Referee not knowing the rules

[rwkling1]

I hate to come here to complain, but I have heard many points about the referees not knowing the rules and just had my first experience with this at the MSHSL state championship (Minnesota). We were competing in eliminations (I won't state the teams) and one of our alliance partners were blamed of touching another robot that was in the safe zone. They called a technical foul on us, but it should have been only 3 pts, because (if I'm wrong, just say in the comments) if they were loading, that's 20 pts, but if they're just in the safe zone and getting prepared to load, it's 3, I may be wrong. This costed us the match. In the second match, one of their alliance partners was trying to block our full court shooter by extending an 84 inch blocker up, this is totally ok, but they weren't always in their auto zone. Myself and another alliance partner began to tell the ref during the match that he couldn't do that, that it was a technical foul. Right at the end of the match, the ref finally got the point and brought it up to the head ref. After the match was over, we lost by about 8 pts, but they didn't give us the multiple technical fouls they had, because they 'didn't see it.' We ended up getting 3rd in state, but this really frustrates me. I thought that the refs should have known the rules a bit better than what they did. thoughts?

[peirvine]

Originally Posted by rwkling1

In the second match, one of their alliance partners was trying to block our full court shooter by extending an 84 inch blocker up, this is totally ok, but they weren't always in their auto zone. Myself and another alliance partner began to tell the ref during the match that he couldn't do that, that it was a technical foul. Right at the end of the match, the ref finally got the point and brought it up to the head ref. After the match was over, we lost by about 8 pts, but they didn't give us the multiple technical fouls they had, because they 'didn't see it.' We ended up getting 3rd in state, but this really frustrates me. I thought that the refs should have known the rules a bit better than what they did. thoughts?

That team, was forced outside of their auto zone. Technically, according to the rules, the team that forced them out of the autozone should be given a technical. The rules also state (and this was brought up at multiple driver's meetings) that if a blocker is pushed out of the zone, by another team, they have to appear to make all possible attempts to get back into the zone to avoid penalties. If at anytime it appears that they are not doing that (ie: picking up frisbees, being fed), then it is a technical. The team in question, in my opinion was trying to get back as they made no attempts to get frisbees or defend otherwise. So really, there was no technical unless that team changed strategies. But overall, I did notice a difference if the "calling of fouls" from Galileo to here.

[rwkling1]

I understand where you are coming from, but as I was on the field I noticed multiple times in which the team wasn't making an attempt at getting back to their auto zone, sometimes they were, but I remember them being at about half court with their blocker up and no one by them. I know it's over and done, but I thought I would bring it up. Thanks for the input

[Jon Stratis]

We all know it's frustrating when you see something the ref doesn't.

Originally Posted by rwkling1

They called a technical foul on us, but it should have been only 3 pts, because (if I'm wrong, just say in the comments) if they were loading, that's 20 pts, but if they're just in the safe zone and getting prepared to load, it's 3, I may be wrong.

The rule you're looking for is G30:

Regardless of who initiates the contact, a ROBOT may not contact an opponent ROBOT

contacting its PYRAMID or
touching the carpet in its LOADING ZONE.

Violation: FOUL. If purposeful or consequential, TECHNICAL FOUL. If an opponent's CLIMB is affected, each affected opponent ROBOT will be granted credit for a Level 3 CLIMB at the end of the MATCH.

So, it doesn't have to be loading at the time, it just has to be "consequential", which is a tough judgement call to make.

I can tell you regarding the refs (As I know all of them)... this wasn't their first show this season. Or even their second. I'm pretty sure they all were at both the Duluth and Minneapolis regionals. Additionally, I know the technical for a blocker being out of the autozone did get called earlier during at least one qualification match (I saw it happen, saw the flag, and shared comments between matches with the refs that that particular foul was the difference in the score between a win and a loss).

Again, it sucks to see something that the refs didn't, or expect a foul to be called when it isn't, but unfortunately that's the nature of the game.

[rwkling1]

Ok, so I was wrong on the loading, my apologies. I wasn't sure about it but that's what I thought the rule was, and I'm not sure whether or not it was intentional or if someone pushed them into them, I was on the other side of the field so I'm not sure. Yes, it is unfortunate, but this is just like a sport and you have to play it by the refs, and sometimes, stuff happens.

[runneals]

Originally Posted by Jon Stratis

We all know it's frustrating when you see something the ref doesn't.

I can tell you regarding the refs (As I know all of them)... this wasn't their first show this season. Or even their second. I'm pretty sure they all were at both the Duluth and Minneapolis regionals. Additionally, I know the technical for a blocker being out of the autozone did get called earlier during at least one qualification match (I saw it happen, saw the flag, and shared comments between matches with the refs that that particular foul was the difference in the score between a win and a loss).

Again, it sucks to see something that the refs didn't, or expect a foul to be called when it isn't, but unfortunately that's the nature of the game.

We noticed the refs being *extremely* cautious/lenient at North Star on Friday this year for calling fouls/technicals. We even joked about it during our scouting meeting, up to the point where we were going to have our mentor sit by the field with the rule book on Saturday to be able to show the refs the how it should be ruled, even if that meant helping our opponents. Luckily, they got their game together on Saturday, and made ~95% of the correct calls.

I give refs credit (they are volunteers after all!) for doing their best, but I suggest to all the head refs to have their refs practice during practice matches, before their rulings count. Also I believe that some of the rules this year could have been better clarified to allow refs to make better calls. From experience as a ref at a FLL this past season, there is no way to be completely ready to ref an event. I suggest that FRC makes a video like the one that Scott made for FLL & shows it to the refs. I felt as if that video helped me understand the FLL game a bit better, as an outsider.

[rwkling1]

Originally Posted by runneals

We noticed the refs being *extremely* cautious/lenient at North Star on Friday this year for calling fouls/technicals. We even joked about it during our scouting meeting, up to the point where we were going to have our mentor sit by the field with the rule book on Saturday to be able to show the refs the how it should be ruled, even if that meant helping our opponents. Luckily, they got their game together on Saturday, and made ~95% of the correct calls.

I give refs credit (they are volunteers after all!) for doing their best, but I suggest to all the head refs to have their refs practice during practice matches, before their rulings count. Also I believe that some of the rules this year could have been better clarified to allow refs to make better calls. From experience as a ref at a FLL this past season, there is no way to be completely ready to ref an event. I suggest that FRC makes a video like the one that Scott made for FLL & shows it to the refs. I felt as if that video helped me understand the FLL game a bit better, as an outsider.

Thank you for the input, and I totally agree. The scoring system and the fouls were quite weird this season. I really appreciate the refs, but sometimes I can't help but be a little frustrated, but that's fine. I'm not blaming our whole season on them, there is definitely things we did wrong.

[WaterClaw]

We were on the alliance that was suffering referee insufficiencies mentioned in the beginning. I also must mention however this was an off season event. Quality was not a necessary factor. People were simply playing the game in a somewhat recognized event.

I do see where my teams' alliance partner would be coming from. This is a bad representation of FIRST and disregards gracious PROFESSIONALISM. But again, this was barely a recognized event and irrelevant as far as actual FIRST endorsed events played.

No one is perfect, and I would just like to thank the refs for their time at our regional. They did their best and we thank them for their work.

Finally, I must somewhat agree that referees need a much larger understanding of the rules. They do a lot already, but as in everything in FIRST, we need to continue to improve.

[Siri]

Originally Posted by WaterClaw

Finally, I must somewhat agree that referees need a much larger understanding of the rules. They do a lot already, but as in everything in FIRST, we need to continue to improve.

That's fair, do you have any suggestions for improvements? Based on this thread, the refs there were quite experienced (in fact having done more official events than the OP).

[WaterClaw]

Originally Posted by Siri

That's fair, do you have any suggestions for improvements? Based on this thread, the refs there were quite experienced (in fact having done more official events than the OP).

Actually, I didn't recognize them at all from Northern lights or any regional for that matter. I primarily took it they were volunteers with minimal understanding of the rules as far as refs went. My sincerest apologies if I am wrong.

However, again, I appreciate how they took time to ref our post season regional regardless if they were volunteers or full time refs. I've seen how hard their job is and I personally wouldn't do it with out a broader understanding of the rules.

And that brings me to my suggestion. As far as improving it goes, I believe it would be a good idea to have referees take a quiz or comprehension test of some sort to establish they have a well rounded understanding of the rules. The test does not necessarily eliminate the refs from refereeing however it forces them to re-evaluate their understanding of the rules.

If a quiz or anything related is in existence, it should be made more difficult and I believe lessons or lectures should be given to iron out technicalities. These Lessons would be given by the game creating committee and shown not only to referees but also to teams to establish clarity and alleviate tensions that may arise on and off the field. The lessons must be available both in video and in text so that one perception of the rules can be clarified by the other. The game creating committee has the responsibility of coming up with entertaining, challenging and interesting games as well as the rules for them. It should also a responsibility I believe to iron out discrepancies for all involved.

Also, this is only an idea. I am aware there are videos explaining field elements but I think we also need ones ironing out technicalities in the rules. And I believe we should have the creators clarify and expand understanding of their amazing creations.

[Siri]

Originally Posted by WaterClaw

Actually, I didn't recognize them at all from Northern lights or any regional for that matter. I primarily took it they were volunteers with minimal understanding of the rules as far as refs went. My sincerest apologies if I am wrong.

Just so all's clear, Jon Stratis indicated that they'd all reffed Duluth and Minneapolis (both), so it's not odd for you not to recognize them.

Originally Posted by WaterClaw

If a quiz or anything related is in existence, it should be made more difficult and I believe lessons or lectures should be given to iron out technicalities. These Lessons would be given by the game creating committee and shown not only to referees but also to teams to establish clarity and alleviate tensions that may arise on and off the field. The lessons must be available both in video and in text so that one perception of the rules can be clarified by the other. The game creating committee has the responsibility of coming up with entertaining, challenging and interesting games as well as the rules for them. It should also a responsibility I believe to iron out discrepancies for all involved.

There is indeed a test (nor is it new for this year), and while I won't claim it's rocket science, it is pretty comprehensive. However, for obvious reasons it is devised before the competitions actually start, so it's no surprise that it misses some the subtleties. For those it predicts, it's actually rather rough in assessing them.

In an perfect world, the test would be revised weekly and refs working the next weekend would have to take that. I actually quite like this idea, but given how difficult it is to recruit refs (or other certified volunteers, or volunteers at all for that matter), this is probably logistically prohibitive. A variation might be to take this, say, at the beginning of their Day 0. It could provide a framework around which to discuss the new situations that pop up every week. Of course, this could still require a schedule shift for those that have to come in later, and someone(s) still have to revise it throughout the season.

Originally Posted by WaterClaw

Also, this is only an idea. I am aware there are videos explaining field elements but I think we also need ones ironing out technicalities in the rules. And I believe we should have the creators clarify and expand understanding of their amazing creations.

There was an actual training curriculum last year, videos and all. I'm not sure why there wasn't one this year (though I can guess - time required and commitment vs benefit), but it went back to just a test.

That said, FIRST has been very clear for years that they refuse to discuss the...subtleties...of the rules. Just mosey through the annual Q&As, and you'll see a whole lot of "We cannot comment on hypothetical scenarios. Real-time evaluations will be made by Referees given the full context of the occurrence". If they won't do it on the Q&A, I wouldn't expect them to do it in videos. They barely do it at the Championship driver's meeting.

[Jon Stratis]

Originally Posted by WaterClaw

Actually, I didn't recognize them at all from Northern lights or any regional for that matter. I primarily took it they were volunteers with minimal understanding of the rules as far as refs went. My sincerest apologies if I am wrong.

However, again, I appreciate how they took time to ref our post season regional regardless if they were volunteers or full time refs. I've seen how hard their job is and I personally wouldn't do it with out a broader understanding of the rules.

And that brings me to my suggestion. As far as improving it goes, I believe it would be a good idea to have referees take a quiz or comprehension test of some sort to establish they have a well rounded understanding of the rules. The test does not necessarily eliminate the refs from refereeing however it forces them to re-evaluate their understanding of the rules.

If a quiz or anything related is in existence, it should be made more difficult and I believe lessons or lectures should be given to iron out technicalities. These Lessons would be given by the game creating committee and shown not only to referees but also to teams to establish clarity and alleviate tensions that may arise on and off the field. The lessons must be available both in video and in text so that one perception of the rules can be clarified by the other. The game creating committee has the responsibility of coming up with entertaining, challenging and interesting games as well as the rules for them. It should also a responsibility I believe to iron out discrepancies for all involved.

Also, this is only an idea. I am aware there are videos explaining field elements but I think we also need ones ironing out technicalities in the rules. And I believe we should have the creators clarify and expand understanding of their amazing creations.

To address a few points... Your team was at one of the four Minnesota regionals, so I'm not too surprised you didn't see most of the refs this year. However, I can assure you that they were all longtime FIRST refs, who not only ref our regionals, but also ref most of our offseason events.

There is a test for refs, just as there is one for Robot Inspectors. Additionally, the head refs are included on a conference call every week to talk about what happened the previous week and what they need to watch out for (the inspectors have a similar call). The head refs are then responsible for any on-site training that is required, just as the LRI trains the inspectors.

I also want to note... It is extremely difficult recruiting refs, more so than most other volunteer positions. Imagine you're a ref for football or soccer or baseball. You go in knowing the rules, since you grew up loving the sport. You can ref it for 20 years with only minimal (if that) rule changes. Now you come to FIRST and get recruited to be a. Ref. your very first question is "what are the rules?" Well, when the answer comes back "the rules change every year", you get nervous and drop out. The changing rules in a very high pressure and high profile position like that makes it very difficult to recruit new refs. So, anyone out there (not directed at anyone in particular in this thread) who has a problem with the way the refs work... Step up and volunteer to ref yourself (after you graduate, if your still a student)!

[Laaba 80]

It's important to realize the difference between not knowing a rule and making the "wrong" judgement call. In my experience, every time a ref has actually messed up (disabling our tower when our alignment device but not minibot broke the plane before 10 seconds, or not counting our colored discs) we made them aware of the issue and they corrected it. Mistakes happen. Judgement calls on the other hand almost never get changed. It is very hard to make a decision on what you saw that quickly, while knowing that either way someone is going to be unhappy. Ask any sports fan how many times a ref has cost their team a game, and those are professionals.

Originally Posted by Jon Stratis

So, anyone out there (not directed at anyone in particular in this thread) who has a problem with the way the refs work... Step up and volunteer to ref yourself (after you graduate, if your still a student)!

I actually volunteered to ref in Minnesota back in 2011, but was turned down and told I need to be out of college.

[Navid Shafa]

Originally Posted by Laaba 80

I actually volunteered to ref in Minnesota back in 2011, but was turned down and told I need to be out of college.

I know college-aged ref's were present at several regionals this year, perhaps that was an old rule?

[Alpha Beta]

Originally Posted by Navid Shafa

I know college-aged ref's were present at several regionals this year, perhaps that was an old rule?

Head ref in Kansas City was a college student this year. He graduated high school in 2009 and served as a field ref for the years inbetween. I suppose it has a lot to do with who you know, and how well.