Re: Movement Towards Video Review
 

Any ideas on what could be used then if anything?

Re: Movement Towards Video Review
 

Another problem with Video Review is that it affects game play. In football, basketball, baseball, the review happens with the play has stopped.

For FRC, video review is after the game is over. What if a shot is reviewed, and it is determined that it was an illegal shot (robot did not fully cross into the courtyard before launching the boulder), and should not have counted? That affects Tower Strength, and the Alliance may have played differently if it knew that it needed one more boulder to defeat the tower.

Maybe video review for something like a Red Card where it affects the outcome of the match (alliance gets 0 points), but does not affect the game itself.

> Any ideas on what could be used then if anything?
I am of the opinion that mostly bad things will come of Video Replay, and very little good. You have Amateur Ref's refing the game, and you are trying to hold them to a professional ref standard. What can you do? Live with the fact that some calls will go against you, and some will go your way. Hopefully in the aggregate, it all evens out in the end.

BTW: I watched a lot of matches from the Scoring Table, and I can confirm there were a lot of bad calls (and non-calls). However, that was due to my vantage point (and what I was looking at), and the Ref was calling it best he could from his vantage point (and what he was looking at).

Re: Movement Towards Video Review
 

Unfortunately I don't have any at the moment. Usually I like to provide some sort of alternative when voicing a disagreement about a solution to an obvious problem. I'll give it some thought and post anything I come up with here. I agree that some sort of change should be made, but I'm not sure how to go about that change quite yet. I'll get back to you.

Re: Movement Towards Video Review
 

Maybe it doesnt fit exactly within the definition of a "call," but NASCAR has been using video replay for years (though replays should not take that long) and is used to determine placement of positions when cautions come out. This year alone they implemented a pit review system using cameras (which was not done beforehand) which drastically increased the amount of penalties that previously went unseen.

Re: Movement Towards Video Review
 

I would rather see FIRST train their head refs better so that matches are called more consistently. Video review doesn't do much when the refs don't do their jobs well in the first place.

However, it is not a bad idea for refs to review video before making the decision to hand out a red card (i.e. all the tipping fouls this year).

Re: Movement Towards Video Review
 

Video review is in almost all sports now, and I can almost guarantee it will be in FRC eventually (eventually is a long time). We are going to have some form of it at TRI this year. Mostly at the digression of the head ref and a review coupon in eliminations like you have a time out coupon in eliminations. Just like in the NFL their would need to be definitive evidence that a call should go the other way and a lot of judgement calls won't be able to be reviewed, we are still working out the exact details of the review rules.

The idea is to get as many calls right as we can just like it is used in other sports.

Re: Movement Towards Video Review
 

+1 Especially ones invited to the Championship. ;)

Or at least supply them with lots of caffeine.

Re: Movement Towards Video Review
 

I don't see Video Review for High School Level sports.

It is not just a Head Ref problem. It is all the other ref's too.

How much do you want your fees to increase so Ref's are paid, and not volunteers? Then you can complain about the quality of the Ref's.

That said, I do think there needs to be better consistency in some calls. First should clearly define the standard they want the Ref's to enforce. Not necessarily tell it to the world, but at least tell the Head Ref's, who then tell the other Ref's.

Re: Movement Towards Video Review
 

If you look at most sports common fouls are not usually reviewable so in the case of FRC something like a pin shouldn't be reviewable. What should be reviewable are things like assists in Aerial Assist, barrier crosses in Stronghold, and any penalties that would result in yellow or red cards. These types of things have score impacts and are very easy to review. The problem with reviewing something like pinning is that it is very subjective and would take too long. If FIRST were to implement a replay type system, it shouldn't be used in qualifications as it would take too long but instead they can give each alliance 3 challenges for the elimination rounds. At championship teams should be given 3 challenges in their divisor playoffs and then another 3 challenges for Einstein. I think this system would solve a lot of the missed calls in important elimination matches.

I also think that referees should not handle scoring and should only focus on calling fouls. FRC is the only sport were the ref has to look for fouls and keep track of the score at the same time, that is it too much for one person. They should have score keepers that handle scoring and refs who handle fouls.

Re: Movement Towards Video Review
 

Baseball umpires call runs at home plate.
Football refs call touchdowns, field goals, and safeties.

All sports, the Ref calls when a score has happened or not.

In FRC, the Ref's call some scores (crossings), but they don't keep track of the score (FMS does that).

IMHO, there are some things that can be handled by Field Stewards, like they did with Recycle Rush. I think there should have been Field Stewards doing boulder counting in the Castle, and letting Ref's know when they are at 6.

They had Ref's watching crossings, so having a Field Steward do it won't improve anything, other than freeing up a Ref to watch for fouls.

IMHO, FRC should have added one more ref, and done 1-on-1 ref'ing with one ref watching one robot for the entire match. Maybe do it during Practice Matches to see how it goes. The Ref won't miss a crossing (although still has a problem with sight lines for the Sally Port). Ref won't miss the start of a Pin (although the actual start can be subjective, but it should happen more promptly). The Ref for the robot that causes a foul enters it into the panel.

Re: Movement Towards Video Review
 

The lack thereof doesn't mean there shouldn't be.

Re: Movement Towards Video Review
 

Allen was trying to use Video Review of professional sports to support the position of video review at the High School level. Comparing apples to oranges.

Whether the apple should be sweet or tart, in and of itself or compared to other apples, is a valid issue.

Re: Movement Towards Video Review
 

FRC is the highest level of robotics for students. Comparing FRC to the Pros is actually apples to apples. The highest level of competition, no matter the sport, deserves the highest level of calls.

Re: Movement Towards Video Review
 

So far all of the examples I've seen require review with judgement.

I know of a match where the portcullis was crossed twice and neither time was registered. This wouldn't require judging--it's clearly evident; a fact.

The drive coach went to the 'question box' with the video fresh on a camera but they said "we can't do video review."

Please know that I feel really not-GP linking this, but to support this subject, I can't think of another way. I think video review can make things better.

But I also fully understand the time problem.

(removed match link)

Re: Movement Towards Video Review
 

So a referee is video reviewing a specific call, & he sees a different, unrelated penalty. Does he call it?