Re: Goaltending- the next big controversy
 

I remember hearing something about it being illegal. But I could be wrong, by all means. I'll start a more direct thread to get a quick answer..

Re: Goaltending- the next big controversy
 

Not at all. The rules explicitly say that goaltending is only when the ball is on it's way down. If they didn't want any interference, they would have said that.

I didn't see anything in the rule book about not being able to block the ball corral.

Not acting lawyerly is going to come back and bite FIRST in the butt, mark my words.

--Petey

Re: Goaltending- the next big controversy
 

Unfortunately one person's common sense is very different from another's and the game is supposed to be about originality. It is nice to be warm and fuzzy about this and believe that the right decisions will be made but if that is the case why have any rules at all.

Case by case means that at one site anything goes and at another every tiny infraction is enforced. I recall big issues in 2001 about tethers that varied from outright violations of rules to "well they made it so let them use it". It reared again in 2003 with hooks on the gratings.

There is no reason why goaltending shouldn't be allowed- pit human vs machine. Otherwise this becomes a basketball game where the robots are incidental. I've already been instructed by team advisors to find a basketball player to be the human player. My God- this sounds like the antithesis of FIRST is supposed to be! Bring in the athlete to show that a good athlete is the only way you can be successful in a robot competition!

In a basketball game there is defense. If every time a player received a ball everyone cleared the basket to give him a clear shot I doubt basketball would be exciting.

I am waiting for the ruling that robots can't block the feeder chutes and that would pretty much end all defense.

Personally I am quite disappointed in this restriction in the rules. It may be unpopular to say but I think the rules need to be changed and defense of the goals allowed.


WC :(

Re: Goaltending- the next big controversy
 

Wayne,

I do not think this rule should be changed, maybe we should accept the game for what it is, and play it.... How boring would this game be when your team builds a big backboard, and blocks all shots by the human player..... i'd hate to watch that match, it'd be almost as boring as watching the history channel....

Take the game, with all the rules that are in the manual, and play it... the kind folks at FIRST have put way more thought in this game than most people realize.

Good luck

Tom Schindler

Re: Goaltending- the next big controversy
 

I think games should be able to be played both offensively and defensively in an effective manner. Such isn't the case with FIRST Frenzy.

Re: Goaltending- the next big controversy
 

You know, IMHO, the idea of goaltending will be based on what is happening around the robot. Are they just placing the ball on top for points? Or are they using the ball as a swat? Or even more worrysome, if they make it illegal to place the ball on top with balls coming down, can you move the goal before the points get inside?

Re: Goaltending- the next big controversy
 

If you really wanted to prevent your opponent from scoring, just have your human player throw the balls to knock their shots off course. totally legal, and if you can do that, your opopnents will be grateful you're not scoring for your own team.

Re: Goaltending- the next big controversy
 

I have some difficulty with your statement.

What if... you go and find a basketball player, and he/she agreed to join your team, and then he/she got Inspired and Recognized that Science and Technology was something that really interested them and got them excited....

Sounds to me to be what FIRST is all about.

Re: Goaltending- the next big controversy
 

I see tons of defense in this game, knocking the large balls off, blocking robots from the bar, removing bots from the bar?... stopping the other alliance from getting the balls into their human player station.... this game has a lot more aspects of it than last year, or the year before.

Play it like it is, we all have the same rules, so lets all have a good time...

Re: Goaltending- the next big controversy
 

Don't be so glum!

This isn't about bring the 6'7" school jock on your team, as wonderful as that would be, it's about honing the skills of the wide and varied members of your team. You can train someone to throw a little ball into a big basket. it would be fun for them, and a much deeper thrill for your team of the shortstuff mechanic or minuscule CAD man is pounding balls into the goals. Also, winning is important, and one of the objects of the game; but teaching kids new skills is paramount too.

Let them toss balls. :) They'll surprize you.

Re: Goaltending- the next big controversy
 

sounds good Aidan- you know we will play whatever comes up. It would be great to bring basketball players into robotics and such- no argument there.

But wouldn't it be more of a spectacle if robots were to do what the humans are assigned. This IS a robot competition. By restricting the ability of the robots to defend their goals a chunk of that competition is eliminated. I still think we are missing the boat here.

WC

Re: Goaltending- the next big controversy
 

Im not an expert on basket ball, but doesnt the same rule apply there?

you are not allowed to block balls from going in the hoop, once they are on the way down, but you CAN block a shooter

if you could goal tend in basket ball - place your tallest player by the backboard, and have him swat away every shot, basketball would be dead in a month

scores would drop to the single digits

good heavens - it would be almost as boring as hockey!

Re: Goaltending- the next big controversy
 

Have you guys actually tried throwing balls into those goals, it really looks pretty easy to me, you have a huge backboard, and a big hoop. Plus it's hardly like shooting from half court. what about wheeling the little goal up to the plexiglass, and just plopping them over the top? I hardly think this is a challenge reserved for basketball players. The woman shooting balls into the stationary goal during the kickoff demonstration practically had a 95% success rate- practice makes perfect. Just build a goal, assign a human player, and get him/her to practice 24-7.

One of the problems with past games, is that many robots relied on their ability to hinder another team's efforts, for example, ramming a robot who is trying to stack, having a tug of war over a goal. a perfect example would be a ramp-blocking robot from last year. I think the goaltending rule is designed to allow the robots/humanplayers to "do their thing" and show their abilities so to speak. I don't really know why you would want to block their goal, because don't you want to have the closest score possible? As far as goal tending by placing a ball on a goal, wouldn't that be undesireable, because it would just increase their score?

I myself could care less about goaltending, as far as I'm concerned, it wouldn't have much affect on the outcome. As for the interperetations of the rules- What is your intent? is it to block balls from entering the goal? if yes, then NO it is not allowed! Just think- what are you trying to accomplish? Is it in the spirit of the game? :eek:

Re: Goaltending- the next big controversy
 

There are other ways to stop the balls from going in other than manually blocking them.

...

you could cap their goals early

Re: Goaltending- the next big controversy
 

But in basketball, you can still block on the way up, just like you can in this game. A little trivia fact, but the reason golatending was implimented is quite interesting. It was in order to hinder Wilt Chamberland. The rule was born after a game where Wilt jumped and grabbed a ball out of air when it was somewhere between 13 and 14 feet up. The NBA then decided to hinder Wilt, because it didnt work for superstars at the time like it does now (i.e. let them travel witht eh ball as long as the dunk is showy). Anyways, heres to digressing from a tanget (double digress!).

-Kesich