Re: Call Inconsistencies Between Regionals
 

I agree with Brandon. It does not make any sense, in any way, for there to be different rules for different venues. There is one set of rules - that is the one written in the manual.

I think the adult volunteers need to be better trained about the meaning and the reason for the yellow challenge box. Luckily for us, in SVR, we were never kicked out out of the challenge box by any adult volunteer. If that happens, then perhaps this needs to be emphasized with the adult volunteers.

Re: Call Inconsistencies Between Regionals
 

Last year, I watched the brutal elimination round matches on Curie. The ref's allowed some very aggressive play on that field. In the first semi-final match on Einstein, the Curie alliance received a DQ for tipping 71, when the robots involved were attempting to hang ringers on the same spider. My initial reaction was that the Einstein ref had a very different criteria for illegal robot-robot interaction than what was called on Curie. After viewing a video of the DQ, from a field-side spectator, I don't question the call by Aidan, but the same ruling probably wouldn't have been made on Curie.

A problem with aggressive play is it tends to intensify to the point where fouls must be called, but once refs start down the path of "let 'm play", it gets harder for them to draw the line.

Re: Call Inconsistencies Between Regionals
 

Which volunteers do you mean?

Only the Head Referee can make a team's post-match clarification request "go away". Head Referees I have worked with prefer to interact with pre-college team members who are standing in an area that has been designated (e.g., with tape on the floor) for that purpose.

Re: Call Inconsistencies Between Regionals
 

In your example, I would not expect Curie to vary from Einstein in any substantive way because the staff are working together all weekend at the same venue.

I'm assuming that there are some lessons learned being rolled up each week when a regional wraps up. By the time the championship event happens the majority of the issues should be worked out and the refs will have a full body of knowledge. BUT, if a first week regional is run slightly differently than the championship event, is that really a problem?

Re: Call Inconsistencies Between Regionals
 

You wouldn't expect it, and neither would I, but, at the end of the day, that's what happened.

If a week one regional is run slightly differently than the championship event, I think that's acceptable. However, we are in week three right now, and I don't think that anything here is very much slightly different - the referees made clear mistakes that are against the rules.

I think that any way you look at it, there is a problem with refereeing this year. I posted my suggestions earlier in this thread, and I agree with most of Paul Copioli's suggestions.

Re: Call Inconsistencies Between Regionals
 

I'm referring to non-referee volunteers trying to quickly usher the teams away from field-side after their match, sometimes before the scores are announced. We know that it can be a challenge to keep on schedule, especially if there are field faults, repairs, referee discussions, etc.

Teams are entitled to get clarification of rulings from the referee in accordance with <T04> and <G53>. This needs to be made clear to all of the field-side volunteers, who should point them to the challenge box. The teams need to use discretion in seeking clarification, no whining about a judgment call, but understanding what action triggered the penalty should be fine. Most certainly, questions about correct application of the rule should be explained.

Re: Call Inconsistencies Between Regionals
 

Officially, yes, but sometimes some headstrong field personnel feel like they can usher you away from the box because you're slowing things down. This happened to us once this season, and this same volunteer told me later that we were lucky she didn't tell the judges about the incident, because she felt that our resistance to her demands should exclude us from eligibility for awards. It doesn't surprise me to hear that others are being turned away from the challenge box by people other than the head ref.

Re: Call Inconsistencies Between Regionals
 

I do mostly agree with this, however, I have seen some people, who were FIRST alum, fail..horribly. I do agree with you though. There are some rule hounds that can do a great job, but they never want to be involved with the reffing of the event, they want to be involved with the Driving, Coaching, and Strategy.

Also, it is very hard for an adult my age to be able to get a ref position on the Eastern Seaboard. Most regionals here tend to have some bias in the selections. I have seen numerous well qualified students be passed over for Sponsors, Friends of the VC, or VIPs. I have seen it at NJ, UTC, Philly, and Boston. I have a strong knowledge of how an event should run and the rules for the game (while I certainly don't know the most about it, I can understand the game and have been involved in Reffing offseason events), but I have been passed over before as well as some other high profile CD'ers with a strong knowledge of gameplay. For some, there is no point in even trying because they know they will be passed over if the RPC finds someone who might be interested in sponsoring the event.


This may sound very stupid and crazy at first, but it might help. If they were to start an incentives program for Refs (ie, if they make a certain % of correct calls, they get X, and if they don't, that X decreases). It will never happen, but it is certainly an idea.

Re: Call Inconsistencies Between Regionals
 

<not meant to be derogatory>
Its great that the rules tell us the head ref is the only one who can make the post-match clarification go away...however we've seen some rules not called and some called too much on the field....makes sense for the same to occur off the field too

Honestly in a rule book world it makes sense. The head ref acknowledges the student, the student tells head ref, head ref explains, student goes away not necessarily happy, but more satisfied with a ruling.

Problem is some "Officially-given-to-me-because-I-volunteered-white-FIRST-overdrive-tshirt-wearin'" volunteers have told kids to move on. I saw this specifically at an event this year. Because the score had been announced, and because that alliance had been knocked out of the tournament, the volunteer told said kid to move on, its over now. Outrageous and unacceptable, plain and simple. And a good mannered kid is not going to defy an adult telling them what to do....this is the problem.

My point was to get kids INTO the box and INTO conversation with the head ref. If they cannot even do that 100% of the time, whats the point of the box?

This is unreal to me. Threatening to tell judges of the teams behavior for trying to PLAY BY THE RULES AND GET A CLARIFICATION??!?!? Just ridiculous if you ask me. A select few of these volunteers feel that they supersede the rules and the event and the students just because they were "put in charge" of something. This is honestly when someone needs to go to bat for these kids, in a gracious and professional manner, and explain to these people that the students have a right as per the rules, to be in that box WHENEVER they want (to a reasonable extent).

Re: Call Inconsistencies Between Regionals
 

Interesting point you bring up, Corey. I believe I have seen this as well, and it is a shame to hear about.

Re: Call Inconsistencies Between Regionals
 

Ditto, maybe that's why off-seasons tend to be much better staffed and follow the rules better?

Re: Call Inconsistencies Between Regionals
 

In the event that this happens, it's almost worth it to try and talk to the volunteer coordinator and report these remarks. A crew volunteer should have no control over the awards selection, that's for the judges to decide only. Stories like this make me angry as most volunteers are amazingly cool people who are there to make your regional run smoothly. I guess there's room for bad apples even in FIRST.

I can't tell you how much I agree with this point. After attending BMR, I saw so many matches where balls were knocked off the overpass, but remained as counted on the overpass because they didn't hit the ground in time. This is lame. It confuses the crowd and even threw me for a loop at first. Little things like this make a big difference for the "wow factor" of an event. Many ends of matches that could've been exciting were quickly extinguished because of this flaw.

Re: Call Inconsistencies Between Regionals
 

Hmm. In cases of unrestrained motion, the trackball positions are scored based upon where they do finally come to rest, not where they are when the clock reaches zero. If BMR was scoring all trackballs based upon where they were when the clock reached zero, that was incorrect based upon Team Update #13, which resulted in rule G14 being updated as follows:

Re: Call Inconsistencies Between Regionals
 

Maybe they weren't counting them because they were knocked off after the clock hit zero. Not exactly sure, but it could be the case. At least in one of our matches, our partner (1018 I think) knocked a ball off right at the end and it was still counted as being on the overpass. The officiating was pretty consistent either way. Tons of penalties of course.

Re: Call Inconsistencies Between Regionals
 

I didn't see that, what I saw were balls that were knocked off right at the buzzer and were rightfully counted because they were in contact with the robot knocking them off at the time of the buzzer.