Quote:
Originally Posted by tindleroot
I was thinking the same thing about possession. Upon further investigation I found out that unless there was a rule change I did not know about, it should not have counted for possession. Here is the FIRST definition of possession in the rule book:
“carrying” (moving while supporting BALLS in or on the ROBOT or holding the BALL in or on the ROBOT),
“herding” (repeated pushing or bumping),
“launching” (impelling BALLS to a desired location or direction via a MECHANISM in motion relative to the ROBOT), or
“trapping” (overt isolation or holding one or more BALLS against a FIELD element or ROBOT in an attempt to shield them).
All of these definitions require that the robot actually moves either a manipulator or the whole robot in order to direct the ball. By definition, the hard bounce is NOT possession. No idea why they counted it. However, there was a rule change for IRI saying that zones don't matter for assists, not sure if that affected anything judgment-wise.
|
Their hard bounce for the definition of launching. The ball went where they wanted it to and their catapult arm moved relative to their robot