Quote:
Originally Posted by CraigHickman
I like this idea for a "Rules Committee" They'd have to be on hand for the head ref to ask for clarification, but having a group who's only responsibility is to interpret the rules would go a long way. In order to keep the committee fair, ref's wouldn't give team numbers, but only "If RedAbot did X" type questions. If something like this were in place, or if the refs had to go through more training and testing (I acknowledge that they do, but more might help a bit...), then we wouldn't have an issue.
|
You are assuming such a system does not already exist, and is not fully documented in the materials provided to all the Head Referees and senior officials at each event, and that it does not already document the precise procedures to be used for seeking clarifying information and elevating appeals of decisions by referees, Head Referees, field managers, FTAs, and other event personnel.
Unfortunately, as many of us have learned time and time again in our professional lives, having those procedures defined, documented and available is only one part of the process. The affected personnel - whether they be spacecraft design engineers, FIRST referees, airplane maintenance technicians, or almost any other profession - must also use the established, approved procedure once they are available.
-dave