Quote:
Originally Posted by Foster
I will say that I have watched matches from the stands, and it's a far different experience than watching the event from the field. I got invited to watch from the sidelines at a Drexel Event. The lights, the noise, the robots being about 10 feet away is a lot of sensory overload. If you get a chance, wrangle an invite to stand on the sidelines. It will change your opinion on refereeing.
|
If you believe that it's harder to watch the matches from the sidelines then why are referees positioned there? Logically, following your statement suggests that referees should be positioned in the stands. I do not agree with this. If the referees feel that being close to the field inhibits their ability to make the correct call then they should discuss moving to a different position so that they can make the correct call. There is no excuse to not position the referees in the location they are most comfortable with. For the last 22 years the referees have been fine on the sidelines. If it was an issue someone would have brought it up by now.
I personally agree with OP's proposition. Qualification matches don't matter nearly enough to allow teams to contest calls. However in eliminations a major call made incorrectly is often the difference between attending CMP or not. That's a pretty big deal. I will agree with you that FRC is not about the robots. However, unfairly crushing the hopes of an entire teams can be very discouraging for students. "Life isn't fair" is also not a legitimate excuse. FRC is not about teaching students that life isn't fair, there is no reason to not expect the best that everyone in FRC has to offer, students, mentors, and volunteers alike. If we have the means to avoid issues such as poor calls and it affects all participants in only a positive way I can't think of a good reason not to support it.
I would like to point to an example at CMP last year that I personally experienced that is an excellent testament to the argument for the ability to contest calls.
In the finals on curie field last year we (1678), 148, and 862 were playing 4814, 67, and 1918. During the first match 1918 and 67 both climbed the pyramid at the same time and by result of a field fault 67's climbing claw lifted the top section of the pyramid causing 1918's claws to slip, and they fell. 862 was driving around the pyramid, clearly not in contact with pyramid, you can go back and watch the video, 862 wasn't even close to the pyramid when 1918 fell. However, 862 was penalized for the fall and 1678, 148, and 862 were red-carded for the match resulting in a loss. After the match representatives from 1918, the team that gained the advantage form the call, went to the head referee to contest the call. Due to FRC's current rules, the ruling was not reversed. Then, during either match 2 or 3 (I can't recall which) 148 was hit by 4814 while setting up to climb the pyramid incurring a foul on 4814's alliance. This in turn caused them to lose the match. I'm not really sure if the penalty should have been incurred on 4814, but since there's no instant replay there was no way for either alliance to contest it.
I think I speak for everyone when I say that those finals matches, although they were exciting, didn't feel entirely fair for either alliance. Despite winning and taking the curie division title, it didn't really feel like a genuine win to me. I felt pretty bad taking a match from the other alliance on fouls and I'm sure that the other teams didn't feel great about winning a match on fouls either. Since two of the three matches were decided by fouls, we effectively played a best-of-1 set which doesn't seem favorable in the spirit of fair competition. If FRC had instant replay or the ability to contest calls both of these issues could have been resolved and I think many more people wouldn't have felt better about the outcome of those matches.
I see your point that instant replay may make FRC too much about the competition and not enough about co-opertition. But I think only employing instant replay during elims, when it matters, and only giving each alliance the chance to contest only one foul would be a good balance.