View Single Post
  #3   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 08-05-2008, 08:48
GaryVoshol's Avatar
GaryVoshol GaryVoshol is offline
Cogito ergo arbitro
no team
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Rookie Year: 2000
Location: Royal Oak, MI
Posts: 5,756
GaryVoshol has a reputation beyond reputeGaryVoshol has a reputation beyond reputeGaryVoshol has a reputation beyond reputeGaryVoshol has a reputation beyond reputeGaryVoshol has a reputation beyond reputeGaryVoshol has a reputation beyond reputeGaryVoshol has a reputation beyond reputeGaryVoshol has a reputation beyond reputeGaryVoshol has a reputation beyond reputeGaryVoshol has a reputation beyond reputeGaryVoshol has a reputation beyond repute
Re: 2008 MARC "Rules of Engagement"

Regarding video review - You've eliminated two things that video review might not be able to see - the ball falling onto a robot following a hurdle, or the robot being in contact with a trackball during a crossing. But a video review will not answer the question as to whether a ball was scoreable or not. Remember that the ball must pass over the opposite finish line before it can be scored again.

I question issuing yellow cards to the alliance in the finals for a challenge that does not stand up. Losing the time out would be enough penalty in my mind. But it's your game and your rules.

I like the option of referee judgement on <G22>. Did you consider extending that to <G42> as well - that if a hurdle is made despite any interference, the penalty shouldn't be assessed?
__________________
(since 2004)
Reply With Quote