Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary Dillard
And Dave wonders why we spend so much time lawyering each detail of the rules...................
Friday at Florida Regional, the lead inspector comes around to every team in the pits who had bumpers and explains that there was a ruling made at FIRST dealing with standard bumper construction that did not get passed down to the inspectors, and any team that was not in compliance had to modify their bumpers before they could compete on Saturday.
Text in R37 Figure 8-1 says, "Aluminum angle attached with wood screws to "clamp" fabric - using only staples and glue may also work but will not likely as secure"
Interpretation - you must have aluminum angle with wood screws to secure the fabric. Staples and glue alone are not adequate.
I had a friendly debate with him about it, but you know the drill - he doesn't make the rules, he just has to enforce them. So we (and several other teams) put the angles on.
Add one more to Paul's list I guess.
|
Gary -
I am sorry to hear that this happened. As is also true for the referees, the inspectors have the authority and responsibility to enforce the rules that have been provided. The Lead Inspector has the authority to decide whether a particular robot design, device, or configuration is in compliance with the rules that have been given. They do NOT have the authority to change the existing rules or make up new ones.
There is a difference between obsessively "lawyering" the existing rules that have been provided to all FIRST teams, and respectfully challenging someone that has created a new rule on the spot and expects everyone at an event to respond. The provided rules define a set of standards across the entire FRC program upon which each team an event participant (including the inspectors) should be able to rely. There is no provision for "local customizing" or "regional interpretation" of the rules.
-dave