[maxnz]

Originally Posted by maxnz

I guess they probably could have made the definition of incapacitated clearer. Is it making a robot unable to move for 5ish seconds? or the rest of the match?

Possibly something to add to the glossary next year?

They do have the rule about not touching a tipped robot for 10 seconds, but I have no idea if that was ever enforced this year.

Originally Posted by Pault

The problem isn't the definition of incapacitate, it's the definition of intentional. This year it seems like any sort of defense that resulted in a tipped robot was cause for a red card, even when it seemed like that defensive bot was playing normally and the offensive bot was not very stable.

Originally Posted by EricH

Except on Einstein.

Originally Posted by Pault

Very true. I am curious why that was. Is it just a result of the best refs being on the field? Is it a coincidence that this one instance was considered to not be the defender's fault? Is it actually because 330 got back up? Is it because the referees wanted to let the win happen naturally because it was more exciting that way?

I was getting at the disparity between the Newton match ruling and the Einstein semifinal match ruling. The rule says that the strategy of tipping gets only a yellow card and a foul, harm or incapacitation has to occur to warrant a red card. Thus bringing up the point, when is a robot considered incapacitated?