Re: Missed Inbounder Assists
 

I do believe the ref just made an honest mistake and missed the assist, a similar thing happened to us in quarter finals 1-2 at WPI, where the ball went all the way around the field and went through a lot of different robots but was only scored with too assist even though it had three. we were able to win the match and advance and we didn't notice it until watching the videos over again.

Here is that match:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TCWgkha78mI

At Hartford we were in the quarter finals and they weren't counting our third assist so we challenged it and they corrected the score but we also had a 50 point charged against us and we weren't able to overcome those penalty points.

Re: Missed Inbounder Assists
 

That's interesting. We had the same issue at Hartford with our semi match, which we lost by 6 points, but nothing was done. What did you tell/show the ref to convince him?

Re: Missed Inbounder Assists
 

I'm doing this from memory from watching a ref during a practice match. On the Score screen, there is something like:

9 buttons corresponding to each bot in each zone. You press the button, and that bot is identified as assisting in that zone. You can have zero to 9 buttons pressed.

Other buttons:
High goal
low goal
truss
catch
undo (undo's whatever you press next)
foul (goes to foul screen)
submit (or something like that, which ends the cycle and points are scored)

On the Foul screen there is something like:

4 buttons. Foul red, technical red, foul blue, technical blue.
Each press increments a counter for each alliance for each type foul.

Undo (removes foul/technical for next button pressed)
Card (indicates a card situation occurred, but I don't think there is a card screen)
Score (or something like that to switch back to the score screen).

There are 4 pads (pair for each alliance), and one HR pad. The pair for an alliance are tied together. So, if both are in scoring mode, both see what buttons were pressed. In other words, you update the screen based upon what was pressed at that pad, and what was pressed at the other pad.

I'm guessing delays could be reduced if pad communication was one-way. In other words, one ref had scoring, and one ref had fouls. Then the pad could update itself, and not have to get info from the scoring system, and the scoring system only sent info to the HR station.

One complaint I heard was the time it takes to switch from Scoring to Foul screen (and back again). So, one screen that does it all would be helpful.

Re: Missed Inbounder Assists
 

i just went up to the question box and asked if they counted our third assist and he went over to the table and came back and said he fixed the score but we still lost, that was all the infromation o gave him.

Re: Missed Inbounder Assists
 

I was a ref at Hartford, and while some of the difficulty is the panels, I think a lot more of the difficulty is just that it's just hard to see all of the field at once. There were times that I was on the panel tracking assists, and it wasn't always easy to tell whether or not the second robot made it completely 100% into the white zone before making the truss shot (especially as the opposing alliance was crowding around pushing the robot trying to stop it from getting there). I called it as I saw it the best I could, but it's certainly possible that somebody with a different angle on the field would have called some of those cases differently.

I do want to say that I was impressed by the teams there recognizing the difficulty of our jobs and thanking us for our work, and any disagreements that I saw were very respectful, even in the heat of competition.

Re: Missed Inbounder Assists
 

Mostly I found that a question like this to the head ref lead to the head ref asking us "Did blue get three assists on cycle #?" In general we remembered and were able to correct if there was a mistake. But sometimes we either thought there were only two assists or no one was sure and we couldn't adjust the score.

Re: Missed Inbounder Assists
 

That's just horrible and wrong and I'm hoping you misheard or there was some sort of miscommunication. Absolutely none of the reffing standards should be secret and undisclosed. All the information should be available to teams if they ask, otherwise how are we supposed to know how to play the game? The only reason for keeping something like that secret is so you can have a hedge against inconsistency in calls by declaring that particular instance of bulldozing didn't meet your secret standard.