Re: 2012 Mid-Atlantic Robotics FRC Region Championship
 

I'm going to try and not clutter this thread with discussion of this issue and refer you to this one, about where the same situation occured but the opposite call was made. Were they right? I think the GDC should make a ruling and wouldn't be surprised if they're on the phone right now.

Re: 2012 Mid-Atlantic Robotics FRC Region Championship
 

Precedent from last weekend in Queen City is contradictory to that call.

Re: 2012 Mid-Atlantic Robotics FRC Region Championship
 

Nope, some team at CVR racked up 63 points in penalties in 1 match.

Re: 2012 Mid-Atlantic Robotics FRC Region Championship
 

the rule G45 mentions rule G44, and G28 is an exception to G44.

Re: 2012 Mid-Atlantic Robotics FRC Region Championship
 

So the question is: Were they taking advantage of the exception and thus in violation of [G45]?

Looks like the call will stand.

Re: 2012 Mid-Atlantic Robotics FRC Region Championship
 

No, they were trying to triple balance for the win.

Re: 2012 Mid-Atlantic Robotics FRC Region Championship
 

But their actions were ramming and sandwiching 1218 to get them 8 fouls.

Re: 2012 Mid-Atlantic Robotics FRC Region Championship
 

And 1218 couldn't have driven away from the red bridge?

Re: 2012 Mid-Atlantic Robotics FRC Region Championship
 

Is there a rule that says they have to?

Re: 2012 Mid-Atlantic Robotics FRC Region Championship
 

Was their match goal to get 28 points in penalties?

Re: 2012 Mid-Atlantic Robotics FRC Region Championship
 

The fact remains that it wasn't their own actions that caused those penalties, it was the actions of the other alliance. If [G45] wasn't intended to apply to that kind of scenario, what it is supposed to apply to?

Re: 2012 Mid-Atlantic Robotics FRC Region Championship
 

it was their own actions, they parked in front of 341 in between them and the bridge. G28 also says there should have been a TF for consequential contact, i.e. instant 49 points for repetitive contact with the bridge.

Re: 2012 Mid-Atlantic Robotics FRC Region Championship
 

G45 states: Strategies exploiting Rule [G44] are not in the spirit of the FRC and are not allowed.
Violation: Technical-Foul and Red Card

G44: Generally, a rule violation by an Alliance that was directly caused by actions of the opposing Alliance will not be penalized. Rule [G28] is an exception to this rule.

and G28:
Robots may not touch an opponent Robot in contact with its Key, Alley, or Bridge.
Violation: Foul; Technical-Foul for purposeful, consequential contact.

Re: 2012 Mid-Atlantic Robotics FRC Region Championship
 

That is what the Q&A has to say on this matter (or a related one).

If it was a strategy to rack up the penalties, [G45]. However, if a robot seems to be trying to play the game, say by knocking another robot away from the bridge, then that's not a strategy to rack up penalties, and no [G45]. YMTC. (And please let the refs at the event do the same--it's their call that counts.)

Re: 2012 Mid-Atlantic Robotics FRC Region Championship
 

But the direct cause of those penalties was the driving of the red alliance - if they had gone at the bridge from the other side, for example, there would have been no penalties. Also, [G28] assigns Technical Fouls only for purposeful, consequential contact, and this was not purposeful. Not really sure where you're getting the 49 points from, because the extra 40 points would come from [G25], which you can definitely not be forced into committing...