[cooker52]

I was watching on the side when our robot was scored into the goal (the flood of photographers was quite amusing). The first thing that flew through my mind was "how in the world is that possible?" Before we started any regional we went and put our robot into the goal to see if it was even possible and if we could get out. We knew before hand the risk. Personally I never expected it to happen (unless 1024 was going to do it for us).

Rosie was a tough defense. We had seen something close to it in our semifinals at Purdue, which was when we decided if we went any further we would need a righter device. Aside from the penalty at :33, I don't believe any other penalty was deserved. As the discussion has brought up, the rules say it is legal to be in the goal. If we had attempted to, I'm sure we could have found a way to have gotten ourselves out, so I do not believe we were "entangled" in any way, just unluckily sitting on our base rather than our wheels.

I personally inspected our robot right after that match and found no major problems with the robot. We had a tough time getting the bumpers off of our robot and a couple of decent dents on two of our sides, nothing that goes to show that they were intentionally trying to shut us down permanently.

I believe that Rosie was giving us a fight for our money and did so successfully. Rough housing isn't against the rules (but I wouldn't mind the high speed ramming rule to come back) and as has been stated, our teams shook hands after that match.

Thank you Team Rosie for giving us the fight of our year during those semifinals. It was great playing against you.