[DougHogg]

In other sports, officials have years to iron out the gray areas and loopholes as they crop up. Because we have a new contest each year in FIRST, that isn't possible. And so FIRST officials have a tough job.

It certainly isn't clear to me that a robot straddling a bar has been designed to react against the bar. It would depend on one's definition of reacting against. Does it mean actively pushing on the bar, or does it include being pushed against the bar.

I feel for the FIRST officials who had a game in mind, and are trying to preserve it. I also feel for Team 68 who thought outside of the box. Your robot design is an inspiration to us all, because you had the spirit to leap beyond the barriers which were meant to contain us.

Given the nature of FIRST, and the fact that we have a lot of intelligent people involved who will think outside of the box, I am afraid a certain amount of this kind of controversy goes with the territory.

However, one thing that we can perhaps do in the future is have a glossary of the important terms in key rules (such as "reacting against"), which might make things a little more certain. After all, a lot of words in our language have more than one meaning. It would be good to spell out which meaning is meant.

In this case, I think that Team 68 got further out of the box than the creators of the game and I think that it took us all aback somewhat. It certainly surprised me. Congratulations to your team on creative thinking that pushed the limits. Congratulations to FIRST also for handling a very difficult area. May we all do better at it in the future.

Good luck 68. Your team has the heart of lion. Look forward to meeting you in Phoenix.