Should teams be allowed to decline a replay?
 

From T16

Aerial Assist has seen its fair share of field faults due to various reasons. A field fault can severely hinder an alliance's ability to play a match. What if, however, the hindered alliance is able to cope with the fault, and still manages to squeeze out the win? Should the affected alliance be allowed to decline the replay?

An example would be this. Blue Alliance vs. Red Alliance in an Elimination match. Red Alliance's pedestal does not light up. Red Alliance switches to a defensive strategy since they are in the lead anyway. The Red Alliance wins.

This happened at an event I was attending. The head ref decided that the field fault changed the flow of the match (Red team being forced to play defense) which in turn could have affected the outcome of the match.

With no rule in place, the subject of declining a replay was heavily discussed between Red, Blue, and the ref (Red pro declining, Blue against). As I said, the decision for a replay was made.

Should Affected teams be able to decline a replay? With the above example being an Elimination match, no qualifier points were at stake. Should declines only be allowed in Eliminations? Or should an alliance that was satisfied with their performance, despite a field fault hindering them, be able to decline a replay at any time (thinking that the win is much more important than maybe getting a couple more assist points in a qualifying match).

Just to clarify, I am not asking what should have been done at the event I attended. I'm just curious if people think that there can be merit for an alliance to decline a replay. Or, as the rule is written, should it always be up to the head ref to declare replays. Also since Q+A is open until the 22nd, this would be the best time for those teams competing next week to ask for an official response.

Finally, Good Luck to all those competing at Championship.

Re: Should teams be allowed to dencline a replay?
 

A similar situation happened at Midwest, there may be other extenuating circumstances but in QF 4-2 a blue score wasn't counted for about 20 seconds because it snuck into the low goal, thus the pedestal never turned on. The blue alliance ended up winning by 60ish points. They didn't call a field fault during the amtch, and we didn't ask for a replay because we ended up winning by quite a margin.

Drive teams, on the blue alliance at least, were not notified that the next match was a replay until 10 seconds before auton started. The MC actually had to be corrected in the match intro.

(Full disclosure: my team was on the blue alliance)

Re: Should teams be allowed to dencline a replay?
 

Not sure if this counts as a "Field Fault", but at UNH a call was made incorrectly as a rule was quoted incorrectly by a ref (I completely forget what the penalty was). We won the match anyways, but we were offered a replay if we wanted it. Since we won the match, we declined to have a replay.

Re: Should teams be allowed to dencline a replay?
 

Perhaps, but it would only work if there is a unanimous 6 team agreement to decline the replay

Re: Should teams be allowed to dencline a replay?
 

More than declining a replay, I wish teams this season could decline a foul.

Let's say for example, that Team A receives a G-28 for damaging something on Team B, but Team B did not actually took only superficial, not-functionally detrimental damage. It would be great if Team B could talk to the Head Ref and say "We decline this penalty, score the match without it."

Re: Should teams be allowed to dencline a replay?
 

It's interesting that you should describe this. One such situation happened EXACTLY this way at the Michigan Waterford District, except the penalty was G27 rather than G28. I was a referee at that event and remember the match. 469 - Las Guerrillas - were playing against 3098 - The Captains. During the match, as 469 was preparing a truss shot, 3098 hit the 469 robot rather hard. This impact was against 469's Intake bar. The shot went short and thereafter in the match all of 469's shots misfired. The head referee as well as the two referees standing near the incident determined that 3098 had caused damage to the 469 machine, and as such assessed a G27 technical foul. 469's alliance won the match because of this. A couple of matches later, Dan Kimura of Las Guerrillas came to the scorers' table and head referee and explained that the 3098 contact was not the culprit for the malfunctioning catapult. After a discussion the foul was removed from the match, which ultimately changed the outcome.

Recall that the rules are the rules, but that according to the handbook the Head Referee has final say in matters of the field. I felt personally that this was handled very well by head ref Gary Voshol. I had initially been uneasy about calling the foul but the referees closer to the incident agreed and I absolutely trusted their judgment. It was an incredible amount of class and a wonderful example of Gracious Professionalosm from Mr. Kimura and Team 469 in that situation, as well as an example of how an interpretation of the rules "went right."

Re: Should teams be allowed to dencline a replay?
 

I believe so.

During semi final 2-3 at UNH there was a dead ball debacle that hurt our alliance. The match ended with our alliance in the lead however the head ref/FTA decided to call it a field fault because the refs made a mistake and declared a rematch. The problem was their mistake was in not giving our alliance a new ball in the final 20 seconds of the match which would not have helped our opponents beat us. The next match was replayed due to a pedestal issue and our alliance did with the following match.

In the above case, having to replay the rubber match of the semis is a HUGE deal and since they replayed it after the winning alliance was hurt and granting us our ball would not have changed the outcome of the match we should have been allowed to decline the replay.

Re: Should teams be allowed to dencline a replay?
 

In eliminations it shouldn't be necessary. In eliminations the only "outcome" of the match is who wins. If the only alliance that suffered due to an Arena Fault wins anyway, the outcome of the match was not affected. Due to all of the tiebreakers this is much tougher in Quals.

Re: Should teams be allowed to dencline a replay?
 

I believe that in eliminations, An alliance should be able to decline a replay on a field fault that affected only to them.

During Finals 2 at Waterford, a strand of red lights fell down in front of the red goal in the last 6 seconds, resulting in an automatic replay due to a field fault. The Red alliance was leading by 60 points, and since the lights were dangling in front of their own goal, it should of been entirely in their right to say "No, we don't want a replay".

They actually won the replay, and the match after, winning the competition.

Re: Should teams be allowed to dencline a replay?
 

I completely agree that teams should be allowed to decline a replay given that all 6 teams are in agreement. However, I would also like to see the opposite be able to happen. If the red alliance were to win a match because of a field fault that impeded the blue alliance (and the field fault wasn't called) then I would like for the red alliance to have the ability to redo the match (again if all 6 teams are in agreement).

Re: Should teams be allowed to dencline a replay?
 

This match (QF 2.1 if i'm not mistaken) was very confusing for the Head ref, and both alliances. Because the confusion with the dead ball, all of red played defense against the 1 blue bot trying to score. Because this defense, it interrupted the flow of the match... which then led to a replay(according to what the head ref told me).

On the other hand, I really enjoyed playing against you guys in SFL and Orlando; you guys have a fantastic team! :)

Re: Should teams be allowed to dencline a replay?
 

Yea that was the one. Our argument was that we could have chose to play defense anyway. As you said, he didn't think that his mistake should change how the match was played, so that was the reason for the replay. It didn't affect us too much, but I could see it knocking out a team in the future, which would not lead to happy team.

Either way it was a great event. . It was great talking to your team while you were across from us in Orlando. We loved your projector with the stream.

Re: Should teams be allowed to dencline a replay?
 

The way the rule is already: "affects the outcome of the MATCH" means to me that there should not be a replay called in a situation where the team who the field fault detrimentally affected still won. The match outcome would be the same had the field fault not happened.

Now, as my team's story shows, thats not how its actually being called. Not sure if its a "busy ref" thing or an "I interpret the rule differently than the GDC" thing.

If its a "busy ref" thing, declining a replay should be allowed for the circumstances where the ref calls it wrongly, although, the rule being followed(to my interpretation), it shouldn't ever be necessary.

If its an "I interpret the rule differently than the GDC" thing, and the GDC wants a replay if there is a field issue, no matter what, declination of replays should not be allowed. I assume the GDC knows what they're doing, and have a good reason for it. Maybe they think that too many variables are screwed up and its impossible to know who'd have won if the fault hadn't happened(stronger defense because of lack of ball, etc). If thats the case, they should remove the clause about "affects the outcome of the MATCH" because it causes a great deal of confusion.

I'd disagree with this line of reasoning; replaying every match with a field fault, but I'm not the GDC, and I'm sure they've thought about it more than I have. It is their job.

Re: Should teams be allowed to dencline a replay?
 

I think they should. At one of our events, we played what was probably our best qualifying match ever, then when there were three seconds left, the match was stopped, because a hot goal for autonomous was not entered for a team, which wouldn't have effected the outcome of the match. During that match, our intake was slightly damaged, so we didn't do as well in the replay, which was also because the other alliance knew our strategy.

I'm also not a fan of waiting to explain why replays happened until after the replayed match is over. I know that for our team, in eliminations, we never have time to wait in the question box between matches to ask why our matches were replayed, so we never find out.

Re: Should teams be allowed to dencline a replay?
 

Team 58 was part of this alliance and I found this particular situation frustrating as a spectator because it wasn't explained very well. I could not understand why the match was replayed when the fault affected only our alliance and we had outscored the opposing alliance by a comfortable margin.

I feel that after the circumstances of the fault have been explained to each alliance the alliance that was impacted by the fault should be allowed to refuse the replay. However, In the spirit of Gracious Professionalism, the alliance that was not affected by the fault should say that the fault made no difference in the outcome and graciously deny the replay.

If both alliances are affected, The Head Ref should make the call.

Re: Should teams be allowed to dencline a replay?
 

And this is why I think you should NOT be able to decline a replay. After every match that is to be replayed everyone would question the GP of a team that decides to not decline the replay. I don't want to put teams in that situation. I've really gotten sick of all of the accusatory threads popping up on CD lately and I don't really want to read any more of them.

Re: Should teams be allowed to dencline a replay?
 

I have seen instances where the head ref has consulted an alliance(s) before making a final decision. Some of these are to let the teams know before it is announced and start storming etc. Other times it is to see if the blue alliance wants to replay the match even though the "field fault" 'hurt' or 'inhibited' only their alliance's play and blue still won.

I think these are the best ways to handle the situations. As they are typically rare; although seemingly to have a higher frequency of occurrence this year.

Re: Should teams be allowed to dencline a replay?
 

This happened at Greater DC this year - during finals, the pedestal for our alliance would not light up. At the time, we had a sizeable lead, and probably could have won by playing defense for the rest of the match, but the match was replayed.

We ended up winning the finals anyway, but yeah, I think you should be able to decline the replay in that situation.

Re: Should teams be allowed to dencline a replay?
 

I wish I had thought to argue this during quarterfinals of Midwest. We ended up replaying the match, even though our goal did not light up for at least 10 seconds, two separate times. Another driver and I went to the question box, where the head ref told us we had won even with the pedestal error, so we went on our merry way. However, as we were setting up for our third match, the head ref came over and told us that we would be replaying the second match, because the other alliance argued that the pedestal error changed how the match was played.

You bet it led to an unhappy team...

Re: Should teams be allowed to decline a replay?
 

(I'm ok with the concept of declining a replay if you were the winner and the cause of the replay negatively affected your time).

More importantly, I think that in cases of replays and re-scores - there should be an announcement (and maybe a written cutoff time for doing so). Our team had two situations this year where another team went to the ref afterward and had a discussion that led to replays/re-scores.

In both cases we never found out the actual reasons, and neither alliance nor opposition teams had the same story as to why we re-played or re-scored.

Communication is key - all teams should walk away with the exact same understanding, and that didn't happen.

Re: Should teams be allowed to dencline a replay?
 

Introductions were going on and the FTAs came to our alliance station (blue) and told us to huddle up and explained that the red alliance had protested the previous match due to the blue pedestal not lighting affecting the flow of the match and that after conferring with HQ the match would be replayed. We (blue) had no say, no recourse, and no time to settle down from this news as the match was about to start. Not only did this mentally affect our alliance, but now the red alliance (who won match 1) could play this match very differently because they had "nothing to lose" rather than it being a rubber match.

Should it have been a replay? Yes. It was a clear field fault. Why it took so long to communicate that to our alliance, after the head ref said we're good (and his ruling is supposed to be final), I have no idea, and I'll never understand. I would been fine with replaying the match had we been told up front it was a replay.

If replays were granted consistently, there would be no question of whether to allow the affected team to deny the replay. I really could go either way on this, but I'm not okay with the FTAs calling HQ and overruling the head ref at the urging of the opposing alliance (which is what APPEARED to have happened at Midwest).

Re: Should teams be allowed to decline a replay?
 

Interesting Question to say the least. I can think of a match or two where there were replays but declines would have been used. But back to the initial question.

I know in FTC, the replay decision is on the Head Referree but often that call is made off of the FTA/Tech support staff's findings. (Been on that hot plate enough times as FTC FTA)
I could see a rule added for declining replay of matches but there are a fair few questions/hypotheticals that would have to be worked out for it to ever end up in the manual.
Who would decline? Both alliances or the losing alliance? Would it be a decline by team? If so, what happens if it is a three for and three against split? What justification would you have to give for declining? So many more that it borders on the nutty.

If it were done in the eliminations, I could see it being a potential decline on the part of the losing alliance and treated as a decline card similar to the time out.

Re: Should teams be allowed to decline a replay?
 

We learned at Champs the hard way last year that we need to have a member of the drive team hang around the question box through at least the match following the one we just completed...every time and maybe to remind the head ref and FTA that a replay due to a field fault should only take place if the outcome of the match is affected, not because an opponent's ranking was lowered due to loss of a few autonomous points...or any other hypothetical issue that may arise.;)

Re: Should teams be allowed to decline a replay?
 

Agreed. I was a driver in this match and was shocked to learn that the replay request was approved because the outcome was not affected

Re: Should teams be allowed to decline a replay?
 

There was a match that we lost, but it was 1 v 3 (one robot was disabled from the start, the other one tipped in autonomous mode) and we only lost by like 23 points.. the score was 130 to 107... there was no ball on the field for about 17 seconds, and the field reset crew messed up, and you can actually see it in the video we have... but the Head referee , after a few matches, decided not to... and we believe it really hurt us when it came to alliance selections. we saw what happened, and our robot pushed the ball in using the opposing teams robot... we think for a hi-tech event such as FIRST is, there should be like one challenge per team for like 20 seconds to prove that teams point.

Re: Should teams be allowed to decline a replay?
 

The replay isn't only for the benefit of the affected teams, it's also (and more importantly) for the benefit of the competition. It eliminates a situation where the match wasn't conducted within the agreed-upon parameters. Teams should not be able to decline on behalf of the entire competition, because everyone has an interest in knowing that the rankings reflect the outcomes of correctly-determined matches.

Also, the outcome of the match ought to be defined¹ to include the score, because the rankings consider the score in addition to the win/loss/tie result. (Note that in some FRC games, only the score really mattered.) As a result, the outcome is almost always affected by a field fault.

¹ It's not defined in the rules.

Re: Should teams be allowed to decline a replay?
 

Are seeding points not part of the outcome of the match?

Re: Should teams be allowed to decline a replay?
 

Hey, a game theory question that we can answer conclusively with logic! These are fun :)

I'm going to go with quick and dirty logic because it's easy to read and the jumps aren't too big. Although if it's unclear I'd be happy to write up a longer more formal version.

--I think without the head ref bringing in subjective data always forcing replays or always allowing the affected alliance to decline them are the only two options.
--I am assuming alliances will only decline a replay if the outcome of the original match was favorable for them.
--The more consistent alliance would win more replay matches than the inconsistent alliance, so forcing a replay is in their favor.
--The inconsistent alliance is more likely to lose the replay, therefore they gain more by being allowed to decline it, so allowing declining replays is in their favor.

Assuming I haven't made any mistakes the above should be conclusive. Not comes the subjective part; I personally think consistency should be rewarded over inconsistent peaking, but that's just my preference.

Re: Should teams be allowed to dencline a replay?
 

IMHO, if the Head Ref is on the ball (so to say), the game is stopped when a field fault happens. Then, there is no question about a replay.

Re: Should teams be allowed to dencline a replay?
 

Having gone through this during the season, that apparently is very subjective.

From the manual (with my emphasis): If, in the judgment of the Head Referee, an “ARENA fault” occurs that affects the outcome of the MATCH, the MATCH will be replayed.

Although I think the bulk of people here and in FIRST like to believe that the competition, robot building process, scouting... the whole season is run on metrics and clearly defined events - I struggle to find any that don't really come down to one person's opinion.

I think that's an important lesson for anyone entering a STEM field though - as much as engineers try and contain problems to objectively evaluated criteria, time and time again real answers are subjective.

Re: Should teams be allowed to decline a replay?
 

So by extension, every time a team misses even one single point due to maybe a bump or tear in the carpet that wasn't fixed by field resetters before the match they should ask the FTA for a replay, even if they won or lost the match by 200 points because total points may cause a team to miss out on a higher seeding at the end of qualifications? There is a common sense reason "outcome of the match" has traditionally been considered as who won or lost the match itself...the need to keep replays at a bare minimum so an event can be held in a reasonable amount of time.

Re: Should teams be allowed to decline a replay?
 

I think the LOSING alliance should be allowed to decline a replay.

If they feel the outcome of the match was fair and that they couldn't win in a rematch, it would be Gracious Professionalism to decline the replay and not delay the other matches.

Re: Should teams be allowed to decline a replay?
 

To me, a Field Fault forces a replay because the field not operating correctly essentially means the teams on the field are no longer playing the game. The rules of each year's game define what is to be expected in each match. If the field changes mid match, they're simply playing a different game. Due to the way seeding works, this has consequences beyond just whether or not the field fault caused a loss when there would have been a win. It could affect the standings which impacts everyone at the event, and it's not fair for the standings to be impacted by sets of matches which did not follow the same rules as other matches.

By allowing teams to decline a replay you're essentially rewarding teams who find that not playing the game as defined in the manual was to their benefit. This opportunity is created randomly and not distributed evenly, so it's not fair to allow teams to decline a replay.

Re: Should teams be allowed to decline a replay?
 

The manual clearly states a replay is to be granted if a field fault affects the outcome of a match. If one's concern is to protect the integrity of the event then perhaps the manual should be rewritten to say event instead of or in addition to match? The result of this of course would be an unmanageable number of challenges and replays. There is a practical, common sense, unlawyered reason the outcome of a match has been regarded as who won or lost a given match.

Re: Should teams be allowed to decline a replay?
 

They should certainly feel empowered to ask. As the rule states, it's up to the head referee. Recall that the referee is being asked to judge not only whether the outcome was affected, but whether a field fault existed at the time. The referee may rule that slight variations in the surface of the carpet don't represent a violation of the game specifications, and are thus not a fault.

Re: Should teams be allowed to decline a replay?
 

How about designing a game that doesn't rely so heavily on the split-second decisions of volunteers, who are human and make mistakes?

A counterargument is that even if you think a field fault didn't affect the outcome of the match, it did. If you didn't get your next cycle in time, you make a decision to play more aggressive defense, which could affect the "losing" team's score.

I think that it's interesting that this is apparently the first game in FIRST history with field faults. Heavens to murgatroyd.

Re: Should teams be allowed to decline a replay?
 

This leads to the situation described above, where teams that do ask for a replay are considered "un-gracious" in certain cases. Not a good road to go down.

Re: Should teams be allowed to decline a replay?
 

Field faults have always been around.

They're just much, much more frequent this year.

Re: Should teams be allowed to decline a replay?
 

Does a fault that occurs with 5 seconds to go with no balls on the field affect the outcome of the match?

In a close match, definitely. Those five seconds could've been a truss shot.

Re: Should teams be allowed to decline a replay?
 

Was the match within 10 points?

I'm under the impression that we're dealing in hypotheticals, so hypothetically, yes.

Re: Should teams be allowed to decline a replay?
 

What if it hypothetically wasn't?

Then we'd be at the mercy of the head ref's judgement calls. If it was up to me (it's not) I'd probably call for the replay.

Re: Should teams be allowed to decline a replay?
 

Would you call for a replay if there was a 200 point difference with 5 seconds left? 100 points? Where do you draw the line? It all comes down to the judgement of the head ref/ FTA and they have a reasonable schedule to keep.

Re: Should teams be allowed to decline a replay?
 

There was a situation in Q32 of Kettering where a field fault occurred that hurt the blue alliance while simultaneously one of the three blue robots was disabled (can't remember what specifically the field fault what, but I remember the whole alliance was pretty mad over the situation). Despite these two hindrances, blue still won the match by sheer luck. Head ref declared a field fault and the match was replayed at the end of the day, against all of the blue alliance's requests not to.

In the rematch, red won by a slim margin. Another field fault though, so the match needed to be replayed again the following morning. The third time, red got their stuff together and blew the blue alliance out of the water. Surprisingly enough, no field fault that time.

I think the team affected by the field fault should decide whether to accept or decline the field fault, just like football teams can accept or decline penalty yards. Sometimes lightning strikes only once, and replaying the match you loose all your upset magic.