Off Side Penalty?
 

We are wondering: what happens if you are on defense and are not able to get one of your robots to the other side because it has broken down? Will you get penalized? We already know what to do in the event that it happens, but we want to know what the judges will think. The rule I'm referring to is in Section 4.3.4.5 (Match Play), Paragraph G26. Please advise. Thanks!

The Athenian Robotics Collective

Re: Off Side Penalty?
 

Either choose another robot or push the damaged one to be the backbot within five seconds.

Re: Off Side Penalty?
 

pyroslev is right

FIRST Q&A on the subject.

Re: Off Side Penalty?
 

Please refer to the changes that have been made, the first two replies were answering it, but not in the way we were anticipating.

The Athenian Robotics Collective

Re: Off Side Penalty?
 

The referees will think "I am here to enforce the rules of the game." The judges probably won't think anything about it, because they are likely to be back in the pits interviewing teams. If a robot breaks down on the "wrong" side of the field, count on getting a 5 point penalty for every 5 seconds that your alliance partners don't push the dead robot back across the mid-field line, or until one of them scoots back over the line.
What were you anticipating?

-dave

Re: Off Side Penalty?
 

I agree with this.
If your robot breaks down and you can't get it back over the line, just choose one of your functional alliance partners to be the backbot. The only problem will be that it's now 3 versus 1 (+ one broken) during offence.

Re: Off Side Penalty?
 

You should have a backup plan because the penalties add up fast. In our first match at the UTC scrimmage, our opponents neglected to have a backbot. Their penalty was 35 points. It would have been higher except for incidental robot travel.

Re: Off Side Penalty?
 

it's should be a 40points penalty if you stay with all 3 during the entire 40 seconds,
just need to think wether you will be able to block more then 40 points with 2 bots and a dead one, if not, leave it to 1vs3,

something I just thought about, can an alliance decide it wants to get a 40point penalty and stick the entire 40seconds with 3 bots?

Re: Off Side Penalty?
 

Well, it would be a 45 point penalty - 5 points for the initial infraction itself, plus 5 points for each 5-second continuation in the offside position. I wouldn't look kindly on such a strategy, but I'm not the GDC or a referee.

Btw, I just noticed your full name. You may be interested in this link: http://www.bookstore.mtu.edu/michtec...F PG74AB598AB The Watersmeet (the name of a very small town in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan) Nimrods were mentioned on ESPN as having an "interesting" mascot name. They got so many requests for apparel they had to outsource it to the Michigan Tech bookstore to fulfill orders.

Re: Off Side Penalty?
 

We saw this happen at the UTC scrimmage.

Best thing to do is put the robot with the most potential for breaking down at the beginning of the match in the backbot position already.

To do this, gain psychic powers.

If you are competing with a known dead bot, just make them start at the backbot position.

It was pretty funny how Benge solved the problem at the UTC scrimmage. :p
I could upload a vid of that sometime this week.
Horray for a being a scrimmage where it's mostly by the rules but semi-forgiving as well.

Re: Off Side Penalty?
 

This is what you can do in this situation if you are on the opposing alliance and you have a defensive robot on your alliance. Because it is now 2v3 with the backbot dead, the defensive robot can go and begin pushing dead backbot into position so it is no longer a backbot, and presto you now have given your opponent a penalty for every 5 seconds that backbot is over the line. and therefore created a 1v3. But if you were to do this I would only push the dead bot so far as to barely put it over the line so the opposing alliance won't see that it is past the line.

mmm for strategy

Re: Off Side Penalty?
 

And that is exactly the sort of cheap, unsportmanlike tactics that we are supposed to rise above. I would expect to see such a play in a pro wrestling match, but not in a FIRST competition. When you do this, don't be surprised when everyone on your team is treated like pariahs for the remainder of the competition.

-dave

Re: Off Side Penalty?
 

Wow. That thought would have never crossed my mind in a million years.

If the oppoent pulls a dead backbot over to the other side, I would expect that not to count against the dead robot. I think there is a rule about how if the opponent is preventing a team to get to backbot position, it will NOT count against the backbot team. I would hope the same logic comes into play with your nasty strategy.
Heck, I would hope that opponent gets a penalty for acting ungracious and unsportsmanlike. If you need to use that kind of strategy, you should probably take a look at the rest of your strategy and capabilities to find out where you can improve.

Re: Off Side Penalty?
 

While I may never have thought of using this strategy, it is none-the-less a legitimate strategy. I thinke everyone bashing Dj should stop, I mean think of last year, and how many people would try to get intentional 30 point penalties called against the other alliance. It happened more then most would like to admit I am affraid. Although I do agree with Amy's post about it not counting against the alliance due to the rule where the opposite alliance caused the infraction.

Re: Off Side Penalty?
 

I actually agree with both of you. The thought of this just happened to cross my mind and i decided to point it out. Our robot isn't made for pushing but out maneuvering. Also i didn't know there was a rule about their not counting due to the fact that the opposing alliance caused the infraction (do you have a rule number, just curious). But yes last year people tried to force loading zone penalties way too much, and i could see the same thing happening this year (except it would be with the backbot not loading zones of course). My guess is in the first few matches the backbots will forget about the rule and accidentally go over the line, but as the competition rolls on it will be remembered quite well, just like HP's being in the box last year.
I do agree that this strategy wouldn't be within the ideas of GP so in the end I wouldn't use it at all. But the more prepared you are for any situation and circumstance the better off you are.

Re: Off Side Penalty?
 

Good reply DjAlamose - thanks for keeping this thread on the high road.

Look - there are going to many times when some ninnie dreams up a devious strategy that many will think is totally unprofessional and truely ungracious - when that happens teams will be given the real test of character - copy the ungracious behaviour or ignore it for the "high road".

Some live by a higher standard regardless of what the written rules say - some play the game by the rules, and what isn't written must be okay.

Once each team makes that decision, the greater masses at the event can then decide what they think about it - treat them like pariahs, ignore them, pick them as alliance partners, or whatever.

Sorry - I got off topic -
My answer to this is to "just don't push the opposition if they are "dead, disabled, or tipped over" - that is what I tell our drivers my expectation is of them. Legal or not, if that is the only way to win a match, I'd rather lose.

Re: Off Side Penalty?
 

The very last sentence of G26 talks about if a robot prevents a backbot from getting to their position, it won't count against the backbot because they are on their way, intending and trying to get there.
Last year there were a lot of rules and updates about the loading zone infractions, and many of them discussed if the opponent caused the infraction, it would not penalize the other person.

Applaud your reply, and glad to know you aren't planning to use it. It was good of you to bring it to attention for discussion.

Last year was chaos with the loading zone infractions and questions of "did they intend to make you cause a 30pt penalty" etc. This year, if you go over to the dead backbot, and pull him to the other side, it's quite obvious of your intent. I would not consider them exactly the same situations, but relatively the same concept.

Re: Off Side Penalty?
 

To add to Amy's post, the text of <G26> which I believe applies is:
I underlined what I feel is a key element in the spirit of this rule - that the defensive alliance can change which robot is backbot, but the offensive alliance cannot.
If I am the referee, I will consider a disabled BACKBOT which is pushed by their opponent into an offsides position, to be prevented by the offensive robot, and therefore not subject to penalty.

Re: Off Side Penalty?
 

The rules are pretty clear on this. If they push the bot over the line and back away they the former backbot is no longer "prevented by an offensive ROBOT from crossing the field centerline". Therefore they will have the 5 point penalty assessed against it. The only thing preventing that team from getting back over is their own bot's inability to move, no one else. I am kinda sick of people saying anything that is defensive is not GP. The GP thing to do is to volunteer to help the team who's bot broke down fix it after the match, not to disregard a perfectly legitimate strategy.

This is where I draw the line: if a team is running a strategy that harms or is likely to harm another team's bot it is not GP. If a team is using the rules to their advantage then go ahead, I congratulate you on your ingenuity.

Re: Off Side Penalty?
 

Well, some don't agree that this is a perfectly legal strategy of plan as outlined by the rules. Perhaps it's time for Q/A to specifically address this actual case.

This is not really a defensive play, persay. As always stated, nobody says Defense is un-GP. The perceived intent behind this strategy is to make your opponents score go to 0, while you sit back and watch, maybe? The rules basically tell you that playing defense on a would-be backbot does you absolutely no good. If one wants to think of this as a legit plan, ok. But I guess I don't understand the advantage of wasting all your time pushing a dead robot, rather than scoring offensively with your partners. To each his own.

If a robot is dead, it's likely that the dead bot could be damanged by the pushing, shoving, beating by the opponent to get it moved on the other side of the line. That is not acceptable and likely will be penalized for damage. I would hope they'd give up if it doesn't budge.

The question is cause of infraction. In G26, if the opponent is preventing you from becoming a backbot, the backbot doesnt' get penalized because they are not causing their own inability to get behind the line. Now if a dead bot is sitting there, they are fine. If the opponent pushes them back to the other side, the opponent caused the infraction, not the deadbot themselves. The alliance did not cause themselves to violate the rule, so if you interpret the rule that way, then no penalty.

Would seem the same logic that applies in the moving case would apply in the dead case. Therefore, the deadbot did not cause his situation, therefore by implication would not be penalized.

Why would they penalize a dead robot who was perfectly fine as a dead backbot minding his own business when they don't penalize a robot that is actually moving to become a backbot but is prevented by the opponent? This logic implies that it does not good for the opponent to try and screw up your ability to get in backbot position.

I will ask Q/A and get it answered. Good debate though.

Re: Off Side Penalty?
 

At the Winter War Zone scrimmage(the FIRST "testing" ground(as far as I know, it is the first place that FIRST actually sees the game in play by a real robot. Anyone can feel free to correct me via p.m. if that assumption is false.)) the head ref moved a dead bot over to the other side after calling about 30 seconds worth of penalties on the dead bot's alliance.

Re: Off Side Penalty?
 

Excellently articulated response, rep points coming your way. It seems people stretch the rules into a "GP" form a lot in FIRST, something will notice does not happen in other sports. If you want rules to be read that way I suggest you (GDC) write them that way. As a relatively high level soccer referee we subscribe to the philosophy that the simplest interpretation of a rule is the correct one. In soccer the rules are revised if we want to mean something else, we don't make up long winded explanations te justify them. I understand FIRST is different, but if we want it to be a "real" sport we should play by our own rules. The def. of prevent is: "To keep (someone) from doing something; impede". Impede is defined as " To retard or obstruct the progress of". The fatal flaw in your logic is that you say they "caused the penalty". You are 100% correct to say that they put the bot in a situation that allows the bot to incur a penalty, but think of it this way; if you pushed a live bot over the line and backed off and that bot's drivers decided to take their hands off the controls and let it sit there thould it incure the penalty? The other team DID put the bot in the illegal position. The only difference is that the team has the ability to get out of it. The rules do not reference this ability, therefore a penalty should be assessed in both situations.

Jon, I almost really did smile when I read this. Did anyone ask how under the rules he came to the conclusion that this is the right thing to do? If an alliance is too dense to figure out they just got 30 penalty points against them so they should pull one of their bots back then they deserve the next 10. It seems the 30 second mark is so arbitrary. Either you count it or you don't.

Re: Off Side Penalty?
 

No I didn't count it but I remember there being an aweful lot of penalty points called on its part and thats why the ref moved it.(Mostly because a scrimmage is a testing ground for bots not a real competition and therefore it wasn't really a big deal.)

Re: Off Side Penalty?
 

True.

I compiled a video of just that instance last night, and will post it later tonight.

Re: Off Side Penalty?
 

actually, the first -5 you get AFTER 5 seconds have gone by,
so lets do the math
at 35 seconds=-5
at 30 seconds=-10
at 25 seconds=-15
at 20 seconds=-20
at 15 seconds=-25
at 10 seconds=-30
at 05 seconds=-35
now assuming that no one is gonna wait the entire 40 seconds, and will probably head back at around 38, you might actually get a -35 instead of a -40, in any case -45 is NOT possible by this kind of penalty ALONE,

I didn't get the whole Nimrod thing,
in any case don't make fun of my name...Nimrod is the guy who ENGINEERED the BABYLON TOWERS! so HA! (how FIRST of me hehe)...

about the defensive strategy DJ proposed, I think it's great, really "out of the box" thinking, and I wouldn't have any problem doing it UNLESS it so happens to be that while pushing the other bot (for example if he tipped over), that bot's sensitive parts might be harmed, that could be VERY expensive to repair...

now here's a question, if that bot tipped, and when pushed, it's components tear-apart the carpet and or poof balls, who's fault is it? the pushed bot, or the bot which is doing the pusher?

if it's the pushed bot's fault, will it still get a penalty after pushing the ES buttom?

Re: Off Side Penalty?
 

There is a 5-second grace period "to allow an ALLIANCE to get their BACKBOT “ON SIDES”, however, the BACKBOT must be moving toward the mid-field line at the start of the period." (Rule <G35>) If the robot is already dead, it won't be moving back toward mid-field, so does the grace period apply? If it does, then 40 is the max. If not, it will get the initial 5 point penalty immediately. <G35> also says that the additional penalties per 5-second increment begin accruing after the grace period ends, so again, the question becomes, will the dead bot get a grace period?

We might note that a live robot could get significantly more than 40 points in penalties, if it continuously wavers offside and onside. If this was done about once per second for the entire 40 seconds - WOW, a 200 point penalty!

I had no intent of making fun of your name. I knew Nimrod is a name that appears in Genesis. The school mascot is based on Viking lore. I posted the link in case you wanted to order a shirt with your name on it ...

The reason ESPN thought the name "interesting" is that nimrod is a somewhat derogatory term meaning a silly or foolish person. dictionary.com thinks that meaning derives from a Bugs Bunny cartoon, where Bugs describes Elmer Fudd as a "poor little Nimrod". Elmer of course was always hunting Bugs, and Nimrod was a hunter - but Elmer was a very ineffectual hunter, so Bugs clearly didn't mean it as praise.

Re: Off Side Penalty?
 

I know all about my name, trust me (I even added a link in the sig), =) I love it
and yeha I even know that episode buggs rocks =)

in anycase about the rules
isn't the backbot allowed to get across the line for 5 seconds?
if not...man DJ's strategy could get pretty mean, I mean who cares about scoring, just have one bot pushing him unto one side, and another pushing it to the other side, you get so many points in penalty for the other team you don't NEED to score

Re: Off Side Penalty?
 

If it is a robot that can move then no penalties will be assessed per <g26> but if it is a deadbot then penalties (from my interpretation will be assessed). But that still doesn't mean that you don't need to score points. It is not only bad to do this but not wise. Your standings at the competition are based on how many points your OPONENT gets at the end of the match not by your score (only if you win of course). So it would not be wise to make your opponent get zero pts. BUT because the number of QP (qualifying points) gained is the lowest number before penalties this could be good. here is how QP is given:

No penalties: Opponents score
You had penalties: Opponents score
Opponent had penalties (and without penalties would have won the match): your score
Opponent had penalties (would have lost even without): their score before penalties.
Both have penalties: either opponents score before penalties or your score with penalties, whichever is highest.
(should be right unless it has changed)

Now that I have confused you, If could be advantageous to use this strategy (i wouldn't no matter what) for QP seeing that their score to begin with is higher and your score is lower (before penalties). This is the only time that I can see it beneficial. Plus this year with real time scoring it will be easier to decide if we should score for the opponent to get more QP. (yes I would do this because if you can then you must have a good robot, plus you help them out with QP)

Again, I brought out this strategy to let people know about it so if it does happen they can have an idea as to what actions should be taken. Also, Hey Amy, has the GDC answered the question yet?

Re: Off Side Penalty?
 

No they have not.

Re: Off Side Penalty?
 

Nope, it hasn't been posted to Q/A yet by the GDC. Doesn't look there has been any activity today on Q/A.
You can check yourself also at yttp://www.usfirst.org/robotics/2006/qa.htm . The subject title was "Dead backbot".

Also, Ethulin, good points! However, your example of Unless they foolishly take their hands off the controls and sit there, like your example, they won't get a penalty. Chances are, the pushed bot will be trying to get back over to his backbot position, and therefore, if the opponent tries to prevent him from doing so, G26 kicks in again, and no penalty assessed. I suppose your situation could happen, but honestly it doesn't seem realistic to me... why would a backbot just sit there and take the penalties after they got shoved around by the opponent? There might be a reason, but.... I'll take the odds that they will try to get back.

The GDC might just make a difference between dead and live bots. We shall see soon hopefully.
I like health of this debate.

Re: Off Side Penalty?
 

http://podquard.multiply.com/video/item/3

Enjoy the video. It was fun to make.

Mirror if you want to as well. Just don't edit it please. :)

Re: Off Side Penalty?
 

Hm, a distinction between "dead" and "live" bots. If the GDC decides to make that then I think your interpretation is very valid. I just think that to make an air tight rule you would need to make distinctions like that. You are right, it is not very realistic, it is a theoretical. I was using it to point out an inconsistency, nothing more. Personally I would be a little pissed if they made the live and dead bot distinction this late (after ship). Also, if they did, do you consider disabled bots dead? I can see the GDC saying that no, they are not dead, just because it is some how part of their penalty. I would also wander what makes a bot "dead" is a dead bot a bot that can not move at all, its base does not move (they can still shoot). What if they still have one chain left so all they can do is circles :)!

Haha! Very ammusing. I like the referees perplexed look before he moves it.
As a team mate of the dead bot I would have ran over and moved it. I was supprised when a RED team came over and rammed it, were they trying to move it?

Re: Off Side Penalty?
 

Hmmmm.. Good question on disabled bots. Dead bot implies nothing can move, so if they can drive in circles, they are not dead. If they can shoot, they are not dead.
On the flipside, if one of your partners is disabled or dies on the non-backbot side of the field, I believe you can push them over to backbot position to act as a legal backbot. The difference in this case is that it was your own alliance that causes the action and you are fully complying with the rule to make sure one of your alliance bots is a backbot. So I don't know which way they'll go on this.

I still contend dead backbots shouldn't get a penalty if they were moved intentionally and specifically by an opponent. Hopefully they answer questions in the queue, as I've read they shut Q/A off (which I think they should not do, now there's no way to get official clarifications before regionals). It hasn't been answered as of yet.

Can always ask the refs at each regional I suppose.

Re: Off Side Penalty?
 

I don't know. If they were, they would of had to move it up on to their ramp from midfield to get any points whatsoever. Another legitimate strategy?? Maybe???

That's amusing.

Re: Off Side Penalty?
 

See http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...486#post459486 to clear up deadbot cases.

Re: Off Side Penalty?
 

Incase you are too lazy:

Though I can not say I agree with this it is what it is. I have to say this is what annoys me with the GDC. I suggest that they build the "intent of the game" into the RULES rather than their interpretations. This really will constrain this fine game of ours from becoming a sport if rules are not meant to be read but entire rule books read in the light of the GDC's interpretation of the "intent of the game". They either need to make rule modifications or stick to the ones they have.

So then in follow up some one posted:
QUESTION:
ANSWER:
In other words you DO still need to get a backbot if yours was pushed over. I will be asking tonight how long this grace period is.

No, I thought they were jsut being really good sports! I thought they were trying to get their opponent on sides so it did not incure any penalties.

As for deadbots being pushed onto the ramp that DID happen to us at our scrimmage. Our refs counted it for 5 points.

Re: Off Side Penalty?
 

Grace period is likely 5 seconds considering that is what the rule says. Is Q/A open? I thought someone wrote it closed.

Considering the GDC are the ones that made up the game and wrote the rules book (very well, I might add, for the first cut, compared to previous years), I think their interpretation of the rules actually matters, whether it's written in black/white or not.

I honestly believe that their answer was their intent of the game, but sometimes it's difficult for the few GDC members to think of all the instances that 1000 teams will think up - therefore making it difficult to cite every possible situation in their rule book and describing every rule's intent in detail. Perhaps the GDC didn't think anyone would want to use that type of strategy, which is relatively clear by their answer.

They answered it according to what I would have considered the original intent of the game, but I suppose others don't see it that way. Are we really that annoyed that a team can't intentionally cause penalties on the opponent? Sigh.
In Volleyball, it's illegal to touch the net, but if the opponent spikes a ball such that is hits the net and then hits you (on the other side), you are not penalized for it because you didn't violate the rule. Maybe not a great analogy. But they are still sticking to the rules in that the deadbot alliance must still act to have a backbot - they just aren't penalized for the initial action made by the other alliance but will be if they don't eventually produce a backbot.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion and interpretation, but now we have the final GDC intent/interpretation.

Re: Off Side Penalty?
 

Q&A is open - I asked the question about shields being upgrades yesterday. I suspect the person who reported it closed wasn't logged in.

Re: Off Side Penalty?
 

With all of the confusion regarding the penalty around the backbot - Is there ever an advantage to not having a known deadbot even placed on the field at the start of the match?

In the past, it was always encouraged to bring your robot down, BUT there wasn't penalties associated with being on the wrong side of the field, or potentially incurring additional damage from other robots trying to push your dead robot over a line to get or avoid a penalty.

If the robot is dead and unable to even move, the only reason I can see is to allow both other live robots to be able to play defense during that 40 second time period. This requires the dead robot to be placed in the correct starting position so the team doesn't incur a penalty for being on the wrong side of the field.

If there ever was a time for a placebo bot to act as a place holder for the Dead bot, this seems it.

Re: Off Side Penalty?
 

There was something (a Q&A?) that said if an alliance could only field 2 robots, they would not be required to have a backbot. (The proof is left as a [search] exercise for the reader.)

Re: Off Side Penalty?
 

Gary,
Thanks, exercise completed -
Yes, the Q&A did have a response.
So it would appear that if your team cannot move you are better off not putting it on the playing field, and it is questionable if you think the robot may break down during the match, and be stranded on the wrong side of the field.
Just curious - Are the Rule revisions documented in the Updates, the Q&A, the Rules sections, all 3? - and where was that communicated (I can't find it) - and the Rules sections don't seem to have been updated to match all of the answers listed in the Q&A and the Updates.
Hope everyone knows that they need to be aware of all 3, if that is the case.

Mike

Re: Off Side Penalty?
 

We were interested in the penalty more than the strategy, but the suggestions are helpful.

The ARC

Re: Off Side Penalty?
 

Mike -

The revision to this particular item was documented in Update #12, Rule <G26>, and in the "Rev D" version of Chapter 4 of the rules, posted to the FIRST web site on Friday.

-dave

Re: Off Side Penalty?
 

Thank you David - I was looking in th wrong section, I went to section 5