Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Garver
I think this just gets back to the question I asked in another tread about the yellow and red cards. This will make the FIRST yellow and red card system useless because refs will feel that they don't have the authority even though T06 lists examples and states that is not limited too just the examples given. I believe the yellow and red card system works great for IRI because there is one head ref (Andy). FIRST can never cover every situation that might come up during a regional making it necessary to give refs some freedom.
|
I think that the text of update 15 serves only as a reminder of situations that may result in a yellow card. It is not a rule, nor a new interpretation of a rule in any sense and conveys no additional or changed responsibilities or powers to the referees. It does not begin with the <xxx> nomenclature and is thus unenforceable, as far as I'm concerned. It, therefore, only explains that referees may look at violations of rules particularly relating to those circumstances when deciding to issue a yellow card. It is not carte blanche to reinterpret or make up rules.
Quote:
|
I also have to disagree that Dave has said that the referee exceeded his authority in this case. Dave commented on "The head referee should have been informed that he was "enforcing" a nonexistent rule." and Dave said "correct".
|
In another thread (
http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...&postcount=19), Dave explicitly said that the head referee exceeded his authority. Sorry for any confusion.
Quote:
|
T06 does basically give the head ref this authority to make a judgment about the level of defense. Also G53 gives him final say for any particular regional without any worries.
|
<T06> gives the authority to disseminate yellow cards for EGREGIOUS robot or team member actions. The definition of EGREGIOUS (though not provided by FIRST, despite its capitalization in the manual) suggests that actions that are not specifically disallowed by the rules are not conspicuously offensive or in bad taste. Certainly, precedent from past seasons and, more importantly, the prior week's events suggests that nothing about defending a ringer-less robot is inappropriate. How is that a single ref. made this interpretation to the exclusion of all others? They're certainly not given a rule book and left on their own to decide what the words inside mean, after all -- that's what Aiden is for.