View Single Post
  #9   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 16-03-2014, 15:27
EricH's Avatar
EricH EricH is offline
New year, new team
FRC #1197 (Torbots)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Rookie Year: 2003
Location: SoCal
Posts: 19,814
EricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Two balls on the field in Howell QF-1-2

I'd like to make a couple of comments. Bear in mind that I have only watched the video linked earlier in this thread, and what I'm about to say is probably going to show that any advocates for instant replay are going to REALLY need to reconsider single-camera methods.

Basel, the high goal that 469 scored should have been counted as scored. BUT, unless and until the dead ball was cleared (by sending it through a goal or to a human player), no points should ever be awarded, and no cycle should be ended. Once the dead ball is cleared, the cycle is ended. This certainly appears to be what happened in this match. In short: Dead ball loose, no cycle end. Dead ball disappear, end cycle when live ball scored if not previously scored.

Regarding the truss-corner goal shot: I can't tell for sure whether or not 469 contacted the ball. From that camera vantage point, it looks like they didn't--nothing deflects on them, nothing changes in the ball's trajectory. In which case, Joseph actually got it right. Bear in mind that although it happens right in front of a ref, the ref in question is actually scoring BLUE possessions and truss shots; the ref scoring RED is at the far side of the field*. (If instant replay had been available from the webcast camera, it would have been inconclusive, call stands. Folks looking at single-angle instant replay, the robot itself blocked any chance of a good replay call on that.) But, the camera vantage point is not the ref's vantage point. So it's entirely possible that the refs did in fact get it right.

Given point of view that the ref made a mistake... replay, or rescore. Mike's third case applies. IMO, that's the right call. (Again, I wasn't there, I've only seen the video.) But, if 469 did in fact make contact (again, I don't see anything to confirm or deny that in the video), then Mike's second case applies.

BTW, that's not going to be an easy call to make by any ref. I could tell the refs were trying to figure out what went wrong (they were on their headsets later in the match). I'm not going to second-guess that call; I don't think I could have made it either way (again, just based on the video) and NOT have someone in the challenge box.


*GDC, if you're reading this: Field Reset should NOT have a better view of whether something is scored or not than the scorekeeper/ref who is supposed to be tracking the score of that particular thing!
__________________
Past teams:
2003-2007: FRC0330 BeachBots
2008: FRC1135 Shmoebotics
2012: FRC4046 Schroedinger's Dragons

"Rockets are tricky..."--Elon Musk