POLL ONLY. SVR F-3
 

Do you think it was necessary to go into a 4th round during the finals of SVR?

Re: POLL ONLY. SVR F-3
 

Sorry for replying, but are there any videos of this so that the rest of us (who were not there) can see?

Thanks.

Re: POLL ONLY. SVR F-3
 

Currently I do not have footage or know where to get it. If anybody has a copy and could send it to me, I could upload it and post it.

Re: POLL ONLY. SVR F-3
 

I'm sort of hoping the Blue Alliance guys will be on top of this one ASAP. Otherwise, the webcasts are often archived and viewable through the NASA Robotics Education Project page. (I also missed the matches, and only tuned in in time to catch the aftermath....)

I know, it's supposed to be a poll only.* But I figure it's worth posting <T16>, just so that we can bring the rules back into the discussion (rather than just the visceral response to a bad call):

If, in the judgment of the Head Referee, a “field fault” occurs that affects either the play or the outcome of the match, the match will be replayed. Example field faults include broken field elements, power failure to a portion of the field, improper activation of the field control system, errors by field personnel, etc.

I can definitely see a bad call by the referees being construed as an error by field personnel affecting the outcome of the match. <T16> mandates a replayed match in that case, rather than a reversal of the call (which might have been the more just thing to do).

So be careful what you vote for: voting no is, in a way, a vote to allow the officials to bend the rules when convenient. (And that's not necessarily a bad thing, particularly in cases when the rules are flawed.)

*I hate it when people do that...no offence, Pavan!

Re: POLL ONLY. SVR F-3
 

First of all, I am very thankful for this poll. It is comforting to know I don't have an unreasonable bias on this matter.

I will not go into detail here, but in my opinion, 'errors by field personnel' does not include the judges making an initial poor call, because it does not absolutely require the match to be replayed. In other words, there were no conditions that could have altered the results of the match, which seems to be the intent of the rule.

Re: POLL ONLY. SVR F-3
 

Both sides are right:

Refs have a tough job --vs-- Refs were supposed to be trained.

Humans make mistakes unfortunately. I think people got caught up in the heat of the moment.

I can recall in many matches over many years "there was a change in the score from the last match" and can only imagine if all of those resulted in rematches. Yikes!

Re: POLL ONLY. SVR F-3
 

I voted No, but I'd actually like to change my mind. Yes, we all know that the call was against the rules. However, the refs had called it that way all day. If they suddenly changed their mind then, to literally decide the championship, 100 (and their partners) would have a legitimate argument that, based on what the refs had been saying, they thought they had done enough in the match. Of course, they should have read the rules and someone should have informed the refs earlier, but "stuff happens" and no one can memorize every possible application of the rulebook. Should this have resulted in a replay? Well, preferably the rules would have been known to all, including the refs, in the first place. But although the rules are black and white, the field is in shades of gray, and it's better, in my opinion, that the match be decided on the field than a side losing as the direct result of a referee's decision.

Re: POLL ONLY. SVR F-3
 

While watching matches, I did notice the ref's called the rule their way. However, those matches would not have been decided by the 12 points. The other team won by more than 12 in those cases.

I do not think that the judges would appreciate a random student from a random team coming in from the crowd, who did NOT participate the match, and go up to them to say, "Oh, by the way, you guys called the wrong call that last match."

If someone went up to them every single time we saw something wrong with the rules, that wouldn't reflect too well in their eyes, would it? They would see our team as some people who would argue over rules over and over again, even if we weren't even in the match.

The process perpetuates itself, and then when it DOES fall to us, then we can't do anything about it because they say that they've been doing it the whole day. Would they have liked another random team to be correcting their referee'ing all day long? I'm sure that after a while, they would stop listening to us "cry wolf".

Re: POLL ONLY. SVR F-3
 

Please bear in mind that I can only make a judgment based upon what I have read in this thread and the Silicon Valley Regional thread.

As much as we all ask for consistency, I am sure we do not ask for something to be done consistently wrongly; that certainly does not make it right. I certainly understand the argument that referees are human, that referees will in fact invariably make errors, but every time there is a mistake, we cannot simply cite it as an inevitable human error. There has to be some accountability, hasn't there? Isn't that the only way things can improve? By admitting that a mistake was made? I think there could have been no greater demonstration of accountability than admitting that a mistake had been made, and rightly awarding the third match to the blue alliance. Replaying the match seems to come across to me as side-stepping any sense of accountability whatsoever.

As for knowing the entire rulebook, isn't this something that teams do anyway? I would think it is impossible to spend six weeks building a robot without knowing every rule in the rulebook. How else would know what you can and cannot do? Why should this be any different for the referees?

Referees are indeed volunteers and I am truly grateful to every one of them for giving up their valuable time to help to ensure that competitions run smoothly. Thank you so very much. However, referees are also volunteers who choose their roles. They are roles that come with the burden of responsibility, a responsibility that can decide winners.

The referee certification course this year was definitely a step in the right direction by FIRST. It shows that we as a community want to make a change, that we want to put things right. However, situations like these also need to be handled in the right manner to make that change. When an error is made, accountability is a must.

Again, all that I can say is based upon what I have read, take it for what you will.

Re: POLL ONLY. SVR F-3
 

I have to say, I was disappointed by the refs during the elims. Not only with the supported trackball shenanigans, but the fact that many, many illegal "defensive" plays were not properly penalized; team 8 throughout the entire elims or example.

We pay quite a bit to play the game, why can't we play the game in the rulebook?

Re: POLL ONLY. SVR F-3
 

Team 100 and Team 254 pointed out the incorrect scoring of supported trackballs to the referees earlier in the elimination rounds.

I don't have anything good to say about the refereeing at this event. I'll leave it at that.

Re: POLL ONLY. SVR F-3
 

Trophys should be given to all 6 teams as regional winners. Its none of the teams faults for referees that dont know the entire playbook. You never do a playover. It opens up further a can of worms after its over.

Many inconsistencies happened at Chesapeake this past weekend which cost teams the chance to advance simply because they created their own "interpretations" of the playbook. Just too many inconsistencies in scoring and penalty calling which evolved during the competition. From what I heard from people that saw the finals matches, I am not surprised it happened at SVR also.
I am not here to bash volunteers that work hard at events. I just feel that its the responsibilities of the volunteers, especially the head ref to have their team understand the playbook. This isnt some program that cost a few dollars to participate to create a robot overnight.
Blood, sweat, tears, and sacrifice takes place just to get to the point of participating.
I feel bad for all 6 teams being put in a bad situation.

Re: POLL ONLY. SVR F-3
 

i think this is a bigger issue THIS YEAR because of what FIRST said during the kickoff event. stating all refs would go through a online course and be consistent from regional to regional. now we got VCU, SVR, and in my opinion everything but G22's at UCF...not to mention the counting of unhurdled trackballs, and then correcting their mistake and making us wonder...

Re: POLL ONLY. SVR F-3
 

What did they say during kickoff?

Re: POLL ONLY. SVR F-3
 

Let me start by saying that this game is stupid. It’s entirely determined by penalties.


Now consider this. The refs misinterpreted the track-ball removal rules THROUGHOUT SVR. We lost points to this misunderstanding. Other teams lost points to this misunderstanding....

What I'm trying to say is that they did not simply call a random penalty in the finals. They called the same penalty ALL DAY.

So what if they had figured it out? What if they didn't give blue alliance the penalty? Wouldn't all the other teams that lost points to this misunderstanding have gotten angry?

What a strange day....

We were actually packing up our robot when we were called back to the field.