View Single Post
  #92   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 21-08-2012, 18:54
linuxboy linuxboy is offline
Registered User
AKA: Oliver Graff
FRC #3780
Team Role: Alumni
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Rookie Year: 2009
Location: MI, USA
Posts: 217
linuxboy has much to be proud oflinuxboy has much to be proud oflinuxboy has much to be proud oflinuxboy has much to be proud oflinuxboy has much to be proud oflinuxboy has much to be proud oflinuxboy has much to be proud oflinuxboy has much to be proud oflinuxboy has much to be proud of
Re: Team 548 Einstein Statement

One perspective that I think has not been brought up, that I think deserves attention is the competition rules. [T14] states:

"If a team needs clarification on a ruling or score, a pre-college student from that team should address the Head Referee after a field reset has been signaled. An team signals their desire to speak with the Head Referee by standing in the red or blue Question Box which will be placed on the floor at each end of the scoring table. Depending on timing, the Head Referee may postpone any requested discussion until the end of the subsequent Match."

While that does not mention the FTA, it is the closest thing I could find to how an official interaction is made concerning the results of a match. I'm not saying this would have affected how staff reacted but I'd like to point out that, from my interpretation of that rule, the proper way for the mentor to bring this up at the field is not at all. If (s)he wanted, (s)he could have revealed this vulnerability to a team member, the team member would have stood in the question box and voiced these concerns with to the Head Referee, who would (hopefully) confer with the technical staff present, and things could have played out differently. I'm not saying they necessarily would have, but we do have rules about who engages field staff, it clearly indicates that only pre-college students may do so, and I know, when I'm volunteering on the field, I would rather talk to a student than a mentor.