Looking for a rule - No defense on robots without tubes
 

The GLR refs were enforcing a rule that said, "You are not allowed to hit or push a robot that does not have a tube in their possession. You can block their way to a tube, but can't purposely hit or push them".

Just wondering where in the rules this is stated.

Re: Looking for a rule - No defense on robots without tubes
 

Did you search the rules yet and not find it??? The rules are available on line you know....

Re: Looking for a rule - No defense on robots without tubes
 

Yes, I know they are online...and no it's not in there...

As a scoring robot, I love the rule...although I think it's kinda unfair to make up or modify rules in the middle of the season, let alone in the middle of a regional...

But hey...what do I know?

Re: Looking for a rule - No defense on robots without tubes
 

yes, when this rule was said on saturday morning i was completely shocked. they shouldnt change the rules halfway through the regional.

Re: Looking for a rule - No defense on robots without tubes
 

That’s very odd, at St. Louis, we were never told that, and it happened a lot. :confused: According to Rule G35 you can contact within the bumper zone, anytime. That is as long as your not breaking any of the other instances talked about in G35. Do you know what their explanation was?

Re: Looking for a rule - No defense on robots without tubes
 

That referee interpretation of a nonexistent rule was definitely NOT in effect in Pittsburgh. If I ever hear of this at future competitions.......

PLEASE DO NOT REWRITE RULES IN THE MIDDLE OF THE SEASON TO FAVOR ONE STYLE OF PLAY OVER THE OTHER!!!

Re: Looking for a rule - No defense on robots without tubes
 

At the LA regional, there was a lot of contact when a scoring robot was being protected by an alliance partner - pushing and hitting an opponent's robot to keep them away from the rack.
Team 4 demonstrated that tactic most successfully all the way to the championship.
I think this strategy (running interference for your partner) is as appropriate to the game as is playing defense to prevent the opposition from scoring.

Re: Looking for a rule - No defense on robots without tubes
 

So you couldn't defend the opposing home zone? If a robot was going to ramp, you couldn't get in its way because it didn't have a tube? That's ridiculous.
I remember playing elementary-school basketball and getting free inbounds passes; now we're beyond that. Happy birthday, here's 60 free points.

Re: Looking for a rule - No defense on robots without tubes
 

the GLR ref said it was to allow the intent of the game to be played out. that intent being to score ringers. you could get in front of the bots to block them, and you could unintentionally hit them. but if you made a significant attempt to push them or hit them while they did not have a tube, you would be penalized. I was a little shocked at this rule as well, but i did think it made for a more exciting game with higher scores all around.

Re: Looking for a rule - No defense on robots without tubes
 

Then it's not a rule. End of discussion.

The title of this thread says you are looking for a rule. If it doesn't exist, there is no sense looking for it.

Without a published rule or a late-breaking revision published (to/at all current regionals and enforced at all current regionals) by the proper authority; I don't know what the ref was enforcing; but based on what you have told us, they don't appear to have been enforcing a Rack-N-Roll rule.

If this ever happens again, once you become aware of it, I would recommend that you respectfully insist on altering the situation before any more matches are played.

Blake

Re: Looking for a rule - No defense on robots without tubes
 

yeah i agree that this does not exist and you could kindly ask the head ref. to state the rule and where he saw it

Re: Looking for a rule - No defense on robots without tubes
 

You are missing the point. To ask where to find a nonexistant rule is a GP way of complaining.

"respectfully insist"? If the head ref says it's the rule, then it's the rule. End of discussion.

Re: Looking for a rule - No defense on robots without tubes
 

I feel lucky to have Benji head reffing Boston. All these new regionals mean new refs making interpretations that are wrong. You can interact at any time in the bumper zone.

Re: Looking for a rule - No defense on robots without tubes
 

A couple things.

Ricksta- Ron Webb is not a "new ref". He has been head reffing for a long long time.
Blake- This thread was created with the intent to confirm that this was, in fact, not a rule.

I am very dissatisfied with the "rule extension". I understand the reasoning, but that DOES NOT make it ok.

As a solution, i'd say that in addition to whatever already happens, there should either be a challenge system or there should be a representativce of the GDC at each regional. That way, when (not if) a ref at a regional skews the rules, that can be resolved.

Lets not let the refs re-write the rulebook

Re: Looking for a rule - No defense on robots without tubes
 

The best we can hope to achieve is to make everyone aware of this potential interpretation so they might prepare to argue its impropriety.

Who was the head referee at the event? It's not within their purview to determine the intent of the game and unprofessional to interpret or ignore rules in such a way as to favor their preferred style of play.

Our robot cannot hold ringers at all and it makes absolutely no sense at all that we could not be pushed or defended. A majority of the time, we're the machine that wins the match, not any of the tube scoring designs.

I've already complained a lot that the 15 and 30 points awarded for lifting robots was labeled "bonus points," because it led to a lot of questions by scouts like, "Your robot can't score points?" I don't particularly appreciate the implication that our team and our robot fall outside the "intent" of the game.