Quote:
Section: 4.4.3 Date Posted: 1/13/2004 Status: Answered
Q: Regarding rules <G20> and <G21>, and with the emphasis this year on "intent" of rules, is un-intentional blocking of a shot while capping/un-capping (by robot part and/or 2X ball) considered incidental, or would it still be goal-tending?
A: It still would be considered goal-tending.
|
From the refs point of view, they do not want to make opinionated calls at competitions in order to minimize conflicts from other teams. Yes I know this does not seem like "gracious professionalism" but the refs want to make there decisions based on simple, obvious rulings, and avoid speculation.
This is probably why FIRST is strictly enforcing the Goaltending Ruling. And I can understand this ruling after being a Lego League referee for the past three years. But now this allows the human players to sway the game to there advantage, and not the robot.
Initially, many teams probably anticipated that if you cap the 2X ball in the opposing team's goal, they cannot score until they uncap the 2X ball. But with this ruling, it seems that FIRST is encouraging teams to wait towards the end of the game to cap the goals in order to avoid getting penalized. But in doing so, it is now strategic for the Human Players to hold onto two or three balls, and when an opposing team's robot tries to cap a goal (any goal for that matter) a human player can throw there last set of balls at the robot attempting to cap the 2X ball (or the goal they are trying to cap), and get the opposing team penalized for goaltending. Thus FIRST ultimately discourages teams to actually attempt to cap a 2X ball onto a goal.