I have attempted to stay as far away from responding to this thread as possible as I am long winded, and there isn't anyone here that does not already know that I think.
1. I was not present at the event (I was at home while my family participated because I made a personal decision to opt out of going). Search previous posts as to why if you care. Hint...It was game and game tinkering related.
2. I watched the event intently in videos posted (throughout the event), and the stream while watching and digesting all the other streams available. Just as I have all the other Week 1-Week 3 Events.
3. I am directly related to a drive team member (Ball P.U. & Shooting...a 4th year driver), on Team 60 (The Blue Alliance 6th seeded Team Captain - He is My H.S. Senior Son, who I am very proud of, and who initially was hesitant toward using the hatched "Full Field Game Strategy" when initially presented w/ the strategy according to both my son's version of events -he will post his version later, and Jim's version of events already posted previously).
4. I watched the entire event...And, the strategies employed all weekend that evolved from recent rules changes....They received word (Wednesday was a travel & load in day), of changes made Wednesday in the Driver's Meeting Thursday morning. The game has changed once again...Surprise!
5. I, as a viewer and spectator (long distance), enjoyed every match, but, I enjoyed that final match as much, if not more than all the rest of the matches (and so it appeared did all the spectators and teams present, because they employed a 6 Team Alliance Full Field Game Strategy, that was not only fair to all, it was an attempt to accomplish the game goals (nobody gave up on anything....None of the 6 teams would ever give up, or ever give in, a match EVER!) They just tossed out the sticks, stayed away from the rails (and each other), and went after every bunch of carrots they could gather and munched them all down in an outright battle of pure artful offense in the final match of the tournament. That was their choice to make. And theirs alone.
6. They turned this game on its head...and I thouroghly enjoyed watching that happen. They innovated, they strategized in full co-opertition w/ self agreed limits imposed (if anyone stepped outside of the agreement, the defensive game immediately resumes, and there was a point that after reviewing the video, my own team 60 thought they had stepped over the line accidentally also in making contact). They actually thought "outside of the box", and they did so by adding in the element of the added incentive. Though the bar was set so high, it was not acheived in that 1 shot deal.
7. As the only 6 teams left in the competition, they could not in any way affect any other team beyond the 6 adherents and voluntary teams who were all in agreement after Final match 1 was completed. Get angry about this if it had been instituted in Q- rounds yes, not though in Final Eliminations sitting 1-0. As other than those 6 teams, the results affect no one else...PERIOD!
8. You cannot compare teams or alliances in this game this year, on a full season basis, a week to week basis, or even a same week basis (you'd play hard to get comparing on a match-to-match basis even at the same Regional or District Event), as the number of, scope of, and type of purely subjective rules, calls, and ref's calling those subjective penalties is no where near as consistant as it would have to be to be "truthful" and "honest" in publishing any results you would hope to state. And the Rules Tinkering has grown exponentially since Week Zero, and the game has changed too many times.
OK, I agree...You could personally choose to put an asterisk next to the 301 score, or even the combined alliance scores of 481 total (and add the note; *INNOVATIVE GamePlay/No defense used by choice...But, you need to do that after every score so far through Week 4, in this game w/ all the rules tinkering too. Sry Falcon Robotics, CoCoNuts, and Plasma. (But some attempting to diminish your accomplishments is / are totally wrong...You are an alliance to be reckoned with most years, and this year and always very formidable opponents and alliance members too, and our team would do well to play with, or against, any of you, at any time...ever!) With is better!
9. It wasn't attempted as has been suggested, or in a specific manner that was also suggested further, that I would consider really anti-GP, to attempt to cheat to receive the incentive voluntary contribution (the Challenge), that was made in just trying to get "all to give their all", by the event sponsor "out of his own pocket" (they actually threw away any chance of acheiving that added goal - not replacing goal, by throwing out the sticks, and staying away from the rails, and taking the ref's mainly out of the game by only going after the carrots...The goals w/ assists, and trusses).
10. I'll go even one further...They actually did acheive the 200+-200+ score if you truly disect the video (and call every penalty that should be called in the game "if you remove all of the subjective elements"), as the one element you cannot as teams, actually remove the ref's. from, in choosing the "no defensive play game strategy," a fully legal game strategy BTW, that many I think, wished here, that you had actually thought of first,.....The inbounded ball element)...The Ref corps just, I will assume after the video disection, after seeing & possibly recognizing the plan of action, in action, just refused to get involved in a game that all the participants agreed in advance, to use an advanced game strategy, they developed on their own, and agreed together to institute.
I am only guessing above as to what the Ref's. actually thought and when. (To be a fly on the end of the truss during that officiant conference at the end of match, would have been just golden to me).
I would certainly love to hear that angle from a few of them here. The officials conference after the match ended, was just like during other matches preceeding, lenghty and complete (head ref. also conferring w/ the scoring table befrore posting the scores .....If they did not like the match, a replay could have been ordered...It was not ordered, and the match was declared clean w/ no penalties incurred AND FINAL. Is that what actually upsets many others posting in the thread?
The game was declared w/ NO PENALTIES called or scored.
11. Not 1 person from any team, participant, spectator, officiant, or anyone else in attendance lodged any complaint (and anyone watching it had to fully recognize that a specific onfield game strategy was employed, that was quite different than any match preceeding it)....But, they were all way too busy cheering what they had just witnessed. The Aerial Assist game in raw form without all those Sticks & Rails added (and the much hated Battle Bots element removed willingly), and that so many have cried & whined angrily & incessantly for over at least 3+ weeks here on CD about this specific game.
12. I can tell you, I have spoken at length w/ my son about the issues, have disected his version of the events (and they have perfectly matched Jim's previously published version, w/ a few honorable GP actions he did on his own that Jim may or may not have even known about,....like he personally apologized to members of the Red Alliance before Finals Match 1, because he and his team (60), felt they could not accept the agreement, and then after match 1 was completed (and things were brought to light, minds sort of changed and developed), he apologized again to them, because he stated he felt bad that they should have accepted the agreement to begin with, then when all had finally agreed in the end, to institute the new "full field game strategy" TOGETHER).
He also assured me, at no time did anyone in his 6th Seeded Alliance ever give up, from the start of eliminations, right through to the final shot of Final - Match 2. It wasn't, finally agreed to, solely for the money aspect whatsoever, but as a strategy, he and others thought after Finals match 1, could have been effective, via a full on all offensive battle carried out to perfection (it wasn't on one end only, the 3 blue robots were not as complementary in design to each other, as the other alliance was. And, that is the difference always between 1st seeding choice and 6th seeding choices, and that some shots and P.U. were missed (mostly on their behalf if you disect the video also), theRed Alliance had the full package including the truss to Human down pat), if w/ the added element of completing the additional challenge of possibly acheiving the 200-200 or higher scores. He is proud of his Alliance, he is proud of his team, feels he and his Alliance and team fully deserved to play in those final 2 matches...and all before them. And is very happy w/ the results. He loved working with 1726 & 3785 & competing against the #1 Seeded Alliance (competing against, the best of the best, is what Team 60 strives for always....It is an ingrained taught aspect to each member of our quite historic team). Battling hard & fair is what he loves. He favors (his words), this set of eliminations over all past that he has yet been a part of. And some of the preceeding ones ended in REGIONAL WINNER on the banner....Though it has been a couple of years.
13. Each member of the 6 Alliances that forged and accepted an agreement to employ this now seen to some, as a "highly controversial" "Full Field Game Strategy", probably had their own, individual to a person, reasons for forging and agreeing to employ it...But, each held up their end of the agreement, and that alone is a very hard thing to accomplish (given that defense was played in every match by every party thereto for 2 days preceeding).
They did so, without cheating the Sponsor out of his incentive, which as has been pointed out could have been easily done at the last moment of the game...Just incur an easy penalty (that alone not being done or even attempted...just watch the courtesy shown 842 at 1:29-1:36 a total of 8 seconds burned, should be rewarded, not frowned upon), and 200-200 would have been reached...No, they chose the honorable Offensive Cycle Shootout Angle Together...AGAIN...No rules prohibit it, and if there were any, then it was the officiants call, to instantly simply call for a replay. I do not recall any replays in the AZ Regional...Not a one that I saw!
14. It is no one elses business what field strategy is employed by the participants, unless it actually violates the rules. I have read that here many times on CD. Do it w/ GP....They personally turned the game Aerial Assist, on its head, and they did it w/ GP in an INNOVATIVE way. And for 2.50 seconds, they made it really exciting for those involved and those watching. Though you personally do not have to like it.
Is that what all this fuss is really about? I would say personally, do not diminsh or underestimate any of these particular 6 teams this season (or measuring them by that 1 match, where they thought "outside the box together in true Co-Opertition Mode")....You do, and you take a chance on missing the boat....Measuring once and cutting twice. The season is not over.
AZ is "Not traditionally a place known to produce powerhouse teams", eh? Now,....who is everyone talking about today? Imagine that....We show that we work together......Sour grapes/ Make some wine please and bottle it up. Want some cheese to go w/ that?
The word is INNOVATION, the act was Co-Opertittion, both on the field, and off. The thing was carried off w/ GP. And it was just a strategy that some don't like. And it was NECESSARY to balance out this much loved and very hated and totally tinkered with game of unbearably unbelievable design.
Throw away the STICKS. Stay away from the RAILS....Go gather all the CARROTS you can, and MUNCH THOSE TASTY CARROTS UP!
Now....Show of hands....How many teams collaborate w/ other teams off the field at ANY TIME during the season? You are very welcome.....Team 60 started that years ago, I'm told...And it was "very controversial" in those days too, I'm told. We were all told if you watch the team introduced at the beginning of the quarter finals. Guess some things just will never change....Some are just destined for historical success I guess.
I thank Teams 842, 2486, 2403 The Red Alliance (AZ Regional 2014 WINNERS), and Teams 1726 and 3785 along w/ my own Team 60 The Blue Alliance (AZ Regional 2014 Finalists), for helping make my sons eyes sparkle by simply INNOVATING w/ each other (no matter how controversial it may seem at the moment). He's still smiling. You will not diminish that feeling.
You naysayers here, will not diminish that, you will only further spark that fire within. And make it burn ever deeper as the season has only just begun.
And those attempting to diminish the accomplishments of EITHER ALLIANCE, especially the Winning Alliance. Should be totally ashamed of yourselves. The game does not need to be played "as you have determined it be played", or "as YOU PERSONALLY have envisioned it."
It merely must be played within the published RULE SET. Or, penalties will be incurred and sufferred. Show me a rule they actually violated or be silenced on the issue.
_______________________________________
BTW...Jim, TY for hatching the now "controversial plan" and turning both the Aerial Assist Game and a few here on CD and the entire community on their heads! This game needed another controversy to take a bit of the heat off of the GDC and those poor worn out VOLUNTEER Officiants.
At least they now know Arizona is also in the house! Maybe we have more surprises in store in the future......
I will attend the next event...I wouldn't miss it now for the world.