View Single Post
  #8   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 10-04-2004, 14:37
dlavery's Avatar
dlavery dlavery is offline
Curmudgeon
FRC #0116 (Epsilon Delta)
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Rookie Year: 1996
Location: Herndon, VA
Posts: 3,176
dlavery has a reputation beyond reputedlavery has a reputation beyond reputedlavery has a reputation beyond reputedlavery has a reputation beyond reputedlavery has a reputation beyond reputedlavery has a reputation beyond reputedlavery has a reputation beyond reputedlavery has a reputation beyond reputedlavery has a reputation beyond reputedlavery has a reputation beyond reputedlavery has a reputation beyond repute
Re: YMTC: Is it goaltending?

Quote:
4.3.1 Definitions
GOALTENDING – A ROBOT cannot interfere with a SMALL ball on its downward flight toward a goal or within a goal.

<G20> ROBOTS cannot GOAL TEND either the Mobile or Stationary Goals. If a ROBOT GOALTENDs or de-SCORES any SMALL ball, the referee will throw a red/green or blue/green 10-point penalty flag for each occurrence.

<G21> In the case of goal tending and assisting, while the ROBOT is manipulating a large ball, it is considered an extension of the ROBOT.
This one is simple. The rules and the situation are clear and straightforward.

Redabot is in contact with the 2X ball. For the duration of that contact, the ball is considered part of Redabot. The blue alliance throws balls towards their mobile goal. The balls are deflected and prevented from entering the goal by the 2X ball (which is currently considered part of Redabot). Under Rule G20, this is clearly goaltending. Since this happens six times before the red alliance thinks enough to let go of the 2X ball or move the goal out of range, they will be penalized for each occurrence.

The INTENT of both the red and blue teams do not matter, and do not factor in to the determination. It is impossible for the referees to determine the intent of the teams, in this situation or any other. It is NOT the referees job to determine the intent of the teams, and during their training they are explicitly counseled not to do so. To ask them to determine intent is absurd, and would lead to questions of skewed impartiality, favoritism and poor judgment on virtually every referee call. The only things that should be considered are the specific, observable facts and the rules that apply to the situation.

Blue has played with a perfectly legal and viable strategy. Red has made the choice of contacting the 2X ball while in range of the blue human players throw. Red has put themselves in the situation where they could run afoul of the goaltending rule. No one else made them do it. They have chosen to take a risk, and in this situation it caught up with them.

The red alliance takes a 60 point penalty, and you move on.

-dave
__________________
"I know what you're thinking, punk," hissed Wordy Harry to his new editor, "you're thinking, 'Did he use six superfluous adjectives or only five?' - and to tell the truth, I forgot myself in all this excitement; but being as this is English, the most powerful language in the world, whose subtle nuances will blow your head clean off, you've got to ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel loquacious?' - well do you, punk?"
- Stuart Vasepuru, 2006 Bulwer-Lytton Fiction Contest



My OTHER CAR is still on Mars!!!
Reply With Quote