Dictionary references aside, I can share with everyone, from having been on the GDC, that the "intention" of the term inoperable was used by the GDC to mean that a part or function of the robot in question was inoperable in regards to how it had been working previous - not the entire robot. There have been numerous examples of robots being replaced via this rule even when it could still "move" - and it's been within the rules every time at many different events.
Using the 2006 SVR has an example, when the wheel broke on the 1280 robot, the 1280 alliance absolutely had the choice to bring in the next robot for the final if they wished. It did not matter that they "could" bolt on a castor wheel and still compete - all that mattered was that they had a problem with the robot, a part of it was not working as it had been previously, and they worked feverishly to get it working in time for the next match (which was very impressive). The alliance captain in that match had a very simple choice - if they felt the 1280 robot, even with the quick repair made, would not perform as well as the possible replacement robot - they could have switched in the on deck robot for 1280. If they felt that even at less than 100% the 1280 robot gave their alliance a better chance than the on deck robot, they could stick with 1280. Either choice was legal within the rules, the alliance was informed of that, and they could have replaced 1280 if they wanted to - whether the 1280 robot was 100% inoperable or not, or even whether 1280 "wanted" or "didn't want" to be replaced has nothing to do with it.
If any alliance captain on any alliance feels that a function or part of one of their robots is inoperable (not the entire robot, but a part of it - arm, lift, ramp, motor, whatever) and it will not be fixed to work as needed in time for the next match - they have the right to bring in the next highest seeded team. That is the intention of the rule, has been for a few years now, and is how the field crews have been instructed by FIRST to enforce that rule.
There is no bad guy or good guy when an alliance is faced with such a decision. It's not easy. The rules allow them to go to the next highest seeded team if they choose. The entire reason the "replaced" team still is considered part of the alliance is to make sure they are included in any awards or medals the that alliance gets if they move on. The ability of the alliance captain to choose to replace a robot is not so they can offend or hurt the feelings of the robot not working 100%, it's to give all three teams (four, once the switch is made) on the alliance the best chance to move on.
I think people are overlooking a very key point: It's an "alliance", not a team, once the playoffs start. Each team on the the alliance should be worried about the best interest of the alliance, not their individual team - that why the system exists as it does and recognizes all 4 teams equally regardless how much each played or scored or whatever. It's suppossed to be "one for all and all for one" once the alliance is formed - not "each play for themselves and forget about the best interest of the alliance".
That's why there are reserves in sports, so that a "starter" can say "I'm not 100%, even though I can still play, I think the team will have a better chance if my reserve goes in for me - I need to put the interest of the team above the interest of myself getting staying in the game and getting a few more stats". To say the quarterback of a football team must be completely immobile/inoperable and have two broken legs before he can be substituted for would not be a logical rule (and certainly is not in the best interest of the individual player or the team). If the QB is dizzy, has a sprained ankle, or just has the flu and can't play to his previous ability is all that matters - if the "team" is better off with the backup is all the coach should need to decide. If the "team" should win the super bowl, all the players including the starting QB who was replaced would get a ring and should jointly celebrate their accomplishment.
Hope that helps clarify the discussion and the "intent" of the rule.
Quote:
Originally Posted by eugenebrooks
Inoperable is a completely broken state, aka dead on the field,
or if next years game is in water as some have rumored, dead
in the water. Inoperable also means dead in the sense that it
can't be made operable in an allowed timeout. If you had a
wheel knocked off you might consider yourself inoperable, but
then again you might bolt on a caster and continue to play as
1280 did as a finalist in SVR last year.
A robot with an arm ripped off is not inoperable, it can still play
defense. A robot with a lift that comes up 1/4 inch short of
12 inches can still lift a pair of robots 4 inches and score 30 points
doing it. This is far from inoperable. If your robot could not roll
around on the carpet, I would call it inoperable.
You pick your alliance, and you play your elimination matches.
If a robot is inoperable, it is quite obvious to everyone.
Eugene
|