Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Tristan Lall
If we grant that the head referee is ultimately responsible for determining whether an action is safe or unsafe, then he is acting according to <S01> by defining the limit of safe actions. By categorically stating that any robot which crosses the plane of the field barrier is unsafe, he is providing a simple guideline by which that determination can be made, on the fly, by an official who doesn't necessarily know how the robot operates, and may not be in a position to rapidly estimate the eventual outcome of the robot's motion. <S01> If at any time the ROBOT operation is deemed unsafe, by the determination of the referees, the ROBOT will be disabled for the remainder of the match. The only deviation from the rules as printed is the additional stipulation that the disabling take place "at the earliest safe opportunity", which addresses the danger of a mechanism releasing a tetra or moving into an unanticipated position when power is cut. This is an absolutely necessary precaution.
|
To determine if something is safe or unsafe one must see what is happening. To predetermine that something is safe or unsafe is not what is stated in the rule. At no time did a ref shut down a robot that almost hit Refs, Field Attendants , Announcers or others if the tetras were not over the players station. Safety would warrant that wouldn't you agree. A robot that is turning slowly and the corner of the tetra "breaks the plane" is called for being unsafe. From regional to regional there are different calls. My issue is not the safety factor, the rules as written or any ref. My issue is that consistency and a uniform rule that spans FIRST is not in effect. Teams that were within the rules at one event are now outside of the rules at another event. Teams have built their robot based on the rules. Now teams that go high can be penalized by refs interpretation. If safety was such a big issue and concern, why is there not overhead protection built into the field.
Last year at the start there was a breaking the plane rule that was out from the beginning. It was published and called uniformly across the regionals. Like it or not it was a rule and it was enforced. I am in full support of it. This year the design/rules team did not deem it necessary to deal with this issue and as of now have also remained quiet. WHY? They changed other rules this year why not this one?
Unless asked, I will not post on this subject here again. My voice has been heard and I have received many positive and a few negative PM's on the issue. I will respond to PM's or if asked a direct question in this thread. Thanks for listening to the ranting.
