Yellow card / Red card usage at 2004 IRI
 

As the head ref at the 2004 IRI, I initiated a yellow card / red card warning and penalty system. The idea was generated by some smart people in this thread.

Before I describe what all happened, I want to say why I am starting this thread. The point of this thread is to discuss and evaluate the yellow card / red card system, not debate the calls made by the refs. If you wish to do that, please PM or email me directly. What we were trying to do at IRI was test a new tool for the refs to use to make things clear to all competitors and fair for teams. Refs are still human, and their decisions are not perfect in everyone's eyes. This is just a possible tool for them to use.

Yellow Card

• each team can only get 1 yellow card for the entire competition
• a yellow card is a serious, public warning that this team ALMOST received a disqualification (DQ)
• yellow cards are given after the match is over, after the referee team discussed the situation
• teams are told what their yellow card is issued for
• spectators are also told what the yellow card is for and who it is given to (briefly)
• the head ref notes the team who received the yellow card

Red Card

• a red card is given to a team who has been DQ'ed for the previous match
• red cards are given after the match is over, after the referee crew discusses the situation
• teams are told what their red card is issued for
• spectators are told what the red card is issued for
• referees do not have to use a yellow card before using a red card

Usage at IRI:
1 yellow card was given team A for tipping
1 yellow card was given team B for grabbing another teams drive base and not letting go (they probably did not mean to do it, but it happened)
1 yellow card was given team C for running into another team with their grabber. The nature of the action, combined with their specific grabber design led to this yellow card.
1 red card was given to team team D for an entanglement of their hook into their opponent's drive base
1 red card was given to team team E for an entanglement of their hook into their opponent's robot structure (carabiner could not let go)
1 red card was given to team C for a similar move they did to get their previous yellow card.

Referees have a difficult time judging intent. Each of these cases could be un-intentional, but still needed to be warned or penalized. These teams were all competing hard and trying to play the game the best they could. I debated about listing their team numbers here, but saw no benefit in doing that. Further down in this thread, team numbers may come out, but I am going to error on the side of anonimity at this point. Besides these calls, there were other plays where some teams ALMOST got a yellow card, but did not. I can think of a few other instances where a yellow card may have been issued, but the referee crew were less sure of the situation.

In each case of the yellow card given, teams were told why they were warned. We gave team B a yellow card after they left the field, but they were told about it before their next match started.

I have already heard some positives and negatives about this system. FIRST will benefit if we discuss this fairly. Please post your opinions and thoughts on this.

Sincerely,
Andy Baker

Re: Yellow card / Red card usage at 2004 IRI
 

I thought the Red/Yellow card usage was great, it is a great way of giving a warning that means something, and makes sure that the offender changes thier ways before serious pentaltys are issued.

Re: Yellow card / Red card usage at 2004 IRI
 

Andy,

Does this mean if a team earns a second yellow card, they're disqualified?

If these cards are being done "soccer style", I'd like to propose a soccer style ammendment. During the World Cup and other two stage FIFA competitions, a player's yellow cards carry on throughout each phase of the competition. This means that if a player picks up a yellow in game one, and as well in game two, he is disqualified for game three. However these cards do not carry over to the second round of competition.

When it comes to the elimination rounds, an entire alliance could be disqualified for a yellow card earned by a single team in a qualification round match. That's why I propose that a team only be allowed 1 yellow card for each round of competition (qualfication and elimination).

Since the referees still have the discretion to award a red card at any point, I don't see this as a huge restriction. Any team who tries to take advantage of the fact that the cards have been reset, could easily be assessed a red card. I'd just hate to see a second offense, which only warrants a warning, be the demise of an entire alliance.

Re: Yellow card / Red card usage at 2004 IRI
 

It DQ them from the match, not the whole tournament. And unlike soccer, there are allowed to compete in thier next match.

Re: Yellow card / Red card usage at 2004 IRI
 

I understood this part of the system. The soccer parallel I was trying to draw was in cumulative nature of the penalties, not in reference to the timing of the punishments. (Clearly it would be ludicrous to dq a team from a subsequent match, unless their robot was an inherent safety risk)

Re: Yellow card / Red card usage at 2004 IRI
 

I really liked the whole card system. It’s good for the spectator because they can learn some of the intricacies of the rules. Also it can show other teams rules that the refs are looking closer at enforcing. Another reason it is good is that before when you got DQ'ed sometimes there wasn’t a real clear explanation given to teams. This gives a channel of communication between the refs and the teams that before wasn’t present.

Re: Yellow card / Red card usage at 2004 IRI
 

I liked the yellow/red card system, and i hope to try and implement it at Brunswick Eruption 3.0

Re: Yellow card / Red card usage at 2004 IRI
 

Ahh, the infamous team....er...C DQing. Receiving a yellow in the qualifyers, and a red in the elims. Yellow cards SHOULD carry over in this case to the elims. Because of in more minor or unsure of intention offenses, such as the arm situation with team C, it grants them, "a free hit" during the elims otherwise. In this specific case, there were other ways for Team C to prevent the opposing robot from haning, other than the manner they did, which would not grant a DQing, or even a yellow card.
My only problem with the yellow card, is that it forces the ref into the red card call the second time, even if the action wouldnt normally be a DQ. If it occurs a second time, and the second time it could very well be an accident, or it is far less severe of an infringment, if you dont call it it looks like favoritism or not being strong enough to DQ. Either way it can upset teams, and decrease the level of fair play. But if you do call it, your making an alliance that doesnt necisarrily deserve to lose, lose. Id go with a similar system, of warning them in private. That way, if a lesser case occurs, the only team that knows about it, is the infracting team.

Re: Yellow card / Red card usage at 2004 IRI
 

Karthik -

To put what I think you said into different words..
Teams should be able to recieve more than one yellow, and the red card should be used on more severe offences.

- For some instance I would agree, some I would disagree.
Disagree: If a team commits the same "foul' twice. I believe that if a team does what 469 did, go at a robot with the arm out. The first time, the were given a yellow card, and warned that if it was done again they would recieve a red.

Agree: If a team commits 2 different fouls. For instance; If a team tipped another robot in one match, and the grabbed on the ther drive base in another and didn't let go. That would warrent for a red card the second match, but I believe that there should be different catagories for yellow card cumulation.

Re: Yellow card / Red card usage at 2004 IRI
 

It's an interesting point, but I think making other teams and the audience aware of the infraction is the most important piece of the system. By doing this, you make all the other teams aware of how the refs are viewing certain behavior and therefore you reduce the possibility of other teams making the same mistake (and that really is the point, right? We'd rather other teams learn from one team's mistake than have to punish multiple teams for the same thing). Also I feel it makes each team a little more accountable for their actions. I would expect that most teams would be a little embarassed about being called out in front of the audience for a rules violation, and that alone might be enough of a motivator for everyone to think about their actions before they become a problem instead of after.

I thought the system at IRI was done well. The refs did a great job of applying the rules fairly to all teams.

Re: Yellow card / Red card usage at 2004 IRI
 

I agree with you Mr. Flowerday.

I remember watching many rounds, and a certian person next to me was actaully yelling at andy to give them a yellow card. If he didn't do it, this person probably would have beat him up. (kidding of course)

By telling the audience it show other teams that they cannot get away with the behavior, and that they must follow the rules if the wish to go unpenalized.

Re: Yellow card / Red card usage at 2004 IRI
 

well this can all go with the discussion, with how much like soccer do you want FIRST to become, it may get to the point where parents will start brawls in the bleachers

There are 2 reasons why there are rules... atleast 2 that i can think of... rules make the game more entertaining, and they are in place, for you (or the robots) saftey and protections, as a soccer ref, i cant even count how many times kids would walk onto my field without shinguards and cleats... i always threw them off, some did some didnt, they are required for a reason, reasons i have learned.

The Yellow and Red card is great it shows proof that the refs just do more than belly checks and count balls.


This is a game folks, and rules are rules, even if you kinda sorta broke one rule in the end its still broken

-Big Mike
Off to Fix my Rules... They are All Broken

Re: Yellow card / Red card usage at 2004 IRI
 

I think the card system is great....too many times I have seen over the years teams disqualified for something that they were warned about several times and brushed off (then complained afterwards) and sometimes I have seen teams disqualified w/o any kind of warning because of what the other teams have done similar. Now with the new card system, teams will physically see the warning and know that the referees are serious truely serious. They will have a good enough warning and have no reason to complain about a DQ coming out of nowhere. Excellent idea and Id like to see it used in the upcoming FIRST season.

Re: Yellow card / Red card usage at 2004 IRI
 

In my opinion, if there is any doubt into whether there was any ill intention in "pushy" situations, the referees should penalize them. The refs' jobs/volunteer duties are to keep the FIRST competition friendly and graciously professional. I agree with the previous thread that ramming is illegal. FIRST components are not designed to withstand kinetic energies put on them.
If a robot is moving along and another robot puts its arm in the way and it gets knocked over, that is unintentional (no or low penalties).
If a robot backs up 10 feet and then cries "Charge!!", that is "ramming" and should have a high penalty, depending on the damage that it does. (ie tip over = yellow card. disable (electronic damage) = instant dq). If a robot is moving along and it gets some electrical damage, that is their fault, but if it gets charged, that isn't fair.
In addition, it should be illegal for a robot to lead with a "spear". while I don't doubt that team A had no intention of shutting off (or causing severe electrical damge to) team B, it definitely could have happened. If the claw had opened, and it had landed in the electronics, even if they tried to let go, it would have undoubtedly stripped team B's electronics. I would have felt terrible for team B if their robot got disabled that way and they had to miss out on being IRI champions.

But the Refs at IRI were great in that respect. They called penalties if they had the slightest doubt, which is what should be done. Hats off to them. :)

Re: Yellow card / Red card usage at 2004 IRI
 

I was not able to attend IRI, but I can tell that this is a badly needed system for all of FIRST competition. Excellent idea. :cool:

Re: Yellow card / Red card usage at 2004 IRI
 

Sean has a good point here. The solution to this is the fact that a "yellow card" is given for only very serious offenses that are on the edge of being DQ situations. It should be meant to be a smidge bit away from being a DQ. The refs are ALMOST giving a DQ to a team, but they are not 100% sure about it, so they give a yellow card. That is the reason I said this above:

-------

We appreciate the kind words, but we really only call the penalties if we are sure about the call. There were many times where the refs were not sure (they had a doubt) about something, and therefore we did not call it. This happened with tipping, assisting a goal, and ball corral encroachment.

An example:
"one of those balls might have gone in the goal after touching their robot."
"are you sure?"
"no, it was close, I am not sure"
"then we're not going to call it"

---

As for the yellow card, I like the fact that it puts the onus back on the team. There is no penalty for having a yellow card, but the team knows that if they do something similar in a forthcoming match, they will get DQ'ed.

A detail that needs to be ironed out is the quantity of yellow cards. Karthik brings up a good point above, with the idea of getting cleared yellow card status for the elimination rounds. I would vote against the idea, for 2 reasons:

1. getting cleared status for the finals lessens the severity of a yellow card
2. while there is no penalty for a yellow card in a qualification match, it WILL make an impact on the decisions of a picking team: "should we pick team A or B? they both are good... but team B got a yellow card... hmmmm"

Andy B.

Re: Yellow card / Red card usage at 2004 IRI
 

Wow good point...this would even further deter teams from trying to live to close to the edge in qualification matches becuase getting a yellow card then would definately lessen the chances of being picked. Being one penalty away from a DQ could end up costing your team a trip to elim's. Knowing this throughout all of the Q. Matches would definately have an impact on the way the drivers compete.

Re: Yellow card / Red card usage at 2004 IRI
 

Andy, one thing i saw as working with the displays in the Aux. gym is that there was no field display in there. There was the "pit display" of rankings being projected, but the drive teams that were located in there, if were not present on the field during the explaination of a yellow or red card call is they didnt know it occured, or why it occured. Yes they have the team out on the field in the stands but i know of many teams that dont have communication between the team in stands and drive team much during a competition. So i think if this system is going to be put into work, when a red card or yellow card is given, everyone should be made aware of the reasoning behind it and it should be saved for referance so if a team asks they can be told later on why a car was given.

Also another question would be could these cards follow a team to their next competition. I know that sounds doubtful, but think about it a little. Team X at competition 1 intentionally hooks a robot and get a yellow card for it. They dont do it again at competition 1 but when Team X is at competition 2, they do the same thing over again intentionally and once again get a yellow card. Now if this second occurance would deserve a red card, but due them trying to fool the crew because they are at a new event, should they get a dq for intentionally hooking a bot a second time or will cards thrown at an event stay at that event only?

Any way i think this idea was implemented great at IRI and could be improved into a well thought out and desinged system in which could be used at any/all FIRST competition and would improve the competitions.

Nice job Mr. Baker and other IRI refs on your fair and professional job done at the 2004 IRI.

~Mike

Re: Yellow card / Red card usage at 2004 IRI
 

I finally gathered a my thoughts about the card system at IRI. At the prompting of Aidan I submitted new rule <g35> . This is the card system. I have hit the wall several times on some of the issue you bring up. Do it penalize to much for minor infractions especially in the elims? Should there be different penalties for different things? If you notice, my first and second drafts even have a two match time limit. After watching it play out a IRI I think how it was handled was the fairest and best way to make the system work. I'll list some answers to my questions and then why I think IRI implementation worked the best.

About the penalizing for minor infractions, it could happen. Should it happen, maybe yes maybe no. At some point we as teams have to give some discretion to the referees and accept what they hand down. We can gain a feel for the calls refs throughout the day by the yellow cards they hand out. It is kind of like playing basketball. Some days the refs will "let them play" while other time they want to "be in control of the game". Refs use a lot of discretion in making calls and are expected to make fair and balanced calls. If they didn't we wouldn't love Andy so much.

In the thoughts of different cards for tipping or ramming or other illegal actions I think we shouldn't need to tell teams what they can't do. You should know and gain a feel of how tight they are calling it throughout the day. They keep slimming the rule book for a reason. For you will read it. That whole no entangling, tipping, ramming rule should be followed. I know it can be unintentional because of the distance, line of sight, and controls of the robot. But if you've been warned and you know I might entangle with, tip, or ram that robot that could cause possible harm to it and be DQed, you should stay a little farther away or be more cautious in your controls, aka not coming full speed towards them with your arm out towards them. So no seperate penalties, it's all against the rules. Plus it helps simplify the rulebooks that some people must use to level their workbench.

After watching IRI, I think that the yellow card should carry through both to the matches and elims. Unless the elims next year a greatly different that is how it should be. This makes it fair plus adds that new dimension to the game.

I thought it was implemented great at IRI. The refs and audience knew what was going on and had a great time. Hope to see it used in some form in the coming years. And since we are on the sports penalty topic, this year red cards(soccer) next year instant replay (football). j/k..I don't think we would want that. We would go from 8 matches a regional to 5 matches just for replay.

edit: Dez, I just don't see cards following to next competitions. Clean slate. Can you imagine getting a yellow card in a match in Sacramento but being DQed in ATL for the penalty carrying over. Each competition is seperate.

Re: Yellow card / Red card usage at 2004 IRI
 

I also was not at IRI. Work is such a pain at times. I would like to start by saying that it is good that people are trying to make things better. I am also one person with one persons outlook on things. That being said .....

I still don't like this card thing. The refs this year had a hard enough time knowing what the rules were. Every event that I attended (6 in all) had different rulings and many rule changes. As a hockey ref, baseball ump and player of many sports, one thing is for sure. The rules must be set in concrete before the season starts and they must not change. This is not an option! For some reason FIRST believes that it is their mandate to screw up the teams and their machines by changing the rules. There is no reason for a yellow card. You state that a team does something questionable or not quite bad enough to DQ then they get a yellow card. If they do it again then they will get DQ'd. If there was no foul the first time then there is no foul the second time. They still have not broken the rules. They have, in your ( or the refs ) mind come close to the edge but not quite crossed. That's what this game as well as the world is about. Do your best WITHIN the rules and compete hard to be your best. Will you or others sometime go over the line, yes of course and then you get penalized. But to give warnings that 'you are too close for us and if you make me uncomfortable agin then I will penalize you', are just not in true sportsmanship or in the spirit of competition. Measures are in place to penalize teams that deserve it. Let's just use them and get the rules down before we start the season. Robots are to be make sturdy and designed to the game. Teams that have not protected their electronics should be DQ'd for poor design with safety being sooooo important.

Please excuse my rantings but certain things need to be fixed before we start adding more, less defined, decisions for the refs. I believe that most refs do a great job and do not favor any teams. I believe that they try to call plays according to the interpratation (spelling) they they are given at the time. I believe that they can have one of the most stressfull jobs at the event and they are not given enough credit for wat they do. I would like to thank all of the refs for their willingness to put themselves into this situation

As for the flags, forget it.

Re: Yellow card / Red card usage at 2004 IRI
 

My only problem with the yellow card/red card system is that it forces the referees to call a DQ in situations where they might not normally make that call. Sometimes, you might be willing to give a team the benefit of the doubt in a questionable DQ situation, but if that team has already received a yellow card, the standard required for a DQ becomes a lot lower. Basically, I am concerned that actions that normally would not merit a DQ would receive one, simply because the team in question already got a yellow card. While not completely the same situation, I did worry that this is what we did to "Team C" at IRI. Do we want to be lowering the burden of proof for second offenses? Perhaps it is the way we want to go, to make teams consider their actions more carefully, but we must make sure that is the intended result.

Re: Yellow card / Red card usage at 2004 IRI
 

Whatever rule/penalty system FIRST chooses to employ, in my opinion, it must strike a fair balance between offense and defense. BOTH types of robots and strategies should be evenly encouraged, and FIRST should not favor one style of play over the other. In the case of the yellow/red card system, any yellow card you levy upon a team better be for something above and beyond the normal, competitive pushing and shoving that defensive teams like to use. I do not want to see any "let's protect the prima donna star quarterback from getting a hangnail" rules that have curtailed the aggressiveness of NFL pass rushers. I do not want the referees putting the fear of God into teams that like to employ perfectly legitimate defensive strategies. However, whenever a pass rusher delivers a blow to a QB's head or throws a late hit, I expect to see the proper penalties levied against them.

Ultimately, I still believe that regardless of what system you have in place, the human element is always going to dictate the fairness of refereeing at a FIRST event. At the IRI, we were permitted to go about our usual defensive business without any yellow cards whatsoever. I think Andy and his crew drew the proper line between normal aggressive driving and more dangerous and potentially damaging maneuvers. To be fair, this was also the case 99% of the time at most FIRST events we attended. The yellow/red card system worked at IRI because the referees were fair-minded people who communicated with each other and the involved teams to discuss each issue and reach a consensus conclusion, and they then PERSONALLY COMMUNICATED their decision to the teams and the audience. That is the one big difference I can see between FIRST ref crews and Andy's crew - Andy goes above and beyond the call of duty to explain the ruling to everyone at the event. Many times, at FIRST events, there is insufficient explanation of referee rulings, and I think this generates unnecessary uncertainty, anger, and bitterness. I believe the IRI refereeing style should be the standard practice for ALL FIRST referees. This is the type of referee performance I expect to see in place at every official FIRST event.

Re: Yellow card / Red card usage at 2004 IRI
 

FIRST made great strides this past season in the penalty department. Before this year, everything was all or nothing - DQ/disable or no penalty what-so-ever.

The yellow card system has its merits, but once again, I feel it is a little too binary. Okay, maybe its tertiary since now there's three options - DQ, yellow card, or no penaly.

I would like to see the point penalties moved over to aggressive play. If you tip a team - 25 pts; if you ram them repeatedly - 10 pts; if you entangle - 10 pts; if you get more than X penalties (or perhaps more than Y penalty points), you're DQ'd. Obviously the point values used here are for illustration purposes only and would need to be thought of a little better.

I think it makes it much easier to call a penalty if the penalty fits the crime a little better. I like the football anaolgy: you're offsides - 5 yards; holding - 10 yards; late hit to the head - 15 yards. The current system in FIRST is: offsides - DQ&forfeit; holding - DQ&forfeit; late hit to the head - DQ&forfeit.

With the current system, its no surprise that the refs like to look the other way - who wants to DQ a team? If the ref can simply throw a flag and take take away some points, I think the calls will be made more frequently. I also like the immediate ramification of the penalty rather than having something carry over to future matches.

Anyway, that is just a thought.

Re: Yellow card / Red card usage at 2004 IRI
 

Here's a question that doesn't have an inherently obvious answer, at least for me. If a team earns a red card and gets disqualified, are they disqualified for any subsequent yellow cards? Since two yellow cards merits a dq, it seems only natural that a red followed by a yellow, would also merit a dq. (A second one in this case)

The cumulative nature of these cards will definitely make teams think twice come alliance selection time. Are we sure this is what we want? Let me give an example.

From the described situation, although it was accidental, a yellow card was clearly merited. The thing is, this action was an honest mistake. I don't want to end up with a situation, where a picking team sees a yellow card in the standings, and says "oh they're too risky of a pick, let's skip them", especially when the card meriting action was accidental.

I don't want to diminish the value of yellow cards to the point where they're mere slaps on the proverbial wrist, but I also don't want to see an accident, or a single poor decision by a 16 year old driver keep teams out of the elimination rounds.

Re: Yellow card / Red card usage at 2004 IRI
 

this happened with a team at IRI. they were debating between their pick of two different teams. Team A could/had run the field collecting balls and capping. Team B did well capping and could hold balls, they just didn't have the same dominating style of Team A. The only problem was, Team A didn't play smart, at all. And that was reflected in their yellow card (where Andy literally chased them off the field to explain their warning to them...good job AB). The drafting team drafted Team B who played well and faught hard and were only three balls and a hang away from winning it all.

seconldly...this thread rocks. really great comments from everybody. keep it up!

finally...I agree with Chris Hibner's philosophy, as long as it is done right. The 25 pts for tipping should be "intentional tipping". I know, I know...what is "intentional"? But at Nats, we had two robots in one match drive up us...we stopped driving...they didn't...and they tipped. That isn't intentional...and if you'd see our robot...you'd know we didn't design it with that in mind, the other two teams just had bigger wheels. To think that we'd have to make 10 balls just to alleviate the pain of our opponents tipping makes me scared...especially when we weren't good at getting balls and I wasn't that good of a shooter (it would have taken about 12-14 balls for me to hit 10). Pass interference isn't pass interference if both players honestly go for the ball. Refs at football games make snap decision calls, and they aren't nearly as smart as our refs (sorry if I offended football refs...my uncle is one). Our refs can take the time they need to talk it out, talk with the teams involved (never seen that happen at a football game) and make a fair call. Once again, American football rules over European football. :)

Re: Yellow card / Red card usage at 2004 IRI
 

Cards shouldnt carry over to other competitions. Otherwise one foul play at a regional can cost you your chance at a win at another event, by having a team not pick them because of the yellow card carrying over. In many cases drivers/coaches may differ from event to event due to schedule complications and such. Such an occurance happened to our team, where the only constant between our 2 regionals was our HP, and coach, both our drivers were different. If one driver is more aggresive than another, and gains a yellow card, why punish the other? But, that makes it basically an idv. penalty, not a team, and if we pursue that mentality, a) it add another lvl of complexity, and b) teams will rotate drivers to avoid being DQed.
Since intention cant be determine in 4 ot of 5 cases, I say we give them the benefit of the doubt, and not have cards carry over.
But within a competition, it needs to follow into the elims. That is when the penalties and results will matter the most. The yellow card may keep them from the finals, but if it doesnt follow them, their actions may eliminate 3 other team, instead of just holding them out. And I think in 9/10 occaisions, if a team hasnt been DQed, but has 1 yellow card, the team will select them anyway, due to the capabilities of their robot.

Re: Yellow card / Red card usage at 2004 IRI
 

I agree.

Forgive and forget.

New weekend, new regional, clean slate.

Re: Yellow card / Red card usage at 2004 IRI
 

Not to mention that would be a ton of information for the refs to keep up with from comp to comp. A lot of teams go a lot of different places, and the refs would have to have just a 3 ring binder of teams with infractions from each competition.

I was doing the video at IRI, and I personally liked the red and yellow card system. It was nice because the infraction was always explained in detail withat it was the team did to deserve it. The yellow card system just seemed to me to be a friendly reminder that whatever move isn't appropriate and please don't do it again. It was gracious, and it certainly helped the crowd understand what happened. Not to mention us video geeks who were busy running the switcher and didn't always take in what happened in the matches. :]

Re: Yellow card / Red card usage at 2004 IRI
 

I also really agree with the card idea. My props to everyone who made it work.

(I was not at IRI but) I have some suggestions based on some comments here.

I don't think only two cards should be used. I would proposed a Red, Yellow, and Black card. Black would be the least offensive, Red the most. A black card might be issued for excessive pushing, or dangerous behavior. A yellow card would be issued for repetition of violent behavior, and a red would be for violent behavior and/or excessive damage to other robots (such as partial or complete loss of robot functionality).

Each black card received would subtract 5 points from your alliance's score for the match, each yellow would subtract 10, and a red would subtract 15.

HOWEVER, a team the receives a red card would also be put on a blackball list, meaning that if they receive another red card (or two yellows or 4 blacks), then they would be DQ'd.

ALSO:
4 black cards = 1 yellow card
2 yellow cards = 1 red card
2 blacks and 1 yellow = 1 red

Advantages: A point reduction makes the threat of elimination (DQage?) that much more serious. It could have a negative impact on the standing of that team, which would be a fair penalty. This method also means that two penalites wouldn't be an automatic disqualification, which makes the refs jobs a bit easier. It allows for accidents.

Hope that makes sense...

MrToast

(and cards shouldn't carry over to other competitions. team should have enough honor not to try a stupid move like what was suggested)

Re: Yellow card / Red card usage at 2004 IRI
 

I liked this system because it made it easier to call the tougher calls. Take, for example, If a team is accused of tipping and immediately DQed, the ref will be less inclined to call it. This is due to the fact that it is easy to argue that it was unintentional. If they get a public warning first, and do it again, it makes it harder to argue that it was intentional.

I hope that made some sort of sense, and I hope FIRST does something like this next year.

Re: Yellow card / Red card usage at 2004 IRI
 

I'm strongly against point penalties for all but the smallest
infractions. Why? It encourages doing illegal things as a strategic
move. If intentional tipping was 25 points, it's a no brainer to tip
237 before they get on the bar. Even if it's 50 points, I'd still
rather have 237 on the ground, then keeping other people off the bar.
What about intentionally ramming 45 as they get ready to put the 2x
ball on a goal full of 15 balls. As long as you ram then 7 times or
less (and keep them from placing the ball) you've come out ahead.

Even if it was 100 points for an intentional tip, it wouldn't be that
hard for 2 good offensive teams to beat the 1 remaining team, where
they might not have been able to if both were there. If it were 200
points, you might as well DQ, the team.

Re: Yellow card / Red card usage at 2004 IRI
 

Your last line sums up the problem with that. Even though it may make sense to you or me, an observer who doesnt know anything about FIRST wouldnt be able to take it in as quickly. Most people at least a vague idea about the yellow/red card system, and if they dont, it can be explained quickly to them. So basically, your way isnt quite simple enough. Interesting concept though.

Re: Yellow card / Red card usage at 2004 IRI
 

I agree with what your saying, but I also partially agree with him in the fact that there should be some sort of severity between penalties. Whether it be certain penalties hurt you(and you alone) in your next match(you only get half the QPs from your next match of something) or purely take away QPs form your ranking, and lesser penalties only DQ you, I dunno. But we need something to seperate knocking over a team and ripping out a teams wiring.

Re: Yellow card / Red card usage at 2004 IRI
 

I am strongy against a point penalty, and here is why....

Who remembers watching the webcast of the first FIRST regional this year? For all of Friday, if you scored 60 pts, it was basically an automatic win. At Nationals, a 60 would win maybe 6% of matches. So how could you set a point penalty system? At nationals the penatlies wouldn't mean as much, and that is where they are most important! Also, would the change the point penalties from year to year? I rarely saw a 100+ match in 2003 (stack attack); but this year, that was only two hanging bots!

A point system would be too confusing to inforce, and too confusing to change from week to week and year to year. There must be penalties that carry the same weight no matter what year, what week, what tournament.

-Ben

Re: Yellow card / Red card usage at 2004 IRI
 

I've seen a lot of really great ideas come out of this topic. I have a few of my own.

I noticed that a lot of people are trying to use a (seemingly obviously and accurate) comparison between sports and that of FIRST. I think there may be a few things to consider.

1. Athletic events tend to be longer, in many sports refs can take time to discuss between plays and see instant an replay.

2. FIRST has historically used a tournament format very different than that of sports (qualification and elimination rounds).

3. The "team" size in first is very unique since there are only two "players" per "team."

I agree with a lot of the principles with a card system... but I think there's a penalty that nobody here has metioned which should be used MUCH more frequently.

Anybody remember that disable switch?

How about this for a rule:
If you're not playing nice, then you don't play for the rest of the round.

Doesn't that seem fair?

Examples:
If you tip a robot, you're shut off.
If you're banging up against a robot destructively, you're shut off.

This rule could probably be coupled with that of the card system to avoid a kamikaze type playing style.

I'll admit that this will take swift action by one ref or nearly instant voting, but nevertheless, I think that this sort of penalty should be used more often in gameplay.

Just my two cents,

Matt

Re: Yellow card / Red card usage at 2004 IRI
 

Matt,

I'd say I agree in a way. I think a lot of things would work if they were enforced consistently and across the boards. I think people know the rules. Drivers should definitely know the rules. They know what is friendly play and playing mean. I lifeguard and I constantly tell kids to play nice. They know what it is to play nice and usually stop at least until I turn my head. The greatest issue I saw was to be consistent, be fair, be simple, and be open. Point penalty or time penalties can be obscure and confusing. The previous reffing wasn't consistent and definitely wasn't open and easy to understand. I relate a lot to sports because it is somethings a lot of people can relate. Basketball is good when it comes to talking about consistency. If I drive the lane (ha!) and get called for a charge and then go down the court and get ran over by their player, I expect to get the same call. That's what most people are looking for here. Consistency with the game and within the game.

BTW, We also need to add some ridiculous signals for the ref to use to make calls, just to watch Andy do them. Just imagine Andy calling team A for ramming team B doing the techno ticks dance. Ha!

Re: Yellow card / Red card usage at 2004 IRI
 

I thought the Yellow card/Red card system was great. FIRST has needed something like this for years. I think it was properly enforced at the IRI. The only change that I would make is that if FIRSt continues to award point penalties for other game violations (ie foot faults, robots in ball chute, etc) that there should also be a point penalty associate with a yellow card. After all, breaking the ball chute plane can cause you to lose if you get a penatly, but you more or less get one free game misconduct with a yellow card. A yellow card should have a negative point value so that it has risk of reversing the game outcome if it is awarded.

Re: Yellow card / Red card usage at 2004 IRI
 

After I went home yesterday, I KNEW there would be a post regarding this. I should have clarified. I'm not saying that the point penalties should completely replace the DQ penalty - just enhance it.

I still think that this year's DQ rules should be in place. Intentional tipping, entanglement, damage, etc should be an automatic and immediate DQ. The point penalties would be reserved for more of the gray area of the rules. Basically, I'm proposing to replace the yellow card with some points. When I mentioned that accumulated penalties should result in a DQ, I was thinking like basketball: someone can be immediately ejected for a flagrant offense (in FIRST: immediate DQ for intentional damage), or they can foul out after so many fouls (in FIRST: DQ after so many penalties or penalty points).

Does anyone really think that point penalties are confusing? It seems we had point penalties this year for a lot of things - breaking the plane, stepping out of bounds, goal tending, etc. I don't think that was too confusing.

Re: Yellow card / Red card usage at 2004 IRI
 

The one real problem with that is, it's really tough to make a disable call that quickly. I had to make a couple disable calls at IRI on robots that were outside the playing field and/or damaging the field barriers. Both are fairly straightforward calls, but I was still hesitant and unsure what to do, because disabling a robot can have such a dramatic effect on a match. If it's that tough to quickly call a disable on a robot that has fallen over and gotten entangled, and essentially out of the match, imagine how tough it would be to disable a robot on what is essentially a judgement call by one person.

I think if FIRST were to implement a disable penalty system like you suggest, the rules for disables would need to be extremely well-defined. If you rely on one lone referee to make a snap judgement, you open up the whole situation for argument. And, even with well-defined disable rules, you will still have plenty of controversy every time a robot gets shut off. No matter how defined the rules are, teams will always complain and say the rule does not apply in that situation.

The current system of DQs and the IRI card system aren't perfect, but it's a lot more reliable than instant disables, IMHO. Having had to make calls with far less gravity and ambiguity, I don't think it's a better solution. If it could be made completely objective and defined, it might work, but any time you leave total decision power to one person in the heat of the moment, you're asking for trouble.

Re: Yellow card / Red card usage at 2004 IRI
 

I'm going to toot my own horn here a little bit...

This was what I originally came up with in the <G101> thread. Three cards (Black, Yellow, Red). A black card is issued for overly aggresive behavior and results in a 5 second shutoff for that robot. A yellow card is issued when a robot damages part of another robot and results in a 10 second shutoff for the offending robot. A red card is issued when a robot disables (IE, tips, destroys vital components) another robot and results in a 15 second shutoff for the offending robot.

Perhaps I'm speaking from inexperience here, but it shouldn't be TOO hard to make these calls. I think it wouldn't be that difficult to see when a robot is being really aggresive or damages/disables another robot. A temporary shutoff time seems like an adequate penalty (perhaps throw in some point reductions?) because it could seriously hamper one alliance's strategy. So if you screw up somebody else's strat by being violent, your strat should get screwed too. Seems fair.

You can see my post (with much more detail) here: <G101> Thread

Enjoy!

MrToast

Re: Yellow card / Red card usage at 2004 IRI
 

it's not that it is that hard to see intentional...however...the coordination between all of the refs, field crew, knowing which bot to shut off is difficult. at IRI we had probably the best ref crew and scoring/match running crew available in FIRST AND they were right next to each other. Andy was rarely more than 8 ft from Ken and the rest of the scoring table and they still had problems coordinating which bot to turn off at times. not because it is hard, but because it's a noisy, action-packed two minutes and the refs don't want (and the fans and scorers don't want) to have to scream at each other during the match to constantly disable robots for different amounts of time. let the refs watch the match...then make the call. if it needs immediate attention (few things do but it happens) they can take care of that. but let them do their job without having to get that complicated

Re: Yellow card / Red card usage at 2004 IRI
 

Headsets?

MrToast

Re: Yellow card / Red card usage at 2004 IRI
 

I must disagree that it would be easy to say what is agressive or not. Just by reading this thread there are many different opinions. Take the Championships last year. One of the teams (forgive me for my poor memory) was built for one purpose only. To play defensive. I heard many coments on how well they played. I also heard just as many comments on how they should have been DQ'd and not allowed to continue with their agressive play. This thread is not to discuss either point but this is stated to show there are always different ways to look at agressive or defensive.

As for issues like entanglement, our team had it's wire/pulley system destoyed a couple of times at Championship alone. Should the team that did it be DQ'd or penalized? I don't believe so. Maybe FIRST could have fixed the problem by giving us a little more weight to work with. We then could have protected our wires. This is also unreasonable. We built the robot knowing what the pitfall might be. The wires were partly protected by our frame but we had to go with weight. We were given the instructions to build our robot robust. We knew from day 1 that there could be interaction. I give no fault to the teams that caused us damage. This does not mean that a team that INTENTIONALLY damages another should not be shut down as per the rules. There is also a rule that states if a ref decides that a robot has a part that can cause damage that it must be fixed before their next match.

One other issue. It is nice if you have time to explain rules like they did at IRI. This would cause every team to have at least 1 less match at competitions. Having worked as an announcer for the last 3 years and being at 10 regionals and 2 Championships, I see how rushed we are to keep things going. I continually have someone pushing to keep things on time. There is no time to stop and explain all of the penalties and infractions to the teams and spectators. I even had a hard time getting explanations for refs calls during the change over as the refs were busy scoring andgetting ready for the next match..

Sorry again for the ranting.

Re: Yellow card / Red card usage at 2004 IRI
 

As a Scorekeeper, i know personally i have never had a problem hearing what the refs and field crew need to convey to me. And also whenever i have had to disable a robot, there never has been a problem conveying what robot to shut down.
Though the problem i see with this whole suite is not what type of penalty system to employ, but the penalties themselves. As of being 8 events thus far this season (4 being offical events, 3 others using FIRST ref crews) is the refs themselves. They are human and have emotions and thus not one ref crew to the next, have the calls been consistant and 100% the same like it should be. I think before we spend time to come up with a way to call penalties, i think the we should find out how the penalties should be defined and held consistent from the first event to the last event.

Re: Yellow card / Red card usage at 2004 IRI
 

I agreed, as long as a penalty system is implemented consistently across all the official competitions then any system is acceptable.
Fair or not fair it they are the rules to follow at all competition and everyone much deal with it.

It was a great idea to beta test the color card penalty system at IRI.
I do like the idea of using color card penalty system.
It is recognized worldwide because it is used in international soccer. It will convey penalties quickly to the audience and teams when the cards are held up instead of flags tossed on the floor.

Only change I would suggest is to have the referees show the cards immediately when the violent is detected and expand the reason for the penalty afterward.
:)

Re: Yellow card / Red card usage at 2004 IRI
 

Things are starting to get off topic.

So... How do you think the Red/Yellow card system worked?

Re: Yellow card / Red card usage at 2004 IRI
 

Refs are human. That's just the way things go. In every sporting event, spelling bee, round of Jeopardy, FIRST match, science fair (I know...FIRST ISN'T A SCIENCE FAIR)--refs are human. I know I've never been a ref...anywhere. I also know that I yell at the TV when somebody has a late hit on Peyton Manning that goes uncalled, I scream at the ref when J. O'Neal (the one that is in basketball because he loves it) is fouled and it isn't called, I talk trash to umpires at baseball games because their strike zone is nowhere NEAR consistent, and (I'll admit it) I yell at refs because I told them that a moveable goal in the ball chute wasn't a penalty and they called it on us or I feel like somebody's being too agressive. However, at the end of the day, most of the time it wasn't a late hit, Jermaine should have been called for a charge and wasn't-whew, the balls are moving 95 miles an hour and I can't see them any better than the ump can and it turns out it was strike three, and you move on because FIRST isn't about the penalty or the un-penalty or whose robot is agressive and who is timid.

The card system worked. Well. It was used properly and (except for when Paul yellow carded Andy during his "Thank you" speech) wasn't abused. I applaud the referees. Kudos. You did the job everybody thinks they can do but few ever really can do.

If we're worried about taking all of this time...why not shorten team introductions? What's more important, knowing why your alliance partner was DQ'd or hearing all 45 of your "main" sponsors announced and asking who's gonna win the match to the crowd? (I love all of these things and FIRST wouldn't be FIRST without them...dont' get me wrong here.) But I think if we're going to have a method in place for dealing with overly agressive robots, we need to give it the time it deserves.

We ran something like 111 matches at IRI. 48 teams * 8 matches each / 4 teams per match is only 96 matches. Some regionals have more teams that 48, some have less. You have to know, if you go to a popular regional, you're going to get fewer matches.

We got behind on Friday because we were moving slow and talking a lot, not because refs were explaining penalties. Saturday (I believe) we were early. And that's when most of the lengthy explaining happened. If the refs are going to talk they need to pick one that is their spokesman. He should be articulate and know what he needs to say and that he needs to get it out. That's what will keep things moving.

All in all, I'm a fan of the lenient version of the card system that was in place at IRI. One that isn't totally objective (like fouls in basketball-6 and you're out), but one that isn't totally subjective either (like baseball-make the ump mad and you're out). It should let the refs be human on two levels.

1.) It lets them make mistakes and have time to fix it.
2.) It lets them have some feeling and care when making calls, while still following procedure.

(this may have been my longest post ever... :) I love this thread!)

Re: Yellow card / Red card usage at 2004 IRI
 

Well John now that you bring it up, I think it worked well.

By issuing yellow cards the ref's were able to warn a team that got one "Hey you are going a little too far there, you don't want to do it again" and most of the time teams listened.

Yellow cards made drivers and coaches more aware of their robot and their actions on the field. Duing one of our strategy planning talks before he finals Team 980's coach said, "Remember we have a yellow card, don't do anything stupid", to their drivers and they were careful not to bring out that Red card.

My team was on the other side of 2 Red Card DQ's. Once in the quarterfinals where it was an obvious DQ situation (Hooked on and couldn't let go) and one where a previous yellow card had been issued and the action occured again, leading to a red card. In both of these cases, and all the other ones that I saw, the card system was used in the way that Andy explained it on Friday morning of IRI. Reasons for the card were explained, and the referees always conferred before issuing one.

There will always be some rules that aren't totally clear and are interpreted different by different people, it is just the way it is. All umpires don't call strikes the same way, all NFL Refs have a different defintion of penalties in their game. But they do have some guidelines to follow, as did Andy and the crew at IRI. They enforced the clear rules, and interpreted all the others to the best of their ability.

The card system test was an excellent idea for IRI.

Re: Yellow card / Red card usage at 2004 IRI
 

I think this single statement, more than any other, proves that this system has it's desired effect.

-John

Re: Yellow card / Red card usage at 2004 IRI
 

I agree with Johnny V here, if the card system makes teams calm down with fear of DQ, it's worked. My only qualm with it is there a way to see what teams have had red cards, yellow, etc. My fear is that a team might pair up with another warned team and not know it, then all of a sudden their alliance partners are disabled. It dosn't have to be shown to everyone, but just to the team heads. Well, that's just my opinion, but otherwise, from what I read, this system is probably the best thing for FIRST competitons since live scoring from last year.

Re: Yellow card / Red card usage at 2004 IRI
 

It worked very well, not perfectly, but no system can even come close to perfect. My problems with it have been mentioned over the last couple pages. But all in all, its probably the most effective system used thus far.
And dont have a penalty for aggrressive play. Penalties for spearing, hooking, entanglment, ect. are fine, but not a subjective call such as aggressive play. FIRST has no problem with aggressive, non-damaging play anyway. They encourage defense, and in order to mount an effective d, you need to be at least somewhat aggressive. Body-on-Body contact is perfectly fine in 9 out of 10 cases, and in many cases so is arm to arm, or arm to body, as long as nothing become entangles, hooked, or things like that. Look at, for instance, how 190 used their arm to play def. They used it more or less like a wall to stop the opponent from getting on the bar. But when team C, or a few other team used there arm to spear or knock over other teams, its becomes a penalty. And at IRI the judges called that well.

Re: Yellow card / Red card usage at 2004 IRI
 

I think that the card system is good and works well, however, once the criteria is created for what determines a yellow and red card, that needs to be fairly applied to all teams. *I am in no way attempting to discuss the specific call at IRI but solely for example sake, if one team "spears" a robot, every single team with an arm from there on out who "spears" a robot should be given a card, no questions asked. Like I think often times rules and DQ statements are given, but they are not followed up on all the time and where one robot gets called for entanglement (zone zeal) one round, the next round a team entangles and is not called on it or DQ'd. Whatever system is used, it has to be used all the time and there should be no slip-ups. I understand that calls are being made by judges and ref's who are only human, but there have bene evident times at competitions where some rule out on the field has been broken and warrants a DQ and then is not called, even tho it was called earlier in the competition.

just my 2 cents...

Re: Yellow card / Red card usage at 2004 IRI
 

again

Re: Yellow card / Red card usage at 2004 IRI
 

First let me say, I hope the Card system is adopted into future games, albeit with a few tweaks to be as fair and effective as possible. I think it went over pretty well at IRI and hope we see it again.

Since somebody asked....
Ok, I'll say it - In FIRST Frenzy, I think having all those possible point penalties was confusing - and I was one of the "rules experts" on the team. I counted or can think of at least 10 or 11 point penalties.. this doesn't include all the DQs or disablement possibilities. I quickly didn't care what the value was (even though in the end I think they were all 10pts), but just tried to be conscious of not doing them.

With this past season's game especially, I think the amount of point penalties was excessive. I'm an advocate for making penalties as simple, but effective as possible. When I see all these suggestions made for numerous/additional point penalties, for whatever various reasons, and they're all different values, call me lazy, but I don't want to work that hard to understand or remember it all...

While I'm not going to come up with the best solution ever, I think that having too many penalties is a problem. I realize maybe not all of them are known or realized at the time of game creation, but it shouldn't take me 10min to explain to a non-FIRSTer (or even a FIRSTer) what all the penalties are and what their point value is, and then think they're going to remember with all the other action going on. And that's in addition to explaining the game.

I'll even risk saying that I'm not sure all the refs knew all the point penalties throughout the season. It got exponentially better as competitions went by, but there were times it was clear not all the penalty rules were known (and I'm speaking only of the misc point penalties, not all the ramming, entangling, etc). And no, I'm certainly not bad-talking the refs. The point is, those making the calls have a LOT to be thinking about.

I'd even venture to say that 40-50% of FIRST participants didn't know all those rules/penalties, for various reasons, which I think is unfortunate.
I think that by having few (because it's hard to imagine having none) point penalties, and an effective system, such as the Red/Yellow Card system, it helps the audience, drive-team, and esp Refs, focus on what's more important. There's many reasons I think this way (i'm not gonna go thru them), and they're more beneficial to everyone than not.

It is possible to design fewer penalties into the game, while not compromising robot design and strategy creativity. Granted, it would be difficult, and I by no means have all the answers. i.e. Crossing into the ball chute could have been eliminated in game design, esp since it was such a safety concern. That's just an example.
Though I refuse to compare robotics to sports, sports don't often change their rules every single year... so they can get away with numerous point penalties, cumulative pts resulting in greater offense, etc.. it's learned over the decades and not re-learned every year. If say basketball had numerous NEW, different penalties every season, it'd make it harder to watch, frustrating... imo...

Anyway, again, I like the Card system for all the reasons others mentioned and hopefully it's brought to on-season competitions.