Re: Silicon Valley Regional 2008
 

The consistency of incorrect enforcement of G14 in SVR-F3 was most certainly a foolish one if it was maintained after a correct interpretation of the rule had been arrived at.

Referees have re-issued match decisions after consultations with the rules before, and this is one of those places where a change would have been appropo, instead of a replay.

No QandA is required on this issue, the plain English of G14 is clear and it should be interpreted correctly at future regionals. I am sure it will be given the attention that has been called to the rule.

With that said, the decisions of the head referee are final.
This is the overriding rule that applies in this case.

I would like to suggest that words like "screwed," "conned," "cheated," etc... , should not be getting used in this discussion. The mistake was an honest one made by volunteers who are doing their best to be fair with the teams and adherent to the rules. We should recognize it as the honest mistake that it was.

Eugene

Re: Silicon Valley Regional 2008
 

This whole game is terrible...

I hate it more and more each time we play it.... Its entirely decided by penalties. You can't tell who's winning. The rules are ambiguous and are poorly enforced....

I'm glad 2024 qualified for Atlanta. They truly deserve it. I hope team 8 will make it too... (This was team 192's last regional)

I think we made a lot of enemies today, even though we did nothing to anyone... :( I'd like to say sorry to alliance #2, and would hope that our teams continue to work together and help each other out.

Re: Silicon Valley Regional 2008
 

Eugene,

Watching the webcast of the regional, Jim Beck was very clearly called for consultation on the issue. Between the RD and the FIRST Technical Adviser and other FRC officials available by phone, there should have been plenty of non-volunteer help available to help with the decision.

Re: Silicon Valley Regional 2008
 

I should think nobody holds it against any team on your alliance. You were put in just as awkward a situation as your opponents were and what happened is definitely not the fault of your alliance whatsoever.

We were on the losing end of a similar situation in 2005. These things happen - life goes on. If you made any enemies as a result, then they don't get the point of GP.

Re: Silicon Valley Regional 2008
 

Absolutely untrue. You and the rest of your alliance played the game, and played it well. Even if the blue alliance would have won, it would have been in 2 out 3 final, and would have been decided by two points (IIRC, two points). Everyone who matters knows that it was your hard work and ingenuity that earned you the right to be in the finals, and that if there was an incorrect ruling that gave you the victory, that it wasn't your choice. You, like all teams, rely on the officials running the tournament for rules interpretation and enforcement. You played the game and at the end of the day the score said you won.

I had the privilege of watching you in person at Portland and today on the Webcast. Your drivers are smooth and professional, I've never seen you mug another robot illegally, and your scoring is impressive. You may feel like you didn't deserve to win, but you definitely deserve to feel good about what you did in this event. It was an impressive achievement.

No one hates you!

Re: Silicon Valley Regional 2008
 

My last comment in my prior post, adding whoever you want to add to the list of people involved in the decision, still applies.

I am not making any excuses for anyone, it was a mistake with huge impact, but a mistake it was. The words I have seen used in posts about the event are not appropriate.

Eugene

Re: Silicon Valley Regional 2008
 

There was a similar <G14> in discussion in Portland when I was doing my scorekeeper training. The thing about <G14> is that as long as someone hasn't taken the robots and balls away, you have an infinite amount of time to talk about it, read the book, and decide what to do. It's not like a <G22> or blocking foul that you have to discuss from memory. With <G14> it's all right there to see at the end of the match.

Re: Silicon Valley Regional 2008
 

Actually, I think that the 2008 game is a good one. It is different
in nature than past games, and this has led to some issues with
details in the rules.

There is no chance that the teams on the winning alliance at
SVR have made any enemies and you should not feel that way.
The teams involved are highly visible, and appreciated, members
of the community.

SVR 2008 is behind us. It makes perfect sense to have
constructive discussion about what happened at SVR,
learn from the experience, and move forward.

Eugene

Re: Silicon Valley Regional 2008
 

I don't think the game concept is bad, the inequities arising from penalty calls (or non-calls) are the issue. The referees have an unenviable job and are bound to make errors on some judgment calls in real-time. Where the rules and their interpretation is involved, the rule book, FTA or higher levels of authority are available for clarification. For some reason, this process wasn't effective at the SVR.

Your alliance shouldn't feel responsible for the way this played out. As uncomfortable as this all seems, I doubt that any hard feelings will persist between the teams involved. It's unfortunate that both alliances left the field suffering the consequences of those events. It's done, some lessons will be learned and we'll all move on.

As trivial as this may sound now, remember that everyone who participated in the SVR was a winner. You should feel proud of what your team has accomplished.

Re: Silicon Valley Regional 2008
 

Wow,
That's all I can say for what happened today. And now that I finally got some time to sit down and think back, the finals were just amazing. I wish there was a way we could consider the blue alliance as champions as well, they clearly had as much ability and spirit as our alliance.
Our people that were in the pits at the time actually didn't know about the replay until later, which is part of the reason our robot came in so late, and also because our robot took quite a bit of damage in the previous matches.
Anyways, with that said, 115 would like to thank 100 and 254 again for picking us. Also, we would like to thank the other teams that helped us during the competition in any way, including the finalist alliance for using their timeout to let us fix our robot.

Re: Silicon Valley Regional 2008
 

I was at the event today and found many things troubling. I was in the audience and had a few conversations with the teams sitting behind me and next to me, and the "talk" is pretty sad.

I saw a couple mention in this thread the lack of calls for the agressive defense, and everyone sitting around me was saying the same thing in the finals. I didn't see the event yesterday, but both the teams behind me and next to me (I don't think either was in the playoffs) kept commenting that no penalties were being called on the blue alliance. There were numerous comments that the refs were ignoring high speed ramming, impeding, blocking, pinning, and more. All of them said teams were getting penalties and warnings for MUCH LESS during the qualifying rounds, but that in the finals they weren't enforcing the rules. The team next to me said the entire controversy shouldn't have happened anyway, because if the refs called the 2nd match according to the rules that the 3rd match never would have been played anyway. He even said he was rooting for the blue alliance but couldn't believe what they were getting away with.
What really bothered me was the comment by the team behind me something to the effect of "yeah, but don't forget, that's the same ref that gave us tips to beat 254 last year, so he's not gonna call penalties on their oppossing alliance in the playoffs". I asked him what he was talking about, and they explained that last year the ref advised teams how to stop 254 and kept penalizing them during qualifying rounds. He then told me a couple teams including theirs atually passed on picking 254 in the playoffs last year because they were sure they'd get penalties in the playoffs from that ref. I've been out of FRC for a a few years, but still volunteer with FLL and Vex and follow things - but I couldn't believe what I heard today or saw.
How could any of that happen? How could penalties be called during qaulifying rounds but not during the playoffs for the same or worse action? How could a ref give teams advice on how to beat certain teams?

Seems all 6 teams did not get treated fairly. All 6 did great, played hard, and seemed to handle themselves well. Seems to me that the red alliance should have one in two matches if the rules were enforced but the blue alliance should have wont the 3rd match. So in 4 matches, from what I saw, I thought Red should have won matches 1,2 and 4 while blue should have won match 3. problem is, 3 and 4 never should have been played. I feel bad for all 6 teams in the finals, seems they deserved to have a clean finals with all the rules called correctly.

What I saw today did make me think of a thread I read a couple weeks ago after the first events about preparred ref. I'm gonna try to find that thread, but now that I think about it, I guess nothing that happened today should ahve been a surprise.

Re: Silicon Valley Regional 2008
 

Hey, I'd like to start this post off by mentioning that both alliances played their best and deserved to win the regional.

/*However being a member of 115, and being a key member of the robots design team and pit crew, I have a certain bias to my team.*/

Even though I know the ruling of the referees is absolute, I do not support their opinion of having the rematch. We were declared the winners (by the referees), were sent back to the pits and started crating our robot....Then we got the news of the upcoming rematch.

I'd also like to add that when fixing the robot in between the matches, there was significant damage caused to our robot that had to have been intentional and in no way could have been accidental. For example, a steel 3/8 in drive axle was bent due to the overly aggressive actions of the opposing alliance. This threatened our chances of continuing on.

/*Once again, this post is not to place any blame.*/

Also, I would like to greatly thank team 192, 8 and 2024 for using their timeout to allow us the chance to fix our elevator spool. Also, I would like to thank the nameless members of team 100's drive crew who assisted me in my quick fix of the spool.

Re: Silicon Valley Regional 2008
 

I was a driver at SVR last year, and I remember the comment that the head ref made about "how to beat 254" during the drivers meeting. I believe that topic was discussed last year, it certainly disturbed me, because although I was not part of 254, we scored in the same method and he was basically telling the teams how to stop us as well.

As far as this years finals are concerned, I was completely shocked with the level of defense and contact that was allowed throughout the final matches. In final match 2, team 8's catapult mechanism turned 254's pneumatic release valve, putting they're scoring mechanism out of commission. Why it was not a bumper-zone violation, I don't know. The extent to which team 8 blocked the trackball was very sketchy, I apologize for not knowing all of the rules front to back, but sitting in a corner blocking one of the trackballs is not allowed if I remember correctly (please don't thrash me on not knowing the rules, but I distinctly remember team 8 blocking two trackballs, one of which was popped, for over 15 seconds in I believe match 2) As far as the G<14> ruling goes, I'm very displeased with how the referees handled the call. Apparently it was being called the same way the entire regional (ie. teams would lift up the ball two inches and "descore" the trackball) but when it comes the the finals, they finally decided to change their ruling? I agree with Martin, this years game is too open to interpretation, which makes it really hard to be a referee, and have consistent ruling from regional to regional. I think SVR had the most defense-heavy matches you will see this year.

Nevertheless, very exciting finals put up by both alliances, great robots all around. Thank you to all the volunteers that made the regional possible!

Mike C.

Re: Silicon Valley Regional 2008
 

I think I can speak on behalf of many people that we are not mad at 100, 254, or 115, but rather at the way the finals were handled by the referees. The facts that the referees didn't follow the manual, and FIRST stated in the beginning they would try to tackle this problem with a test, have made made many people wonder why SIMPLE problems are occurring and some of us are terrified that there may be a Finals match 7 on Einstein...

Re: Silicon Valley Regional 2008
 

I don't mean this in a bad way, but I don't think any of their team would have tried to intentionally damaged YOUR robot specifically, seeing as how 100 and 254 were the clear top hurdlers. Obviously, I was getting annoyed both as a driver and a spectator when there were clearly aggressive actions going on.



No "thrashing", but it is allowed as long as their is space to go around that robot on the track, which there was. Also, the popped ball couldn't be replaced yet because it was unsafe for the field personnel to do so. You can also legally herd their ball around the field to prevent them from ever picking it up and hurdling the ball.

Although the head ref was pretty reasonable, there were a TON of inconsistencies with the refs about many different things. We had referees trying to tell us that we had to have the entire robot on the slanted fence when only one point needed to be. This happened throughout both days, and even once in our last match. We needed to get another ref to prove that we were right each time. It also seemed like some refs were timid in calling penalties, unsure about whether to call an obvious penalty.

From my observations, it seemed like the refs were trying to cut back on calling penalties. For example, during one of the finals matches, 254 had a blue ball get into their gripper mechanism somehow. Immediately, our drive team turned to one another and said "that's possession" but it was never called. There were multiple instances throughout the day where the assistant refs didn't seem to know what was going on. Out of the 10 qualifying matches, I think I went to the challenge box at least 6 or 7 times, and even one more during eliminations.

I understand they are all volunteers, but even at the same regional, there were inconsitencies from one end of the field to the other. The passion that most of the students have are reflected in the fact that they know more rules than SOME of the refs.
But of course, we all know that at the end of the day, all that matters was we had fun(ish) and learned stuff (I hope).