I think FIRST needs to appoint more refs to each regional

[Leav]

Sorry if this has been discussed before, I looked a bit and couldn't find anything related.


There have many discussions regarding various issues with the game, to mention a few:

Robots causing damage inside the frame perimeter of other robots - Refs either do not notice or do not penalize
Refs missing truss shots
Delayed ref reaction to pedastel not lighting up
Refs occupied with the scoring computer, keeping them from watching the field
Refs occupied with watching for pinning (which definitely requires undivided attention), missing other things in their area.


I'd like to stress that I have the utmost respect for the refs: i'm sure they are doing everything they can, but I do feel like the game is much too frantic for the 5 refs currently trying to get a handle on things.

I propose:
Each regional should have at least 2 more scoring refs, leaving the 4 other refs to handle defense, and the head ref to focus his attention wherever he feels it's needed.
In my mind the scoring ref would be assigned an alliance (red/blue) and would also be looking to make sure the pedestal lit up after a cycle ends.

I think this would help reduce the amount of non addressed issues during the intense matches.


I would love to here everyone's opinion on this, especially from refs/head refs.
Also, is this something the head ref can decide to do on his own or would he have to clear it with HQ first?

[Jon Stratis]

FYI - for week two the number of refs was increased. Instead of the head ref + 4 refs, there was the head ref + 5 refs + an alternate/sub.

Also, a small nitpick... FIRST doesn't appoint refs. They're all volunteers, organized by the head ref and the Volunteer Coordinator.

Part of the problem with increasing the number of refs is the limit on touch panels on the field. There are only 5 available - one for the head ref, and 4 for the other refs. As I understand it, the panels have two screens - one for scoring, and one for fouls. Part of the problem comes in with switching between the screens - you have to take your eyes off the field for a few seconds to get to the right screen and put in the right input.

At LSR, the refs handled it by having two of the positions act as dedicated scorers, and two of them act as dedicated foulers. They called scores and fouls over the radio to each other and recorded them. Frankly, the system seemed to work pretty well.

Another aspect to the problem - if you have a "scoring ref" for blue, he's probably going to be down by the blue goal, and thus unable to easily see the blue pedestal on the other side of the field.

[Richard Wallace]

At LSR, the refs handled it by having two of the positions act as dedicated scorers, and two of them act as dedicated foulers. They called scores and fouls over the radio to each other and recorded them. Frankly, the system seemed to work pretty well.Glad to hear that this worked well at Lone Star. I was thinking about the benefit of having dedicated tablets for scoring and fouls, once while Gary was demonstrating the system for me Thursday evening at Southfield, and again last night while I was taking the referee training & test. There is a lot for referees to follow this year. ::rtm::

[Leav]

...for week two the number of refs was increased...

That's good to know, I didn't know that, 5 may still be one short, but i'm definitely not an expert!

Part of the problem with increasing the number of refs is the limit on touch panels on the field.
...
...
At LSR, the refs handled it by having two of the positions act as dedicated scorers, and two of them act as dedicated foulers...


That's a very neat idea, i'm sure that helps!

Another aspect to the problem - if you have a "scoring ref" for blue, he's probably going to be down by the blue goal, and thus unable to easily see the blue pedestal on the other side of the field.

I imagined him being positioned near the truss actually, but you are right: no position is ideal.
Maybe if he was focused on scoring/pedestal he could afford to look away from the field and maybe even take a couple of steps towards the relevant pedastel?
Also, as far as I could tell some of the problem was when refs hit a button on the touchscreen and for some reason it didn't register: because of the frantic pace the refs would usually try to get back to the game ASAP, assuming the press was registered. A dedicated scoring ref could solve this problem.
Maybe that's what the 5th added for week 2 is supposed to be doing?

-Leav

[Gregor]

The fifth referee didn't get another tablet, they were just another pair of eyes. They stood across from the head referee, at the truss.

[Caleb Sykes]

Glad to hear that this worked well at Lone Star.

Here in Minnesota, LSR = Lake Superior Regional. :)

[GaryVoshol]

FIRST is responding, within the limits imposed by the hardware (tablets). They strongly recommended that volunteer coordinators get additional referees, so there could be the head ref plus 5 refs on the field, and a sub to give breaks to deter burn-out. This differs from the past where events were scolded for having "too many" refs.

[MrRiedemanJACC]

Gary,

That sounds like a great idea. It is a lot for the refs to volunteer their weekends, and there are only soo many to go around. With the extreme growth we've seen in Michigan, they are really going to be worked hard!

[Leav]

FIRST is responding, within the limits imposed by the hardware (tablets). They strongly recommended that volunteer coordinators get additional referees, so there could be the head ref plus 5 refs on the field, and a sub to give breaks to deter burn-out. This differs from the past where events were scolded for having "too many" refs.

Hi Gary,

Do you think more scoring tablets could be added if necessary?

even if FIRST can't add more tablets, It would still help to have more refs, wouldn't it?

-Leav

[GaryVoshol]

They might possibly be able to get more tablets in time for the CMP. (Heck, just appropriate some from fields that aren't being used anymore.) But they'd have to be programmed and tested.

[MrRiedemanJACC]

Ok, so this is a pet peeve of mine, please don't call them tablets. They are not tablets. They are Allen Bradley PanelView Plus 1000 Terminals. The technology is resistive technology, not capacitive technology. Everyone is used to capacitive touch screens (such as a iPad, Nook, most cell phones, etc). These screens are no where near the level of sensitivity as what everyone is used to with their normal devices. These are designed for an industrial application where you may be moving different machines and they don't want to be moved accidentally. Therefore resistive technology is appropriate for that because you need to be sure to move or start a machine. So when they are applied in a situation when a referee is overloaded, they are not going to take the time, nor do they have the time to verify that the push on the screen is actually made. Remember 80% of the time it's a process problem, not a people problem.


Here's the information on the Panel View
http://ab.rockwellautomation.com/Graphic-Terminals/2711P-PanelView-Plus-1000#/tab2

And how it's resistive technology.
http://www.ab.com/en/epub/catalogs/12762/2181376/1239781/1670480/1670482/Legacy-PaneView-Plus-Compact-1000-Terminal.html

[RallyJeff]

Ok, so this is a pet peeve of mine, please don't call them tablets. They are not tablets. They are Allen Bradley PanelView Plus 1000 Terminals.

Even if it's technically incorrect, FIRST has referred to them as "ref tablets" in all their manuals and training materials since they were introduced, so I doubt you'll have much success getting people to call them something else now.

BTW: my pet peeve is when people use the word "podium" to describe a lectern. I'm probably not going to win that battle either. :D

[Richard Wallace]

BTW: my pet peeve is when people use the word "podium" to describe a lectern. I'm probably not going to win that battle either. :D^+1

A podium supports your feet. A lectern supports reading material.

Sometimes a podium also supports a lectern. Sometimes a lectern supports a tablet.

---------

Back to the OP -- yes, more refs. Please.

[Jimmy Nichols]

..Sometimes a lectern supports a tablet.

or an AB Panelview.

These are all donated to them from Rockwell so I'm sure they do not have extras laying around. I do know each HMI has its own program that it runs, so a sixth program would need to be created for a sixth HMI. I do not know the tag structure, so I'm not sure if each system has its own unique tags, if so then the program would need to be updated to add the new HMI in.

[IronicDeadBird]

After seeing a lil' carnage at the Utah regional I came to one conclusion. More people wouldn't help at all what you need is more experienced refs. That being said does anybody know if there is a way that teams willing to host scrimmages could be supplied with a FRC refs hoping to get practice in for next year?

[BBray_T1296]

Dallas went quite smoothly. A couple of resets as some of the field reset crew was confused at first, but it got sorted out over a friday lunch meeting.

Pedestals were quick to respond and had no huge trouble. Fouls were few and far between. Yes the game is rough and possibly some internals were damaged but I was not uncomfortable with the amount of true "damage" that occurred (which was not that much). This game is brutal, the only word to describe it. Robots have to be built robustly or else.

[KrazyCarl92]

Our team had to go the question box 3 times this weekend to talk to refs about triple assists that were only counted as double assists. Luckily, in our case this never affected match outcomes directly, but this is a big deal because it is the first tie breaker in the rankings.

In one eliminations match we won 152-121 thanks to a tech foul committed by the other alliance. Had this tech foul been missed, we would have lost 102-121. However, an obvious (and double checked by match video) triple assist was scored as a double assist, so our alliance was never awarded 20 points we legitimately scored. The score should have been 122-121 disregarding fouls. Boy would that have been frustrating if that tech foul had been missed (consequently another likely scenario brought about by the craziness that is Aerial Assist).

I'm not saying it's the refs fault, but rather it's a system that doesn't allow our volunteers to accurately keep track of the score. What would they do if half of our scored soccer balls were commonly missed in a match of Breakaway? Would they change the system, or simply let us be told you don't get the points after repeatedly going to the question box?

The fact that the refs have to look away from the field to enter possessions to the system and no particular refs are assigned to only scoring the assists gives rise to the issue. We should have 1 ref tracking robot zone-possession pairs for the blue ball, and another ref for the red ball. As a knowledgable person on the rules, I'm certain I can get this right >99% of the time, which is more than can be expected of the current system.

Also, should the refs be more receptive to question box requests like this? It's not cool to have matches scored incorrectly, but I also get that the refs are doing their best and can't call what they don't see. If we have evidence of matches being scored incorrectly, is there a proper way to bring it to their attention outside of the question box, and what actions can the refs take?

[Travis Hoffman]

After seeing a lil' carnage at the Utah regional I came to one conclusion. More people wouldn't help at all what you need is more experienced refs.

Paid head refs, responsible for local training, and accountable to FIRST and those who pay team fees? Hmmm...perhaps worth a separate thread/discussion. I'd encourage more to speak up and address topics such as these.

In the same vein, how about a larger paid engineering staff empowered to design, build, and vet bug free fields with appropriate hardware and software controls to ensure referee and field crews can effectively administer a consistent, fair competition experience from event to event?

This model of collecting millions in event fees and simultaneously expecting an army of pure volunteers to suffer the burden of event administration is getting quite stale. Teams are the ones that end up getting burned, despite the best efforts of the ill-equipped to minimize event blar.

Spend more of the money we're paying you. Help event staffs and volunteer crews. Seems like a great way to fix the problem - just need people in authority to first admit a problem exists.

[Siri]

The fact that the refs have to look away from the field to enter possessions to the system and no particular refs are assigned to only scoring the assists gives rise to the issue. We should have 1 ref tracking robot zone-possession pairs for the blue ball, and another ref for the red ball. As a knowledgable person on the rules, I'm certain I can get this right >99% of the time, which is more than can be expected of the current system.Actually, there are. With 4 refs (I think most places are managing 5 now?), there's 1 ref per alliance concentrating primarily on assists. They're also the only ones who can enter goals and end cycles. The other 2-3 concentrate primarily on looking for penalties, but also cover their diagonal ref for any missed assists. (The head ref is separate. Truss/catch is with assists.)

Also, should the refs be more receptive to question box requests like this? It's not cool to have matches scored incorrectly, but I also get that the refs are doing their best and can't call what they don't see. If we have evidence of matches being scored incorrectly, is there a proper way to bring it to their attention outside of the question box, and what actions can the refs take?In short, no. As you can see in 5.5.3, such evidence cannot exist as far as refereeing is concerned. There's also no proper way to gain such attention outside of the question box [literally]. No action can be taken regarding something that's not seen.

That said, if you think something's wrong (and you're a pre-college student), do ask politely in the question box. Sometimes it actually is seen and entered, and the FMS drops it. This was still an observed bug as of this afternoon--though note we're talking twice in 80-some matches.

[MrRiedemanJACC]

In one eliminations match we won 152-121 thanks to a tech foul committed by the other alliance. Had this tech foul been missed, we would have lost 102-121. However, an obvious (and double checked by match video) triple assist was scored as a double assist, so our alliance was never awarded 20 points we legitimately scored. The score should have been 122-121 disregarding fouls. Boy would that have been frustrating if that tech foul had been missed (consequently another likely scenario brought about by the craziness that is Aerial Assist).

I think I know how this feels.....

In our third elimination match at Gull Lake we were the #8 seed captain against the #1 seed. Our first cycle was a 3 assist cycle that got scored as only a 2 assist cycle. The middle assist never was counted. You can watch the ref punching away at the screen and the assist doesn't get counted. We lost by 8 points.....
Here's the match video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=410-NKAWwT0

Students from 2611 and 2771 were asking questions at the end, but they would not review video or change the call.

Although we did miss a truss shot at the end that would have won it. Or 2771 missed a shot where we ended up scoring in the one point instead that would have won it. Plus in the first match there was a missed shot at the end that would have won it for us also. There were multiple times where we could have won, but just didn't pull it off.

[weatherdt]

That said, if you think something's wrong (and you're a pre-college student), do ask politely in the question box. Sometimes it actually is seen and entered, and the FMS drops it. This was still an observed bug as of this afternoon--though note we're talking twice in 80-some matches.

Sigh... I refereed an event this year, I saw myself enter the technical foul into the tablet, but did not see the score change on the big board in the replay video. During the match, I am not keeping score of actual points... it would be absolutely awful to have to do that too, so I rely on the FMS to handle that. I wish I would have thrown up my flag on the penalty for that one too, but I didn't, probably because I was also keeping track of other issues on the field (also I was burned out and exhausted). I've been wondering how the foul wasn't counted, and perhaps this bug is the answer. Unfortunately, it would have determined the match, and I only saw the replay video after the regional had ended.

I will probably make a post tonight or tomorrow about my experience as a referee, but the point of that post is to go easy on the referees, and ask questions politely (and don't bring your mentors). I have been a referee for the last 4 years, and this year was absolutely miserable (but I have loved the last 3 years). I heard a lot of criticism in the question box behind one of the referee positions while matches were ongoing ("Why didn't the ref see that?" "Call the foul!" "Are they blind?") The stress of the game and the impoliteness of the teams really made it hard on us.

[mrnoble]

Weatherdt, do you think it would help to have more refs? If so, how many would you wish to have on the field at a time? I'm personally feeling like having several more refs, and going to an analog scoring and pedestal-lighting system might help somewhat.

It is shortsighted of all of us to put blame on refs shoulders for what is turning out to be a debacle. Blame doesn't solve the situation, and refs are doing what they were taught to do, with the resources they have. While I love FRC, and I know that no one can foresee all the problems that can crop up as games are designed, I do wish that they had been willing to invest in a larger pool of refs and relied less on tech, which is invariably buggy.

[orangemoore]

I will probably make a post tonight or tomorrow about my experience as a referee, but the point of that post is to go easy on the referees, and ask questions politely (and don't bring your mentors). I have been a referee for the last 4 years, and this year was absolutely miserable (but I have loved the last 3 years). I heard a lot of criticism in the question box behind one of the referee positions while matches were ongoing ("Why didn't the ref see that?" "Call the foul!" "Are they blind?") The stress of the game and the impoliteness of the teams really made it hard on us.

I am not a ref and cannot be for a long time but the second I got my head around the game (at kickoff) I instantly thought how reffing was going to be very hard this year. Watch the competition the thoughts that I had from day one were true. It is interesting to me that last year the burden was placed on field reset and this year it is on the ref. Another change from last year to this year is that the burden occurs during the match and not in between.

I think that people can relate to what I am saying.

[CLandrum3081]

I'm really concerned that there always seems to be something in the game that negatively affects our volunteers. Last year, field reset was burned out due to the nature of the game. This year, the referees are burned out.

This partially falls on the shoulders of the GDC and event organizers. How are first-time volunteers going to come back and volunteer again if they're miserable when they do it? Being a referee is never an easy job, but it seems ridiculous this year.

Granted, I can only say this from video footage and what you guys have said on this thread, but why make the job of being a referee even harder?

Sometimes I wonder if the GDC is really concerned about their volunteers when it designs a game. I don't want it to sound like I'm taking a hack at them, but this isn't exactly the best track record.

I also understand that this is an event-specific issue as well - FIRST may recommend or require a certain amount of volunteers working one one specific task, but what if that amount of volunteers isn't available? They can't just cancel an event for this reason (to my knowledge). This just makes everyone miserable. The volunteers are miserable because they're overworked and the kids are miserable because the lack of available volunteers (or volunteers assigned to do that task) is affecting their experience.

I remember last year at MN 10K that students had to be recruited to help volunteer with field reset. Something like that is a little bit easier to do than recruiting extra referees with the training required.

My brain really hurts just thinking about what a nightmare it must be to be overwhelmed, overworked, and have everyone blame me for a match not going their way. To think, we normally only expect the latter to happen to referees - which, by the way should not be happening at all. Does it stink when a call isn't consistent? Yeah. But just think of the referee that didn't see the call because they were focused on three other things and have been doing their job for several hours without a break.

Point is, the community, the volunteers, the organizers, and FIRST need to come together to find a solution. Something to make the rest of 2014 better, and avoid this in 2015.

I hope Milwaukee and MN 10K don't have this problem this year. I guess I can only hope and help where I can.

[Siri]

Sigh... I refereed an event this year, I saw myself enter the technical foul into the tablet, but did not see the score change on the big board in the replay video. During the match, I am not keeping score of actual points... it would be absolutely awful to have to do that too, so I rely on the FMS to handle that. I wish I would have thrown up my flag on the penalty for that one too, but I didn't, probably because I was also keeping track of other issues on the field (also I was burned out and exhausted). I've been wondering how the foul wasn't counted, and perhaps this bug is the answer. Unfortunately, it would have determined the match, and I only saw the replay video after the regional had ended.I also reffed last weekend (my first of at least 3), and it is a mess. However, the FMS failures we caught weren't by tracking points; we'd just check the log afterwards to confirm everything was entered. Sometimes fouls or assists don't go up, but since we've flagged and radioed them during the match, they don't get missed overall. (It throws off the real-time, which bothers me as a coach, but as with most years we coaches have to keep it on our own anyway.)

The specific problem I was alluding to was that, while cycles would transition without incident (assist lights off, pedestal on), occasionally the goal itself wouldn't be entered. You can see this on the scorekeeper's screen, and (like most of them) it should be an impossible failure mode--there's no way from the ref screen to end a cycle without clicking high or low goal. Fortunately, this also makes it simple to catch. If you think it was missed though, just ask politely for the recheck. Hopefully it'll be fixed by this weekend.

[loyal]

I do think more refs would be helpful. More eyes on the game. But that means more volunteers. A problem by it self. It reminds me of a federally unfunded mandate. You know, were is going to come from.

[weatherdt]

Weatherdt, do you think it would help to have more refs? If so, how many would you wish to have on the field at a time? I'm personally feeling like having several more refs, and going to an analog scoring and pedestal-lighting system might help somewhat.

Referees need a lot of training, so it might not be possible to find additional referees. What may be possible it to just have a tablet operator, in addition to the ref, especially on the scoring side. One of the refs found it very helpful when I stood next to him, and just told him what to enter on the tablet (this was on my break). A lot can happen in the two seconds it takes you to find the right button to mark for possessions.

Field reset have it tough too. A ball of the same color of the goal can go through the goal and still be considered out of bounds (if it was kicked from beyond the truss). Field reset people actually have to know how the game works so they pass the balls in properly--or the refs need to communicate with them.

I also wish there was a dead ball button at the alliance station that would light up on the ref tablets, instead of those signs. There is simply too much for us to be doing to watch out for those signs.

I will say this of the game--I do like how this game focuses so much on teamwork. It does not take a very complicated robot to score assist points.

[weatherdt]

By the way, I need to mention that almost all of the teams at my regional were very polite. There were only 2-3 teams we were really frustrated with and weren't showing gracious professionalism. Unfortunately, they kind of soured the event...

[mrnoble]

Referees need a lot of training, so it might not be possible to find additional referees. What may be possible it to just have a tablet operator, in addition to the ref, especially on the scoring side. One of the refs found it very helpful when I stood next to him, and just told him what to enter on the tablet (this was on my break). A lot can happen in the two seconds it takes you to find the right button to mark for possessions.

Field reset have it tough too. A ball of the same color of the goal can go through the goal and still be considered out of bounds (if it was kicked from beyond the truss). Field reset people actually have to know how the game works so they pass the balls in properly--or the refs need to communicate with them.

I also wish there was a dead ball button at the alliance station that would light up on the ref tablets, instead of those signs. There is simply too much for us to be doing to watch out for those signs.

I will say this of the game--I do like how this game focuses so much on teamwork. It does not take a very complicated robot to score assist points.

Thanks. I like your ideas much better than what I proposed.