[Petey]

Originally Posted by Timmyd

i disagree i do not like this idea that goes against gracious professionalism there is a system of checks and balances already in place

Please.

Can we stop with the whole idea that gracious professionalism is some sort of impenetrable aura of perfection that surrounds the FIRST organization?

FIRST volunteers and employees are great people who run a great program that provided me with some of the best memories of my high school career. That said, they aren't saints. They aren't infallible. The betterment of the game--if that is indeed the result of an instant replay system--should never take a backseat to some nebulous hurt feelings on behalf of the referees. I would venture to say that anyone who holds their own ego, as a referee, over a correct call is doing more hurt to gracious professionalism than a replay system would.

To forestall the eventual flames:
Yes, I have reffed events before--not FIRST events, but sporting ones, with angry parents.
Yes, I do appreciate volunteers at all the FIRST events.
No, I am not saying people would hold their own ego over it. I'm bringing it up as a hypothetical case to make a point about what I feel is a constant misinterpretation of gracious professionalism.

Originally Posted by Cory

I think you've underestimated the amount of equipment you need for instant replay.

You need a sufficient number of cameras to capture all relevant angles of the playing field.

If those cameras are stationary, that's extra cash that has to be found. If they're the same ones that are currently being used, the operators need intensive training as to what they should be filming and when. In the NFL, do you ever see the cameramen filming some offensive lineman that got clocked by the defense and is lying on the ground seeing stars?

The answer is no. In FIRST, the camera men LOVE to film robots that have been flipped and are sitting there spinning their wheels in the air. This would not work.

You need to record the match, and have a station setup where a/the refs can watch it. More cash needed.

A lot of regionals can barely afford what they're putting out on the field already. This would be a large burden.

The refs get more calls right than they do wrong. Far more calls right than wrong. We need to just trust them and stand by their decisions, right or wrong.

A FAR better use of resources would be to make sure that every ref has intensive training, and understand the rulebook, as well as the in match applications of it perfectly.

Excellent points, all. I had not considered the necessary upgrade in technical infrastructure.

Originally Posted by Bill Moore

Instant Replay??? AAAAAAUUUUUGGGGGHHHHHH!!!

When are people going to understand that the competitions are not the "end" that FIRST is trying to achieve? If they were, FIRST would be a "for profit" corporation and run them like a business, just like any other sports league.

True, the FIRST experience is invaluable. But--personally speaking--I did FIRST for competition.

It is often said that it is the journey, not the end, that is important. But remember that there is no journey without a planned destination. I would have not done FIRST if there wasn't a competition that I enjoyed. Effective, excellent, fun, competitive events are absolutely necessary.

Originally Posted by Jay Trzaskos

To sum it up, the system that FIRST has going is all that we really need, yeah a little better training when it comes to the refs would be nice (especially when you have Baker out there throwing flags left and right ) but they do an awesome job and we need to thank them, not insult them by bringing in instant replay.

JT

Training is key. Oh, and I take issue with your point that calls rarely influence your standing at regionals. They most certainly can, especially in a FIRST regional that more and more parity driven.

Originally Posted by Rod

This is high school robotics for fun and education. Let's try and keep it that way.

Since when did fun and competition preclude accurate playcalling? They're not mutually exclusive.

Originally Posted by Collin Fultz

One thing that has been mentioned in part is that the refs are volunteers. All other sports refs (including the pee wee baseball) are paid.

There isn't time to "extensively train" all the refs. They have jobs. If you start requiring training, your ref volunteer rate will fall. Then you'll have fewer refs per regional. Then people complain because there aren't enough refs.

What is funny is most of the time, the people who complain about the volunteers at regionals have never volunteered themselves.

Perhaps it just takes seeing FIRST from a new vantage point to see the true meaning. Is the competition of FIRST great and what drives some of the improvements? Absolutely. But is it everything? No.

Until the MLB brings in instant replay (which won't happen under Paul Tag.), don't expect it in FIRST (which won't happen ever).
.

First, did you mean Bud Selig?

Second, I see your point about volunteer training being nigh impossible for new recruits. But it may prove necessary. If we can have instant replay, we should at least have (more) consistent reffing.

Once again, this is NOT A KNOCK ON CURRENT REFS. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND EFFORT. YOU ARE DOUBLE PLUS AWESOME!

That said, there is always room for improvement. If instant replay won't fill the gap, perhaps more training can. I'd like to point attention to a post I made last year about Bean Town Blitz, where I noted that there were some major problems with reffing.

Got a reputation from a ref at that event. D@ve. Know what he said?

Hey i understand your concerns .. we try so hard every year to make the right calls. i feel that more voices should be hered so that we all can better understand the rules of engagement..

Now that, my friends, is gracious professionalism.


--Petey