View Single Post
  #3   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 13-03-2006, 00:08
meaubry meaubry is offline
volunteer helper
FRC #6099 (Knights)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Rookie Year: 1997
Location: Shelby Twp, Mi
Posts: 784
meaubry has a reputation beyond reputemeaubry has a reputation beyond reputemeaubry has a reputation beyond reputemeaubry has a reputation beyond reputemeaubry has a reputation beyond reputemeaubry has a reputation beyond reputemeaubry has a reputation beyond reputemeaubry has a reputation beyond reputemeaubry has a reputation beyond reputemeaubry has a reputation beyond reputemeaubry has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Scoring For Your Opponents

I believe Karthik said it as was stated to him - "insulted" which also could be interpreted as "embarrassed"?

I agree in part with what most have said, but I think the qualifying points emphasis has been set up to to try and eliminate the reason for a "blowout" in the first place. There once was a game that you were rewarded the most by just barely beating your opponent - the safety margin was very small. Since then, penalty values and high point value at the end (hanging, being on the ramp, getting home) created a big enough gap that you didn't want to risk losing by that slim of a margin.

If the qualifying points were not at risk, there would be more than one way to do that. But, sometimes in this game you have to be cautious especially if you don't know how far ahead you are (scoring system shut off) and don't want to risk losing a close game by penalities (which can add up quickly with the offsides rule, and the lower goal scoring infractions).

I guess I can see how some teams could take it as a slap in the face - even though the justification is clearly to increase your (and their) qualifying points, very few will feel better knowing that the opponent was able to score more for them than they were.

Maybe, that is what FIRST should do - limit the amount the opposition can score for the other team, by the amount that team was able to score or themselves.
Reply With Quote