Re: G28/G44/G45
 

Here is the response from FIRST Q&A:
--------------------------------------------------
Game - The Game » Penalties » G45
Q. Red robot is in its key lining up to shoot. Blue robot approaches close to red robot to block the shot. Red robot intentionally pushes blue robot back to clear the way for its shot, contacting blue robot while red robot is still in contact with its key. Is this a violation of [G45]?

A. We cannot make a definitive statement on a hypothetical situation, and the final decision on violations of Game Rules is left to the Head Referee at each event. However, generally, if a Robot is attempting to play the game, not simply create Fouls for the opposing Alliance, Rule [G45] will not be violated.
----------------------------------------------

I am satisfied with this answer. Ultimately, it's the referees' call and they will face some tough ones this year. However, it is clear that the GDC wants us to "play the game". It sounds like we will be presumed innocent on [G45] until proven guilty, rather than the other way around. Very good.

Re: G28/G44/G45
 

Can anyone that's been through ref. training let us know what plan, if any, exists to announce fouls/penalties after a match? With real-time foul assessment, if there any chance for review? Any shot at learning who did what wrong?

Re: G28/G44/G45
 

Especially since it involved shoving said robot over a bridge or bump =P
but I agree with your expectations for the rules/callings.

In my opinion, I think (and I think that the rules think) that "red" robots should be able to intentionally "draw" penalties if "blue" robots insist on being in / too near the key or lane. However, it becomes a strategy when these "red" robots begin to play for the penalties instead of the game (ex. too many repeated attempts to draw penalties or chasing "blue" robots around/blatantly ignoring the game to try to draw penalties)

It'd could easily be made clearer, definitive, and a better rule if red bots could only draw penalties while both blue AND red bots are in contact with the key/lane.

Re: G28/G44/G45
 

I have been through referee training and the training does make these rules quite clear. I will be refereeing at the MAR event at Rutgers.

While in past years there has been a small degree of variation between events, this year I don't believe this will be the case because there will not be the referee discussion at the end of the match that there has been in past years. Calls will be immediately calculated via tablets. Technical fouls will be radio-ed in to the head referee. There will also be hand signals for many fouls. I really believe that FIRST will succeed in their attempt to reduce ambiguity of fouls that are called.

The bottom line is that referees were told in training that any rule that begins with "strategies that", especially G45, will be called if a team does this action more than once. It is not all up to what the referee sees as intent. This includes previous discussions on balls under bridges, balls outside the field, etc.

Regarding Wayne's scenario, I'm believe with confidence that a G28 would be called. For a majority of situations, intent is based on repetition. Of course, there will be extenuating circumstances.

Remember this is just one conjecture on the topic. I hope this helps.

Re: G28/G44/G45
 

I guess my question is then what constitutes repetition? Is it x number of times in y number of seconds? Is it x times per match? Is it once or twice in several consecutive matches a team plays?

Re: G28/G44/G45
 

This is supposed to be covered in the next Team Update on Tuesday.