Quote:
Originally Posted by DjScribbles
So, this weekend at MSC we were up against 67's full court shooter in quarter finals. We had built a deployable blocker prior to the event for defending such a robot, and used it to some effect.
In our first match against them, we got pushed away by 2337's very powerful drivetrain ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R1AO...ZbYOGB3Kd9wHV). I talked to our drivers, and suggested they try to maneuver themselves between 67 and 2337 in order to stand a chance; and told them to ask the head ref what would be called if we were pushed by 2337 into 67, simply as a precaution.
I was pretty shocked to hear that we were told that putting ourselves between 67 and 2337 would be considered 'placing ourselves in a dangerous situation' and that the ref would have called fouls against us for this action.
Is this ruling reasonable? From my perspective, if an opposing alliance member pushes us into another opponent in a protected zone, that's their problem, not ours. Just as a team doesn't receive a foul for being rammed into a pyramid, they shouldn't receive one for being forced into a protected bot.
It was a little upsetting to hear this after getting knocked out (since getting in between the FCS and its body guard could have turned the match in our favor), but this ruling would also have a big impact on our defensive strategies at champs. |
We faced this exact situation in Central Washington as the FCS:
We were sitting in teh protected zone and a defender was attempting to block us. Our ally shoved the defender into us, resulting in a G18-1 technical. The explanation was simple: There was no reason to shove the defender into the FCS other than to draw a foul.... Also in that match, the defender got a bit too close for us and as we moved about a little, getting lined up, etc., we made contact. In this situation, the defender was called for a G20 foul as it had placed itself in a dangerous situation by being so close to us while we were in the protected zone.... Later, our ally tried to come around the back to push the defender away. In the process of pushing back, the defender managed to slide into us (in the protected zone). This was called as a violation of G20....
There are all sorts of ambiguities with G18-1, G20 and G30 and the head referees at different events have called them very differently. One of our mentors will be refereeing in St. Louis (not in our division) and has promised to bring the issues up at their referee meetings before the event starts in hopes that it will be called consisently throughout the weekend on all fields. We will also be asking the head ref about it before play starts Thursday afternoon.