, having lined up just in front of the Jammer Line, is hit by Red Blocker attempting to take the same space. White Blocker falls out of bounds before the Jam-Starting Whistle.

Outcome: Red Blocker is penalized for blocking before the Jam started. White Blocker is allowed to participate in this Jam.

Rationale: It is illegal to block before a Jam has begun. Because White Blocker was not in the correct position due to an opponent’s illegal action, they can return to the track.

Keep in Mind: Should White Blocker be blocked into a false starting position rather than out of bounds, White Blocker is allowed to participate as usual in the Jam (without the need to yield) and Red Blocker still receives a penalty for blocking before the Jam started.

Scenario C4.1.3.F

White Blocker initiates a hit on Red Jammer during the Jam-Ending Signal. Red Jammer stumbles significantly off balance after the Jam-Ending Signal.

Outcome: White Blocker initiated legally before the end of the Jam. No penalty.

Rationale: It is illegal to block after a Jam has ended. It is, however, legal to initiate during the Jam-Ending Signal, even if the outcome happens once the Jam has ended.

Keep in Mind: Should that same hit start after the Jam-Ending Signal, Red Jammer need not fall nor be knocked out of bounds. Being hit significantly off balance after the Jam-Ending Signal is sufficient to penalize the initiator of that hit.

Scenario C4.1.3.G

Red Jammer is 18 ft (5.48m) ahead of the Pack alongside White Pivot. They continue to skate, and an Official gives an Out of Play warning to White Pivot. White Pivot continues to skate alongside Red Jammer, and then blocks Red Jammer, making hip-to-hip contact. Red Jammer counter-blocks White Pivot. White Pivot falls as a result.

Outcome: White Pivot is penalized. Red Jammer is not.

Rationale: White Pivot received an Out of Play warning and failed to immediately attempt to return to the Engagement Zone; rather, they continued to block Red Jammer. Skaters who are illegally blocked while out of play may legally counter-block, so Red Jammer’s actions do not warrant a penalty.

Keep in Mind: If Red Jammer’s action was not a counter-block, but instead a separate and distinct initiation of a block, Red Jammer should be penalized as White Pivot falling is enough impact to warrant a penalty for illegal contact.

4.1.4. Multiplayer Blocks

Skaters may not form a wall by linking with or grasping a teammate, or otherwise forming an impenetrable connection.

—Origin: Section 4.1.4

Scenario C4.1.4.A

Red Blockers form a three-person wall, separating White Pivot from the other White Blockers. The middle Red Blocker hooks arms with the outside Red Blocker. White Pivot initiates a block against the middle and outside Red Blockers, attempting to drive between the two Skaters, but fails to make any progress. All Blockers remain upright.

Outcome: The middle Red Blocker was most responsible for hooking arms and should receive a penalty.

Rationale: The middle and outside Red Blockers gained an advantage by creating a link that White Pivot cannot break. Once White Pivot challenged that link, their action became worthy of a penalty.

Keep in Mind: If it cannot be determined who initiated the link, then the Skater closest to the Referee calling the penalty should be penalized.

Keep in Mind: If the middle Red Blocker had also been hooked to the inside Red Blocker, no additional penalty would be warranted because White Pivot did not attempt to get between those two linked opponents.

4.2. Game Structure Penalties

4.2.1. Illegal Positioning

When a Pack cannot be defined, all Blockers are unable to block.

—Origin: Section 4.2.1

Scenario C4.2.1.A

Red Pivot is the only Red Blocker on track. White Pivot forces Red Pivot out of bounds.

Outcome: Officials declare a No Pack situation. No penalty.

Rationale: The destruction of the Pack occurred as a result of normal gameplay. It should not be considered an illegal Pack destruction.

Scenario C4.2.1.B

Red Pivot is the only Red Blocker on the track. Red Pivot attempts to block White Jammer as they pass. Red Pivot misses, and ends up out of bounds.

Outcome: Officials declare a No Pack situation. No penalty.

Rationale: The destruction of the Pack occurred as a result of normal gameplay. It should not be considered an illegal Pack destruction.

Scenario C4.2.1.C

Red Pivot is the only Red Blocker on the track. Red Pivot intentionally skates out of bounds.

Outcome: Officials declare a No Pack situation. Red Pivot is instructed to remain on the track, and is penalized.

Rationale: Red Pivot’s illegal action (stepping out of bounds) destroyed the Pack. Red Pivot is the final remaining Red Blocker, and must remain on the track so that a Pack can be formed.

Scenario C4.2.1.D

Red Pivot is being blocked by White Pivot and White Blocker. White Pivot forces Red Pivot out of bounds, and Officials declare a No Pack situation. White Pivot and White Blocker immediately skate ahead of Red Pivot, who is now behind all other Blockers. Red Pivot still does not return to the track. As a result, the Pack is unable to be reformed.

Outcome: Red Pivot is penalized and instructed to return to and remain on the track until another Red Blocker returns to the Pack.

Rationale: Red Pivot was able to legally re-enter the track once all other Blockers were ahead of them. Red Pivot is not required to return to the track until they can legally do so, and is not required to skate clockwise in order to find a legal re-entry point. In this scenario, however, Red Pivot had a legal opportunity because all other Blockers were ahead of them. Further, Red Pivot did not heed the warning from the Officials, and thus should be penalized for preventing a Pack from reforming. As Red Pivot is the final remaining Red Blocker, they must remain on the track so that a Pack can be formed.

Keep in Mind: If White Pivot or White Blocker had not skated forward, one or both of them would have been penalized instead of Red Pivot for preventing a Pack from reforming by forcing the only Opposing Blocker to remain out of bounds.

Scenario C4.2.1.E

Red Pivot is skating 9 ft (2.74m) behind the White Blockers and 9 ft (2.74m) ahead of the other Red Blockers. Their kneepad slips down their leg, and is no longer protecting their knee. Red Pivot takes themself off the track in order to adjust their equipment, creating a No Pack situation.

Outcome: Officials declare a No Pack situation. No penalty.

Rationale: Although Red Pivot’s actions directly caused a No Pack situation, it was in order to resolve a safety issue. Skaters should not be penalized for rectifying a safety issue.

Scenario C4.2.1.F

White Jammer removes their helmet cover and attempts to hand it to White Pivot. During this process, the Star falls, touching out of bounds. White Jammer leaves the track to retrieve the helmet cover.

Outcome: No penalty.

Rationale: The Jammer and the Pivot may leave the track of their own accord to retrieve a helmet cover that has fallen at least partially out of bounds. Not allowing them to do so would leave them unable to recover the helmet cover.

Scenario C4.2.1.G

White Jammer attempts an apex jump and fails to land in bounds. They land fully out of bounds, enter behind all Blockers, and continue to skate.

Outcome: No penalty.

Rationale: White Jammer did not have an intention of removing themselves from gameplay.

Keep in Mind: Should White Jammer successfully make the apex jump but still remove themselves due to the belief that they did not complete it successfully, no penalty would be applicable.

Scenario C4.2.1.H

White Jammer is calling off the Jam. They skate out of bounds during the Jam-Ending Whistles.

Outcome: No penalty.

Rationale: Skating out of bounds during the four whistles of a Jam call-off does not allow a Skater to score additional points nor gain meaningful advantage over any other Skater.

Scenario C4.2.1.I

Immediately after the Jam-Starting Whistle, all Red Blockers remain stationary. All White Blockers skate counterclockwise, resulting in more than 10 ft (3.05m) between any White Blocker and Red Blocker.

Outcome: Officials declare a No Pack situation. No penalty. Officials assess penalties for failing to reform a Pack, as warranted.

Rationale: Destroying the Pack penalties are issued when Skaters illegally create a No Pack situation. For a penalty to be issued, one team or Skater must be clearly at fault for the Pack’s destruction. Usually, this will be the team or Skater who changes their speed from the established speed of the Pack. In this scenario, neither team’s speed has changed: Red team remained stationary, while White team skated counterclockwise when the Jam started. As there has been no speed change, neither team is clearly at fault for the Pack’s destruction. No penalty is warranted.

Keep in Mind: The same principle would apply even if the White team skated clockwise at the start of the Jam.

Scenario C4.2.1.J

White Blockers form a four-person wall, blocking Red Jammer at the rear of the Pack when “No Pack” is declared. One White Blocker skates forward to reform the Pack but does not do so for several seconds. The remaining three White Blockers continue to actively block Red Jammer before the Pack is declared reformed.

Outcome: One of the White Blockers who was actively blocking Red Jammer should be penalized.

Rationale: All Blockers are obligated to attempt to reform the Pack, not just those who choose to do so. Continued blocking during a No Pack situation is considered a failure to attempt to reform the Pack.

Keep in Mind: If the Pack had been reformed immediately, no penalty should be issued.

Keep in Mind: If all the White Blockers had been accelerating in an attempt to reform the Pack, no penalty should be issued, even if they did so while maintaining their wall and holding Red Jammer back.

Scenario C4.2.1.K

Red Jammer passes all members of the Pack except for White Pivot, who forces Red Jammer out of bounds to the outside of the track. While Red Jammer is out of bounds, the Pack skates counterclockwise ahead of Red Jammer. Red Jammer takes several skating strides while out of bounds, counterclockwise, to maintain their position ahead of the Pack and behind White Pivot, before returning in bounds.

Outcome: Red Jammer is penalized.

Rationale: Skaters are not allowed to accelerate or maintain speed while out of bounds, unless they are doing so to hasten their return to the track or entry to the penalty box.

Keep in Mind: Accelerating or maintaining speed while out of bounds in the clockwise direction should not be penalized, as it does not allow the out of bounds Skater to maintain their position relative to in bounds Skaters.

4.2.2. Gaining Position

It is illegal for a Skater to use the out of bounds area to gain position on someone who is upright and in bounds.

If a Skater is put out of bounds due to an opponent’s block, the Skater must return in bounds behind that opponent, even if the Skater was in front of the opponent before being blocked.

—Origin: Section 4.2.2

Scenario C4.2.2.A

White Pivot and White Blocker are ahead of Red Pivot. Red Pivot is forced out of bounds by White Pivot. White Blocker skates clockwise behind both Skaters. Red Pivot re-enters the track behind White Pivot and ahead of White Blocker.

Outcome: Red Pivot is penalized.

Rationale: White Blocker had superior position when Red Pivot went out of bounds. Red Pivot is required to re-enter behind both White Pivot and White Blocker.

Scenario C4.2.2.B

White Pivot and White Blocker are ahead of Red Pivot when “No Pack” is declared. Red Pivot is forced out of bounds by White Pivot. White Blocker skates clockwise behind both Skaters. Red Pivot re-enters the track behind White Pivot and ahead of White Blocker.

Outcome: White Pivot and Red Pivot are both penalized.

Rationale: White Pivot is penalized because they executed a block while out of play (due to there not being a Pack). Accordingly, Red Pivot was not required to re-enter behind White Pivot. Even though there is no Pack, however, White Blocker still had superior position when Red Pivot went out of bounds. Red Pivot still must enter behind White Blocker.

Keep in Mind: If White Blocker were more than 20 ft (6.10m) from the last existing Pack, Red Pivot should not have been penalized.

Scenario C4.2.2.C

White Pivot and White Blocker are ahead of Red Pivot. Red Pivot is forced out of bounds by White Pivot. White Blocker skates clockwise behind both Skaters. White Blocker loses their balance, takes a knee, and returns upright. Red Pivot re-enters the track behind White Pivot and ahead of White Blocker.

Outcome: Red Pivot is penalized.

Rationale: Although White Blocker lost their superior position briefly while down, they returned upright before Red Pivot re-entered. White Blocker was not the initiator of the block that forced Red Pivot out of bounds, and thus is able to re-establish their superior position.

Scenario C4.2.2.D

Red Blocker blocks White Jammer out of bounds to the outside just as White Blocker blocks Red Jammer out of bounds to the inside. Both Blockers were ahead of both Jammers before the blocks, and race clockwise to pull their opposing Jammers to the rear of the Pack. White Jammer returns behind all opponents, but Red Jammer returns behind White Blocker but ahead of Red Blocker.

Outcome: No penalty.

Rationale: Cutting one single teammate does not have enough impact to warrant a penalty.

Keep in Mind: Cutting more than one teammate should be penalized.

Scenario C4.2.2.E

Red Pivot is forced out of bounds by White Pivot. White Blocker, who is behind both Pivots, skates counterclockwise past both Pivots, and then clockwise to their previous position. Red Pivot re-enters the track behind White Pivot and ahead of White Blocker.

Outcome: No penalty.

Rationale: At the time Red Pivot went out of bounds, White Blocker did not have superior position. Red Pivot is only required to re-enter behind White Pivot.

Scenario C4.2.2.F

White Pivot is in bounds but down. Red Pivot dodges White Pivot, ending up out of bounds. White Pivot returns to an upright position. Red Pivot re-enters the track ahead of White Pivot.

Outcome: No penalty.

Rationale: Downed Skaters do not have superior position to out of bounds Skaters.

Scenario C4.2.2.G

White Pivot and White Blocker are ahead of Red Pivot. White Blocker forces Red Pivot out of bounds illegally and receives a penalty. As White Blocker leaves the track, they accidentally clip the skates of their teammate, White Pivot, who falls. Red Pivot re-enters the track ahead of both Skaters.

Outcome: No penalty.

Rationale: White Pivot was down when Red Pivot re-entered the track, and did not have superior position.

Scenario C4.2.2.H

White Pivot, White Blocker, and Red Jammer are 18 ft (5.48m) ahead of a stopped Pack. Red Jammer is blocked out of bounds by White Pivot. White Pivot and White Blocker roll forward, and both are given an Out of Play warning. White Pivot and White Blocker skate clockwise back to the Pack. Red Jammer re-enters the track ahead of both Skaters.

Outcome: Red Jammer is penalized.

Rationale: White Pivot, as initiator of the block, lost their superior position on Red Jammer by leaving the Engagement Zone. Although White Blocker lost their superior position briefly by going out of play, they regained it by returning to the Engagement Zone before Red Jammer re-entered. White Blocker was not the initiator of the block that forced Red Jammer out of bounds, and thus is able to re-establish their superior position.

Scenario C4.2.2.I

White Pivot, White Blocker, and Red Jammer are 18 ft (5.48m) ahead of a stopped Pack. White Blocker skates forward and is given an Out of Play warning as White Pivot blocks Red Jammer out of bounds. White Blocker skates clockwise back to the Pack. Red Jammer re-enters the track ahead of White Blocker and behind White Pivot.

Outcome: No penalty.

Rationale: White Blocker was out of play when Red Jammer went out of bounds, and thus did not have superior position.

Scenario C4.2.2.J

Red Pivot blocks White Jammer to the inside and forward, across the apex. White Jammer returns fully in bounds with both skates for a moment, and then immediately leaves the track.

Outcome: No penalty.

Rationale: White Jammer did not meaningfully gain position on anybody because they immediately left the track.

Keep in Mind: If White Jammer had not immediately left the track, White Jammer should be penalized.

Scenario C4.2.2.K

Red Jammer is on their second trip through the Pack, having passed no White Blockers. Before Red Jammer can pass any opponent, White Pivot, who skates forward quickly, forces Red Jammer out of bounds across the apex. Red Jammer, while down, slides back in behind White Pivot. White Blocker skates clockwise behind Red Jammer. Red Jammer stands, completely in bounds and starts skating forward.

Outcome: Red Jammer is penalized.

Rationale: Skaters cannot re-establish their position on the track while down. Despite being completely in bounds, the downed Red Jammer did not re-establish their in bounds position until they were upright and not immediately exiting the track. White Blocker had superior position to Red Jammer when Red Jammer left the track, so Red Jammer cannot gain superior position due to their out of bounds status.

Scenario C4.2.2.L

Immediately after the start of the Jam, White Jammer blocks Red Jammer out of bounds. The Pack remains stopped while White Jammer skates clockwise around the track. Red Jammer remains out of bounds. White Jammer approaches the front of the Pack and legally passes the Star to White Pivot. Red Jammer re-enters the track behind the Pack, and ahead of both the new and former White Jammers.

Outcome: No penalty.

Rationale: When out of bounds, Skaters must re-enter the track without improving their position relative to other Skaters. Because the new White Jammer did not earn position on Red Jammer, Red Jammer did not need to re-enter behind the new White Jammer. The former White Jammer, by virtue of having become a Blocker, is considered to be far ahead of Red Jammer (just like all the other Blockers).

Scenario C4.2.2.M

Red Jammer passes all members of the Pack except for White Pivot, who forces Red Jammer out of bounds on the inside of the track. While Red Jammer is out of bounds, White Pivot skates clockwise behind the stopped Pack and past Red Jammer. Red Jammer takes several skating strides while out of bounds, counterclockwise, but re-enters the track ahead of the Engagement Zone.

Outcome: No penalty.

Rationale: When out of bounds on the inside of the track, Skaters may skate in any direction to return to the track. By re-entering the track ahead of the Engagement Zone, rather than being penalized, Red Jammer is considered to be entering the rear of the Engagement Zone, behind the Pack and White Pivot.

4.2.3. Interfering with the Flow of the Game

All efforts should be made by teams and Officials to ensure that the period clock runs according to the rules of the game, and that Jams start and end as specified in the rules.

—Origin: Section 4.2.3

Scenario C4.2.3.A

White Pivot is issued a penalty, leaves the track, and reports to the Penalty Box. The Penalty Box is full at this time, and White Pivot is waved back onto the track. Just as White Pivot returns to the Pack, the Jam is called off. White Pivot returns to their team bench.

Outcome: Officials should attempt to warn White Pivot that White Pivot is in queue for a penalty. If they are not successful, when 30 seconds have passed since the end of the previous Jam, Officials must call an Official Timeout instead of starting the next Jam. White Pivot should be penalized.

Rationale: White Pivot is in queue to serve their penalty, and must be on the track so they can serve their penalty during the next Jam.

Scenario C4.2.3.B

Officials give Skaters a five-second warning before the start of the next Jam. White team finishes their discussion, and five White Skaters approach the track. All are out of bounds or straddling as the lineup time expires.

Outcome: Instead of starting the next Jam, at that moment, the Officials must call an Official Timeout. White Captain is penalized.

Rationale: White team’s failure to field any Skaters in correct position prevented the Jam from starting in a timely manner, thus stopping the period clock illegally.

Scenario C4.2.3.C

Officials give Skaters a five-second warning before the start of the next Jam. White team finishes their discussion, and five White Skaters approach the track. All are in bounds, but ahead of the Pivot Line as the lineup time expires.

Outcome: Instead of starting the next Jam, at that moment, the Officials must call an Official Timeout instead of starting the next Jam. White Captain is penalized.

Rationale: White team’s failure to field any Blockers in the correct position prevented the Jam from starting in a timely manner.

Scenario C4.2.3.D

As the lineup time expires, White team has four Blockers correctly positioned, but White Jammer is still out of bounds.

Outcome: Instead of starting the next Jam, at that moment, the Officials must call an Official Timeout. White Captain is penalized.

Rationale: White team’s failure to field a Jammer in the correct position prevented the Jam from starting in a timely manner.

Keep in Mind: If Red Jammer, too, had been out of bounds, both Captains would have received a penalty for preventing the Jam from starting in a timely manner.

Keep in Mind: If a White Skater had been correctly positioned as a Jammer but did not possess a visible Star, they are not the Jammer. Assuming the White team does not have a Jammer serving a penalty, White’s Captain would similarly receive a penalty for preventing the Jam from starting in a timely fashion.

Scenario C4.2.3.E

White team has used three Team Timeouts during the game. White Captain calls for a Team Timeout. Officials, mistakenly believing that White team has timeouts remaining, grants the request.

Outcome: If White team has an Official Review remaining, they should be considered to have used it as a timeout. If not, White Captain is penalized and the next Jam is started as soon as possible, but at least 30 seconds after the end of the previous Jam.

Rationale: White Captain’s successful, but illegal attempt to stop the period clock prevented the next Jam from starting in a timely manner. If White Captain had legal means to prevent the Jam from starting, legal means should be assumed.

Keep in Mind: Officials should deny requests for a Team Timeout if that team has none remaining. No penalty is warranted if an invalid request for a Team Timeout is denied.

Scenario C4.2.3.F

Jam 23 is called off for an injury sustained by White Pivot. The same Skater lines up on the track for the start of Jam 26.

Outcome: Officials should attempt to communicate to the White Skater that they are not allowed to participate. If the Officials fail, when 30 seconds have passed since the end of the previous Jam, Officials must call an Official Timeout instead of starting the next Jam. White Pivot is returned to their team bench to sit out the remaining Jam, as required. White Captain is penalized.

Rationale: The White Skater’s failure to sit out the required number of Jams prevented the next Jam from starting in a timely manner. The White Skater cannot serve the penalty at this time for the same reason, so it is issued to their Captain instead.

Keep in Mind: If Officials believe the White Skater’s injury poses a serious and immediate threat to that Skater or others, Officials should not allow the White Skater to skate no matter how many Jams have elapsed.

Scenario C4.2.3.G

White Pivot (who is neither the Captain nor the Designated Alternate) walks up to an Official and requests a Team Timeout. That Official, mistakenly believing White Pivot is the Captain, grants the request.

Outcome: When the mistake is realized, Officials must call an Official Timeout. White Pivot is penalized. The next Jam is started as soon as possible, but at least 30 seconds after the end of the previous Jam.

Rationale: White Pivot’s successful, but illegal attempt to stop the period clock prevented the next Jam from starting in a timely manner.

Keep in Mind: If the illegal requester is not a Skater, the penalty is issued to the Captain instead. Officials should deny requests for a Team Timeout if the requester is neither a Captain nor an Designated Alternate. No penalty is warranted if an invalid request for a Team Timeout is denied.

Scenario C4.2.3.H

White Pivot (who is neither the Captain nor the Designated Alternate) uses hand signals to communicate with their Captain, asking for a Team Timeout to be called. Officials, mistaking the White Pivot’s hand signals for a legal request, call a Team Timeout.

Outcome: When the mistake is realized, Officials must call an Official Timeout. White Pivot is not issued a penalty. White team is not charged for a Team Timeout. The next Jam is started as soon as possible, but at least 30 seconds after the end of the previous Jam. No penalty.

Rationale: White Pivot was attempting to communicate with their Captain. They were not attempting to request a Team Timeout from the Officials.

4.2.4. Other Illegal Procedures

Skaters who violate the rules of the game should be penalized if the violation has a significant impact on the game.

—Origin: Section 4.2.4

Scenario C4.2.4.A

White Captain is not visibly wearing a “C”. They signal for a Team Timeout to be called.

Outcome: Officials grant the Team Timeout. White Captain is penalized.

Rationale: Despite not visibly wearing an “C”, the Captain retains the privilege of calling a Team Timeout. Officials should grant this request if they have a Team Timeout remaining; however, exercising a privilege of the Captain while not visibly displaying a “C” warrants a penalty.

Keep in Mind: This same principle should also be applied to a Designated Alternate not wearing an “A”. If the Designated Alternate is not a Skater, the penalty is issued to the Captain.

Scenario C4.2.4.B

White Captain calls an Official Review. Officials grant the request. Red Designated Alternate, while not visibly displaying an “A”, conferences with the Head Referee during the Official Review.

Outcome: No penalty.

Rationale: Red Designated Alternate’s failure to visibly display an “A” while conferencing for an Official Review does not meaningfully affect the game, nor warrant a penalty.

Scenario C4.2.4.C

While seated in the Penalty Box, White Blocker removes their mouthguard. They are instructed to stand by a Penalty Box Official and they do so without putting their mouthguard back into their mouth. White Blocker skates to the corner of the Box and is instructed that their penalty is done. They put their mouthguard back into their mouth and return to play.

Outcome: No penalty.

Rationale: Players are allowed to have their mouthguard out while in the Box, regardless of whether they are standing or sitting.

Keep in Mind: If White Blocker leaves the Box without putting their mouthguard back in, even if they put it back in before they return in bounds, this should result in a penalty.

Scenario C4.2.4.D

Red Jammer arrives at the Penalty Box for a penalty, sits, is told to stand 20 seconds later, and stands. They then watch the Scoreboard count down 10 seconds, and leave the Box without being told to do so by an Official.

Outcome: Red Jammer should be penalized if they left the Box even a fraction of a second early.

Rationale: If Red Jammer’s time had completed and they had not been released, this would be an officiating error and Red Jammer should not be punished for it. However, leaving the Box early without good reason should always be penalized.

Keep in Mind: If an Official had told the Red Jammer their time was up, Red Jammer had good reason to leave the Box early.

Scenario C4.2.4.E

White Blocker is seated in the Penalty Box and asks someone on the bench to toss them their water bottle. A teammate on the bench throws a full bottle of water at White Blocker, who catches it just before it strikes a Penalty Box Official in the face.

Outcome: Whoever threw the water bottle should be penalized. If Team Staff threw the bottle, the team’s Captain should be penalized. Officials should warn the White team that throwing things around is dangerous. On a future offense, the thrower of the water bottle should be expelled.

Rationale: This action is unsafe and thus inappropriate.

Keep in Mind: If the water bottle had hit the Official forcibly and unexpectedly, the thrower should be expelled on the first offense.

Scenario C4.2.4.F

White Blocker, who is seated in the Penalty Box serving a penalty, is talking with their Captain, who is hovering near the Penalty Box boundary. While communicating, said Captain shifts their weight and one skate rolls over the Penalty Box boundary line and back.

Outcome: No penalty.

Rationale: While the Captain is not allowed to enter the Box, this entry was brief and the Captain did not enter fully. Partial entry to the Box is not penalized.

Keep in Mind: If the Captain (or any unpenalized Skater/bench staff) fully enters the Box and communicates with a penalized Skater or interferes with normal Penalty Box operation, they should be assessed a penalty.

Keep in Mind: If the Captain (or any unpenalized Skater/bench staff) had passed through the Box, without interacting with their penalized teammate or interrupting the operation of the Box, no penalty should be assessed even if the Captain (or Skater/bench staff) had fully entered the Box.

4.3. Penalties for Unsporting Conduct (Misconduct)

Unsporting conduct can take many forms. Examples include deceiving or ignoring Officials, engaging in dangerous and illegal actions that pose a real danger to oneself or another, or being abusive toward another person; other unsporting conduct may also be penalized.

—Origin: Section 4.3

Scenario C4.3.A

Red Jammer and White Blocker are in the Penalty Box. Red Jammer stands. After seven seconds, White Blocker suddenly says “Red, [number], done.” Red Jammer, assuming they have been legally released by an Official, exits the Box and begins to return to the track.

Outcome: White Blocker is penalized. Red Jammer is not. Officials should direct Red Jammer to return to the Box and complete their remaining penalty time.

Rationale: White Blocker has imitated an Official’s verbal instruction to try to force a penalty on the opposing Jammer, which is highly unsporting and is penalized as such. Red Jammer left in good faith believing they had been released by the Officials. They should still serve the remainder of their original penalty time.

Scenario C4.3.B

Red Blocker knocks down White Blocker. Red Blocker bends over at the waist, positioning their chest above White Blocker in such a way as to prevent White Blocker from standing.

Outcome: Red Blocker is penalized.

Rationale: Though most positional blocks don’t typically result in a penalty, in this instance, Red Blocker intentionally positionally blocks a downed opponent. White Blocker cannot initiate a block from a downed status and thus cannot re-establish their position without earning a penalty of their own. This is unsporting conduct on the part of Red Blocker.

Scenario C4.3.C

White Blocker intentionally pulls off Red Jammer’s helmet cover.

Outcome: Red Jammer momentarily lost the ability to score or earn Lead Jammer status as a result of White Blocker intentionally removing their Star. White Blocker is expelled from the game.

Rationale: Deliberately removing an opponent’s helmet cover is unsporting behavior of the highest order. It must be penalized by expulsion, regardless of any impact to the Jammer’s head, though intentional contact to an opponent’s head also warrants expulsion.

Scenario C4.3.D

The Jam starts and White Jammer quickly earns Lead. Red Jammer immediately pulls off their Star and tries to pass it over their opponents’ heads to Red Pivot, but is unable to do so. Red Jammer stuffs the Star into their jersey so they don’t have to hold it as they work their way through the Pack.

Outcome: Red Jammer has hidden the Star from their opponents, also hiding the fact that they are their team’s Jammer. Red Jammer is penalized.

Rationale: It is unsporting to attempt to hide your role in the Jam.

Keep in Mind: If Red Jammer had held onto the Star instead of hiding it in their jersey, no penalty would be issued because they would still be visibly in control of the Star.

Scenario C4.3.E

Having been released from the Penalty Box, White Blocker heads back to the track, using a forearm to push a Referee out of the way so they can keep the line.

Outcome: White Blocker is expelled from the game.

Rationale: Intentional or negligent contact to Officials is unsporting, as it renders the Official unable to keep their attention on the game. Contact to an Official who does not expect it or to an Official who is not wearing safety equipment is also unsafe.

Keep in Mind: Skaters and Officials routinely collide during the course of normal gameplay. This is usually unintentional and unavoidable, in which case it should not be penalized.

Scenario C4.3.F

White Blocker is assessed a penalty and swears.

Outcome: Profane, abusive, and obscene language is unsporting and degrading to the sport, but should not always be penalized. If said language was audible to the audience or via broadcast, White Blocker is penalized. If White Blocker’s profanity was directed at an Official, White Blocker is penalized. Otherwise, a few choice words directed at a teammate or opponent should result in a warning and be penalized if the behavior continues.

Rationale: As a competitive, physical sport, roller derby can raise Skaters’ adrenaline and cause tempers to flare; some discretion is in order. Audible offensive language degrades the sport, and abusive language directed at Officials is disrespectful and insubordinate. Abusive language regarding Officials should be considered to be directed at the Officials as a group, and should be penalized if audible to any Official.

Keep in Mind: Any language that is profane, or obscene should be held to a similar standard.

Keep in Mind: A Skater who utters a string of profanity or appears to have completely lost their temper should be expelled regardless of whether it is directed at anybody.

Keep in Mind: Discretion is in order to determine whether the language is degrading to the sport or others. A Skater who is cursing for some reason unrelated to gameplay, such as cursing while crying due to a painful injury, should not necessarily be penalized.

Scenario C4.3.G

Red Blocker is crouched with one hand on the track. White Blocker intentionally falls on top of Red Blocker, targeting a legal target zone.

Outcome: White Blocker is expelled from the game for Misconduct.

Rationale: Falling onto an opponent is extremely dangerous and is an extraordinary physical threat to Red Blocker. Even though White Blocker was attempting to initiate into a legal target zone, intentionally falling onto an opponent is unsporting conduct.

Keep in Mind: A Skater who is crouched with one hand on the floor does not count as down.

Keep in Mind: Skaters accidentally falling on each other due to natural gameplay is not unsporting conduct

Scenario C4.3.H

White Blocker is standing in a wall alongside their teammates. Red Jammer, while attempting to pass White Blocker, jumps and unintentionally makes contact with their chest into White Blocker’s shoulder. Red Jammer is completely airborne when the contact is made. White Blocker does not fall, but is pushed forward out of the wall.

Outcome: Red Jammer is penalized.

Rationale: Initiating a block while airborne is dangerous play. White Blocker has lost their established position in the wall due to Red Jammer’s illegal contact.

Keep in Mind: Non-forceful and unintentional contact initiated by an airborne Skater (for example, brushing of shoulders during an apex jump) should only be penalized if there is significant impact on the recipient.

Keep in Mind: Skaters may initiate a block on an airborne opponent, if that opponent was a legal target prior to becoming airborne.

Scenario C4.3.I

White Blocker is standing in a wall alongside their teammates. Red Jammer jumps at White Blocker, making forceful contact while airborne. Red Jammer had no reasonable expectation of landing in a legal manner. White Blocker, however, remains upright.

Outcome: Red Jammer should be considered for expulsion.

Rationale: Initiating a block while airborne is dangerous play. A flagrant violation of this rule poses a safety hazard to White Blocker. An expulsion would be warranted if the action was judged to be negligent, intentional, or reckless, regardless of whether White Blocker lost position.

Scenario C4.3.J

A Governing Body policy limits the number of bench staff allowed on the bench. Red team has the maximum allowed support staff on the bench; however, in between Jams, an additional support staff runs into the bench area and communicates with the Designated Alternate.

Outcome: A penalty for unsporting conduct is issued to the Red Captain, and the extra support staff is removed from the bench.

Rationale: Both teams agreed to play the game under the Governing Body policy. Violating agreed-upon terms is unsporting and should be penalized.

Keep in Mind: Policies may neither change nor override the published rules. In addition, policies also may not directly impact gameplay. Issues that are identified and resolved prior to the beginning of the game should not result in the assessment of penalties.

4.4. Enforcing Penalties

Rules Section 4.4

Scenario C4.4.A

White Pivot arrives at the Penalty Box between Jams. They call to their coach and signal that they are injured. The coach sends a new Skater to the Box. White Pivot gives the new Skater the Stripe and returns to the bench.

Outcome: White Pivot’s penalty time is served by the substitute. White Pivot may not skate in the following three Jams.

Rationale: Skaters may remove themself from play when injured. A substitute may serve penalty time for an injured Skater, but the injured Skater may not participate in the next three Jams and the substituting Skater must fill the same position the injured Skater filled.

Follow-Up: If White Pivot were not injured but had broken their skate or equipment, and thus could not skate in the upcoming Jam, a substitute would also be allowed. White Pivot would similarly not be allowed to skate during the following three Jams.

Scenario C4.4.B

Red Jammer is skating at the front of the Pack, close to the inside track boundary, when they are assessed a penalty. Red Jammer takes themselves out of bounds to the inside of the track, and pauses to allow the Pack to skate past them. When their path is clear, Red Jammer skates across to the outside of the track, and then continues around toward the Penalty Box.

Outcome: No additional penalty.

Rationale: Red Jammer momentarily entered the infield in order to remove themselves from play. At the first safe and legal opportunity, they left the track to the outside without significantly reducing the distance they needed to skate to reach the Penalty Box. No additional penalty is warranted.

Keep in Mind: Skaters remain liable for additional penalties related to safety and must not interfere with Officials performing their duties.

Scenario C4.4.C

Red Pivot is skating along the straightaway opposite the Pivot and Jammer lines, close to the inside track boundary. They are assessed a penalty and take themselves out of bounds to the inside of the track. Red Pivot then skates across the infield and the straightaway with the Pivot and Jammer lines to enter the Penalty Box.

Outcome: Red Pivot is assessed an additional penalty.

Rationale: In this scenario, the Penalty Box is located on the outside of the track; hence, Red Pivot was required to leave the track to the outside from where they were assessed their penalty. Skating across the infield has significantly reduced the distance they needed to skate to reach the Penalty Box.

4.4.1. Penalty Enforcement for Blockers

Skaters serve 30 seconds of Jam time for each penalty assessed to them.

—Origin: Section 4.4

Scenario C4.4.1.A

White Blocker arrives at the Penalty Box and is instructed by a Penalty Box Official to sit in the right-most seat. White Blocker sits in the left-most seat.

Outcome: The Penalty Box Official should begin timing the penalty then ask White Blocker to move to the preferred seat.

Rationale: Penalty time begins as soon as the penalized Skater is seated in the Penalty Box. Timing does not stop while they move seats.

Scenario C4.4.1.B

Red Pivot stands in the Penalty Box. The dimensions of the Box are not very deep and their skates already touch the line. Two Red Blockers enter the Box together. Red Pivot attempts to give them room to sit, and in doing so, their skates fully move out of the Penalty Box boundary. They immediately return inside the boundary.

Outcome: No penalty.

Rationale: Though Skaters are not allowed to leave the Box early, the mitigating circumstances of this example make the impact to the game negligible. Red Pivot was not attempting to gain some kind of illegal advantage or negligently exiting illegally, but was constrained by the shape of the Penalty Box.

4.4.2. Penalty Enforcement for Jammers

A Jammer may have their penalty time shortened if the other Jammer also receives a penalty.

—Origin: Section 4.4.2

Scenario C4.4.2.A

White Jammer receives a penalty, reports to the Penalty Box, and is seated. They serve 25 seconds of their penalty when Red Jammer arrives and sits to serve their own penalty. White Jammer is released, thus consigning the Red Jammer to serve 25 seconds. White Jammer returns to the track illegally, and is back in the Box 10 seconds after their prior release to serve their second penalty. Red Jammer leaves the Box.

Outcome: Red Jammer is penalized for leaving the Box 15 seconds early. White Jammer owes 30 seconds from the time they are seated.

Rationale: To serve the same amount of time “per penalty”, Red Jammer must serve all 25 seconds that White Jammer served initially. In other words, White Jammer sitting for an unrelated penalty does not affect the time that Red Jammer owed.

Keep in Mind: Red Jammer owes 45 more seconds: 15 from their first penalty, and 30 from their next penalty.

Keep in Mind: Red Jammer’s second penalty could reduce the time White Jammer owes for their own second penalty, but the 15 seconds from Red Jammer’s first penalty cannot be reduced.

Scenario C4.4.2.B

White Jammer arrives at the Penalty Box immediately behind Red Jammer. Both attempt to be the first one seated, and in so doing, they sit at the exact same moment.

Outcome: The Penalty Box Official should inform both Jammers that their time is complete and release them from the Box.

Rationale: When sitting simultaneously in the Box, or when arriving between Jams, Jammers cancel each other’s penalties. Both should be immediately released.

Keep in Mind: If there is any time differential at all between Jammers sitting, it is not considered to be simultaneous.

Keep in Mind: If both Jammers sit between Jams, they are considered to have sat simultaneously and must be released immediately at the beginning of the following Jam.

Scenario C4.4.2.C

Red Jammer is seated in the Penalty Box and has served 15 seconds when the Jam ends. White Jammer receives a penalty at the Jam-Ending Whistle and reports to the Box between Jams.

Outcome: White Jammer reported to the Box between Jams, which will end Red Jammer’s penalty at the start of the next Jam. A Penalty Box Official must instruct Red Jammer to stand and inform them their penalty time is done at the Jam-Starting Whistle. White Jammer must serve 15 seconds.

Rationale: Though White Jammer’s penalty ended Red Jammer’s penalty early, Red Jammer must still begin the next Jam from the Box. Penalties are only timed while Jams are active; as such, Jammer swaps only happen while a Jam is ongoing.

Scenario C4.4.2.D

White Jammer receives a penalty and sits in the Penalty Box for 15 seconds. Red Jammer receives a penalty and arrives at the Box, but before they sit, White Jammer leaves. Red Jammer sits. White Jammer is issued a penalty for leaving early and returns to the Box. White Jammer sits and Red Jammer is released.

Outcome: White Jammer is penalized for leaving the Box early. Red Jammer sat in the Box when no other Jammer was serving time. Red Jammer is released upon White Jammer’s return. White Jammer serves the time remaining from their first penalty, plus the amount of time Red Jammer served while seated in the Box.

Rationale: A Jammer serving time in the Box is only released by another Jammer being seated in the Box to serve a penalty. Even though White Jammer was penalized first, they were not present when Red Jammer sat. Thus, Red Jammer was the “Jammer serving time in the Box” who was released by the White Jammer “being seated in the Box to serve a penalty.”

Keep in Mind: Each penalty is a 30-second segment that may be shortened as long as the Jammers serve equivalent time.

4.5. Fouling Out and Expulsions

Expulsions are a way to penalize a Skater or Team Staff who has committed an act that is sufficiently dangerous or unsporting as to remove the individual from the game for that action alone.

—Origin: Section 4.5

Scenario C4.5.A

While in bounds and in play, White Blocker initiates an extremely forceful block with a legal blocking zone to a legal target zone on Red Blocker. Red Blocker is knocked airborne, crashes to the track, and remains still until the Jam is called for injury. Red Captain calls an Official Review and requests that White Blocker be expelled for an egregious hit.

Outcome: No penalty.

Rationale: The rules dictate the manner in which Skaters may block and White Blocker met all those standards. A Skater may not be expelled for legal play.

Scenario C4.5.B

Red Jammer races to the Penalty Box to serve their penalty. They shout, “I can’t stop!” and crash into the Box. The chairs are knocked backward into a Penalty Box Official. Red Jammer apologizes but complains about how dirty the floor is in front of the Box.

Outcome: Red Jammer is expelled.

Rationale: Unsafe play in respect to Officials, especially those not wearing safety equipment, is held to a different standard than unsafe play in respect to other Skaters. It is incumbent on the Skater to enter the Box in a safe manner, not on the Official to avoid impact.

Keep in Mind: If an Official is unable to avoid the impact because of the constraints of the venue, this still represents unsafe play (due to the constraints of the venue). The Skater must be aware of their track environments, including any limitations of space in the Box. Mitigating environmental factors that aren’t expected to be present, such as water on the track, can be taken into consideration when deciding whether to expel the Skater.

Keep in Mind: Skaters are expected to be in control of themself and their bodies at all times, not just upon entry to the Box. However, opponents, teammates, Team Staff, and Officials in close proximity to the track during active gameplay also bear some responsibility for avoiding contact with Skaters. Contact made to individuals or equipment in areas of active gameplay should only be penalized if the contact is forceful and reasonably avoidable.