Dear W.F.T.D.A Rules Committee

3.0 rules are being enforced incorrectly and there should be an immediate recommendation posted regarding a change to the following:
(And I've got a suggestion on how to fix it...read on.)

• 6.2.10.4 A skater improving her position by re-entering the pack from out-of-bounds in front of multiple skaters.
• 6.2.10.5 A skater improving her position by re-entering the pack from out-of-bounds in front of the foremost opposing Blocker.

Why did we make this rule? To stop players from intentionally cutting the track--taking a minor when their cut had a major impact on the game. We wanted to stop that, and and this rule did but with some serious unintended game-changing consequences. Players are now focusing on forcing major fouls. Its the only rule that gives potential power to the opposing team to actually draw MAJORS on their opposing team. And a major on a jammer has a WAY BIGGER impact on the game than a track cut around the last player. Not to mention the insane can of worms regarding how to fairly call and when to fairly call this major.

The Way It's Called Now
The way it is being called now is : 'at the moment the players are past or the track is cut..',: which has been clearly (currently) defined as EXACTLY when ANY part of their body becomes back in-bounds. This has opened up two horrible cans of worms:

1. How and when to call it is being disputed by refs the country over.
2. Teams training on 2001 ways to exploit this rule -- thereby changing the way the game is played. This is not and never should an outcome of a rule change, in my humble opinion. This is only due to the insanely strict way this is being enforced--hit girl out of bounds on the inside HARD and voila! if she doesn't bail onto the ground--MAJOR. Awesome! (no.)
   

THE FIX
There are two different types of cutting:jammer cutting and blocker cutting, and the advantages are gained in slightly different ways at slightly different times but you can call them with the same rule basic rule of thumb-- Call it at the point and advantage is clearly gained. Sprinkle that with a little interpretation of intent and you've got a much simpler-to-call, less exploitable, totally effective rule that helps the game.

Jammer doing the cutting:
How to call it: Call it when they don't yield the advantage. Just like a false start.

Call it a Major: If the jammer doesn't go back and re-pass those player--ie she skates away thinking she just got away with something--whistle and a Major.

Don't call it: If she gets hit out of bounds on an inside corner (probably just to draw the major... ) but then instantly drops her position back behind those skaters and re-passes them in bounds--No Major impact, no Major call.

Blocker doing the cutting:
How to call it: Call it when they don't yield the advantage. Just like a false start.

Call it a Major:If they pass and don't immediately rectify the situation i.e.; drop back out of bounds and re-assume their original position, then that's gaining a major advantage and has a major impact on the game--Major.

Don't call it a major: If they are hit out of bounds and immediately drop back re-establish their original position, no major. They were hit out of bounds.

Why:

1. Make it a bit of a judgment call for the refs--which is actually a GOOD thing. Because then blockers can't count on it being called a major and will shy away from TRYING to draw the foul. If a couple of majors get missed in this fashion is better than extra majors getting called that were unintentional.
   
2. Get's us back to the reason this rule was made: If a skater intentionally cuts the track and gains the advantage they will be sent to the box.
   
3. Less penalties = Better game play
   More penalties just called for the sake of calling them = poor game play and rules-exploitation-based game play.
   

This rule as it's currently being called is not in the spirit of the game.
I love all you refs and rules geeks. Count me among your biggest fans.

XO Kitt.