[Scott358]

The issue isn’t with the ref’s, but seems to be within rule G25. As it states in the first sentence of the rule, it is in place to deter "Strategies aimed solely at the destruction, damage, tipping over, or entanglement of ROBOTS". This rule seems to try to judge intent, which makes it a rule that is very difficult to properly enforce. This puts the ref's in a very difficult spot (hence the many calls for a rule change which would allow for more consistent application).

As a mentor for a team that was responsible for the disqualification of a complete alliance during the first match of the Philly finals, we feel horrible for causing the loss of this match to our alliance partners. As a Regional Chairman's Award winning team from the week before, I can assure you that we never, ever had a strategy aimed solely at destroying, damaging, tipping over, or entangling. In this specific instance, we were merely trying to leave the opponents end of the field and they were trying to stop us, and they tipped over when we collided. I strongly feel this is “normal game play” (as quoted in rule G25).

At this point, all we can do as mentors is handle the situation with gracious professionalism, and have the kids understand that humans make calls, some of which you'll agree with, and some you won't, but you've got to move on in a constructive way. Don’t blame the ref’s, but if you feel the rule is wrong, find ways to make a change (like perhaps discussing it within this forum).

As Dean reminded us during the opening on Saturday, we're all very lucky to be among the few who play this game. With that, I would call for a better defined rule that can be more consistently applied (especially since this one has/can have such a huge impact), but either way, we're looking forward to Atlanta!!!

Scott 358
Engineer/Mentor
Festo Hauppauge Robotic Eagles
2005 Philly Finalist
2005 SBPLI Long Island Chairman’s Award
2005 SBPLI Long Island Champions (Thanks to team 527 and 870)