View Single Post
  #6   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 08-04-2004, 16:41
Astronouth7303's Avatar
Astronouth7303 Astronouth7303 is offline
Why did I come back?
AKA: Jamie Bliss
FRC #4967 (That ONE Team)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Rookie Year: 2004
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 2,071
Astronouth7303 has much to be proud ofAstronouth7303 has much to be proud ofAstronouth7303 has much to be proud ofAstronouth7303 has much to be proud ofAstronouth7303 has much to be proud ofAstronouth7303 has much to be proud ofAstronouth7303 has much to be proud ofAstronouth7303 has much to be proud ofAstronouth7303 has much to be proud ofAstronouth7303 has much to be proud of
Re: YMTC: Is it goaltending?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kris Verdeyen
The issue here is, I believe, intent. The intent of the rule is to prevent teams from building a device that prevents shots from being scored, or using a ball as such a device. The blue team's behavior breaks neither of these rules. Redabot is trying to play the game correctly, by getting the ball to cap a goal, and the blue team is cheaply trying to use a loophole to score some quick points. If I was a ref, I would award the Blue team no points and a stern lecture.

I'm also of the mind that, if a team doesn't dawdle in capping their opponent's goal, they shouldn't be called for goaltending if a ball or two happens to hit the big ball. The goaltending intent was not there, so the goaltending call shouldn't be there.
I agree. If anything, I would penelize blue for goal tending. (Or are human players not eligable for that?) By the sound of it, either blue shot the balls before relizing that red had grabbed the 2x, or threw with the intention of bouncing the 2x out of redabot's grasp.
Reply With Quote