The key to understanding this year's Robot Interaction rule <G22> is to look at last year's rule, <G25> and compare.
The first difference is in the title. <G25> last year had none. This year's reads, "Intentional Robot - Robot Interaction." This makes is more clear that unintentional interaction is generally not governed by G25.
The first two sentences start off the same the same: "Strategies aimed solely at the destruction, damage, tipping over, or entanglement of ROBOTS are not in the spirit of FIRST Robotics Competition and are not allowed. However Triple Play/Aim High is a highly interactive [contact] game" (2005-G25 includes the word "contact", 2006-G22 does not)
Here, the rules diverge crucially in setting the standards for legitamite and illegitamite interaction. First, 2005-G25:
Quote:
|
Some tipping, entanglement, and damage may occur as a part of normal game play. If the tipping, entanglement, or damage occurs where it is not a part of normal game play, at the referee’s discretion, a 10-point penalty will be assessed, and the offending team/ROBOT may be disqualified from that match.
|
The standard here is "where it is not part of normal game play, at the referee's discretion". This can be very broadly interpreted, and in some regionals last year, it was. In an attempt to clarify the rules and establish some consistency, FIRST offered examples of normal/inappropriate robot interaction.
On the other hand, 2006-G22 reads "Some appropriate contact is allowed subject to the following guidelines:", followed by a list of guidelines, followed by: "In all cases involving robot-to-robot contact, the Head Referee may assess a 5-point penalty and the robot may be disqualified, subject to these guidelines." The standard for allowed robot interaction is specifically laid out here in a set of guidelines. It does not depend on a referee's opinion of "normal game play".
The guidelines themselves specifically set a great deal of robot interaction inside the realm of allowed play. Contact within bumper zones and extension-extension contact "will generally not be penalized", and incidental contact "will not be penalized." Notably, FIRST makes it clear twice that tipping over a tilted robot is usually considered incidental contact: "Contact outside the BUMPER ZONE that is a result of tipping caused by contact within the BUMPER ZONE will be considered incidental contact. ... Contact with a tilted robot such that the contact is outside the bumper zone will generally be
considered incidental contact." As for ramming, "high speed ramming" in 2005 has become "long-distance high speed ramming" in 2006.
It is arguable that the <G25>-to-<G22> changes were made to avoid the controversial robot-robot interaction calls that occured in several regionals last year. It is not arguable that this year's rules governing robot-robot interaction are far clearer and easier to interpret, and the standard they set for improper interaction is much higher than the standard applied by many regional referees last year. Read them throroughly and realize that they do not read the same as last year's rules.