![]() |
Re: Week 1 Analysis
Quote:
|
Re: Week 1 Analysis
Quote:
|
Re: Week 1 Analysis
At auburn, I just saw a robot toss the ball to go over the truss. It arc'd, hit the ground, bounced and then went over the truss. It was in the correct direction, but the Head ref still said it didnt count. What rule would cause this, because that doesnt make sense.
|
Re: Week 1 Analysis
Quote:
|
Re: Week 1 Analysis
I don't want to call out a specific team, but there are instances such as match 34 at the Auburn Mountainview District Event where a robot blantantly stuck it's arm ~15 inches into the low goal multiple times. It doesn't seem like certain penalties are even being watched for due to the complexity of keeping track of things like assists while watching for other penalties.
Quote:
|
Re: Week 1 Analysis
That TRUSS really depended on the interpretation of what "caused" the ball to go over the truss. Seems like the ref used a pretty chicken-and-egg interpretation to me.
Quote:
|
Re: Week 1 Analysis
Quote:
|
Re: Week 1 Analysis
Quote:
|
Re: Week 1 Analysis
After watching the Alamo Regional and Auburn Mountainview District competitions I noticed a few things.
1. Field reset is so much faster than last year. 2. Sometimes assists aren't being called. 3. A lot of matches are being determined by fouls. 4. Too many teams don't know what to do on the field. |
Re: Week 1 Analysis
I have really noticed that the assists they are scoring are really obvious. Some are not being called at all. I think that this may improve with time through the season but for the teams that are competing now it may be making it a lot harder.
|
Re: Week 1 Analysis
Quote:
|
Re: Week 1 Analysis
The balls bouncing out of the goals and some assists not being counted have to be the 2 biggest things out there so far. I have especially noticed that the assists that are left out most often are the third one of a cycle, at least it seemed to be the most prevalent.
I think it is true that a lot of teams look like they don't know what to do out there, but I think it already started to get much better by the end of the day. Keep in mind even for teams that practiced a ton before competition, they probably were not able to practice with 5 other robots running around the field getting in the way. This will take some time, like it does with every other game. I t is just more noticeable this year because there is only one game object. By the end of the day a lot of teams were really starting to learn how to trade off between dealing with the ball and playing defense effectively. Also, while robot catching has not been prevalent due to the middle of the field often having complete chaos all over the place, throwing over the truss to the human player has been an extremely popular strategy and has been pretty effective in a lot of matches. I think tomorrow will really give us a better idea of how this game can be played now that teams have gotten accustomed to the dynamic. We can't be too quick to judge about everything so quickly. -Nick |
Re: Week 1 Analysis
G26-1
ROBOTS may not break the planes of the openings of the opponent’s LOW GOALS. Violation: FOUL. If extended, strategic, or repeated, TECHNICAL FOUL. |
Re: Week 1 Analysis
At Central Illinois, the refs are not calling G3 when teams lose their bumpers. Considering it should be a foul and disabling the robot, this is a pretty big deal.
|
Re: Week 1 Analysis
Quote:
|
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 14:42. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi