[DougHogg]

Originally Posted by Alex1072

The problem that I have with this ruling is that Team Update #4, Example 8 states:



Since this is exactly what happened in the final match, this situation was not really a judgment call, but a mistake. If the judges felt that it was a safety issue according to rule S01 or S05, the offending robot should have been disabled as those rules state. This is not to say that the people involved are bad people or did it on purpose. I think the level of professionalism of people in FIRST is such that this would not happen. Either way it is my opinion that alliance #1 is owed an apology at the very least. If I was in charge I would give both alliances an invitation to the championships as an exception and a recognition that a mistake was made. Just my .02.

Thanks for the reply.

I would venture a guess that the unsafe condition ceased to exist and that the referees then imposed the 30 point penalty instead of disabling the robot responsible for the situation.

Since 2002 when I started Team 980, we have never seen a rule that imposed a thirty point penalty before. It seems to be only one step below being disabled. One thing for sure, I think that it is clear that we are well advised to not cause any impacts with robots in the loading areas. In fact, at the beginning of the Silicon Valley Regional, a mentor from Team 1280 passed on some friendly advice to me, suggesting that we make sure that none of our alliance members bump anyone in the loading zone, as 30 point penalties had been handed out in Sacramento.

True, bumping an opponent into a partner who is in the loading zone seems to be allowed per the rule you quoted, but once again, if safety is threatened, the referees have to act. They then have the authority to apply any level of penalty they deem necessary to prevent the situation from continuing, or to prevent the situation from happening again in the future. In other words, I don't see it as a disable or "do nothing" decision.

In fact, in my opinion, the rule that you quoted should be changed. The truth is, causing any kind of collision in the loading zone is dangerous to the field attendants, and anything dangerous in a FIRST competition needs to be prevented. One way of doing that is to award a 30 point penalty when it occurs so as to strongly discourage that action. A more severe way is to shut off the responsible robot.

I doubt if any referee wants to shut down one of the robots. They apply judgement and suit the penalty to the severity of the situation at the time.

It seems to me that making sure someone's eye doesn't get poked out is more important than any other concern.

In other sports, referees have the benefit of years of experience and a gradual refinement of the rules to cover any holes or conflicts that show up. Since our game is new every year, our referees have to apply their judgement to situations as they occur. One thing that I am totally certain about, is that any action endangering a person will always be penalized, regardless of any other rules in the rule book. In FIRST, safety comes first.

Probably our referees should be paid $5000 per match. They have a huge responsibility, and every year have to spend hours studying complex rules for the new game, rules that haven't been tested in actual competition. I would personally like to apologize to the referees for not previously acknowledging them for the great job that they do. This year, that job is even tougher because there are more robots on the field. What is amazing is that they referee these competitions for free to support us and FIRST.