Re: Throwing the game.
 

Maybe my hand slips and hits the offending bot's E-stop. Maybe.

Re: Throwing the game.
 

:-) I know I can be clumsy that way.

Re: Throwing the game.
 

I almost made a comment about how coaches are not allowed to touch the controls. However, after searching the manual, I cannot find a 2015 rule that says so.

Slap away!

Re: Throwing the game.
 

Sorry Taylor, coaches still should not touch controls.

"G32: During a MATCH, the ROBOT shall be operated solely by the DRIVERS and/or HUMAN PLAYERS of that Team.
VIOLATION: Offending ROBOT will be DISABLED."

Re: Throwing the game.
 

That's what I get for just searching "coach"

Re: Throwing the game.
 

Does E-stop count as robot operation? The point of E-stop is quite the opposite.

I know one year at a Regional driver's meeting someone asked if the coach could hit E-stop, and the reply was 'yes'. I don't know if that was explicitly stated in the rules or in a Q&A that year, however.

Re: Throwing the game.
 

I would think that the E-stop is not controlling the robot. It just shuts it off. Rule layering, maybe? NAW!! I just tripped...

Re: Throwing the game.
 

That's not correct. The penalties specified for violating G15 include a potential red or yellow card for repeated or egregious violations. Without speaking to the specific scenario you described, a violation of G15 that was bad enough could result in a red card on the first offense. Also, 5.5.4 allows the head ref to issue red or yellow cards for egregious actions that violate the mission of FIRST but aren't captured in other rules.

Re: Throwing the game.
 

That's funny, I can't find any specific rules governing the use of the E-Stop button this year. Maybe they intended the button to be usable by anyone who thought ROBOT operation to be unsafe this year.

Re: Throwing the game.
 

What happened to just competing to the best of your abilities and trying to score as much as possible?

Why can't Team B show why they're a good robot by scoring as much as possible?

If Team A is good, why wouldn't B want to show them why they're a good alliance partner, possibly hoping for a pick in alliance selections?

Re: Throwing the game.
 

If you wanted to sabotage an alliance partner without incurring penalties:
Before, you could sit on the field and likely determine a loss for your alliance, strongly affecting the ranking of your partners. If necessary, you had plenty of options to actively sabotage to ensure that your opponent's score is 1 point higher.
This year, you have no choice but to actively sabotage to significantly reduce your alliance's score, which only affects ranking in the case that your alliance partner is being closely followed by the next highest.
There's nothing that makes this year more susceptible to sabotage, only less.

Going to have to call it "stoperating" and that differs from "operating"

Re: Throwing the game.
 

In this particular scenario, whether or not the action was done on purpose is almost irrelevant. A team with a habit of accidentally knocking over stacks isn't going to be highly thought of by other teams' scouts.

Re: Throwing the game.
 

The drive team I work with is aware of this.
The performance they have at competition is what it is as long as they try.
If they fail in a critical situation as long as they try the hardest I will stand up with them and fight tooth and nail for them. The first person someone needs to get through to criticize there performance when they do their best is me.
Throwing on the other hand, is not trying your best...