Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Anthony
We should also remember the fact that the FIRST Manual is not supposed to be enterpreted with lawyer speak. If so you could make it say many things.
Other than that, I am in agreement that this should be scored as an overage in funds usage.
|
Anthony is right on the money.
My intent was and is not to pick these rules apart. That would be totally distracting from the entire goal of FIRST.
That said, I would like to point out that we live in a highly litigious society. People will always be looking for loopholes to use to twist things to make them work in their favor. That's why I love rules that are written with very little wiggle room. If it's clear what the rule is, without room for question, or interpretation then people will follow it correctly. But, if there is room for varying interpretations, believe me, there will be challenges to how the rule should be applied to different circumstances.
When FIRST establishes rules, they have to try to anticipate varying situations. The setup for this YMTC is a perfect example. I think it illustrates the ability to use differing interpretations of a rule to achieve an outcome that beneficial to the situation.
Again as Anthony said: "...you could make it say many things."
Trying to interpret a rule as it was
intended may be more difficult than first glance would lead you to believe.