Alamo Regional: Red cards

[Billfred]

Originally Posted by ThirteenOfTwo

...the following behavior is neither endorsed nor condoned by me or my team in any way.

Isn't it a potential strategy to, upon figuring out that a Red Card for your team is inevitable, decide to bring down as many other teams as you can in order to boost yourself in the rankings? Could you deliberately show up to a match just to screw over your partners? I hope that this behavior has not been and will not be exhibited by any teams at any competition, but with the current rule set up it seems completely possible.

...the above behavior is neither endorsed nor condoned by me or my team in any way.

Just covering my bases.

The key phrase there is if the issue is found after the start of the match.

Let us hope the inspectors will communicate such issues with the field.

[JesseK]

I don't think that you would increase your ranking score so much as piss everyone off if you 'strategized' to go to a match (or skip it entirely) upon missing inspections. Getting an incidental red card would seem probable, but not totally unavoidable. I'd love to see video of 16 & 2056's robot -- based on scores, you guys in Alamo and FLR had a treat!

[Kyoshirin]

This happened up at Kettering today, but one match I was human player. I threw a tube, it hit the driver station, and frisbee'd onto our alliance's minibot pole. Our team was confused by this out come because there is nothing in the manual about this. Rule <G24> is the closest I found, but only applies to an opponent's tower.
<G24> The opposing ALLIANCE may not interfere with the DEPLOYMENT or climbing of a MINIBOT. Violation: PENALTY plus RED CARD
Interference by an ALLIANCE refers to any action taken by that ALLIANCE that results in disruption of the MINIBOT‟s progress. This may include, but is not limited to,
a) throwing a GAME PIECE at the MINIBOT/TOWER,
b) driving a ROBOT or GAME PIECE into the TOWER, or
c) directly contacting the MINIBOT or TOWER.

[Grim Tuesday]

2056 got a red card at FLR for contacting the tower during end game. It was just a mistake, nothing more, as far as I know.

[KC1AJT]

most of the penalties @ BAE were lane violations and they did pile up, averaging probably about 3 per match

[Grim Tuesday]

There were VERY few lane violations at FLR. Well, most of them were given penalties, not carded, though most teams knew the rules.

[DonRotolo]

Not too many penalties at NJ, a few yellow and red cards.

A team was playing defense and was pushed into their opponent's zone by an opponent. The defender then collided with a robot trying to hang: Red Card.

After that, defenders stayed a lot further from the opponent zone.

Probably a dozen lane incursions, mostly inadvertent with no robot-robot contact. Teams learned to avoid tubes in lanes, no matter how attractive.

One particularly egregious act was a team that literally rammed an opponent at about the 8 second mark, messing up the minibot deployment. And they would have won regardless...

[Andrew Schreiber]

Originally Posted by DonRotolo

Not too many penalties at NJ, a few yellow and red cards.

Alamo - 1.69148936170213
Kettering - 2.32105263157895
BAE - 2
New Jersey - 0.561224489795918
Finger Lakes - 2.15948275862069
Traverse City - 1.88659793814433
Average - 1.76997452997367

Nope, apparently NJ teams were the best behaved by a long shot. Wow, I never thought I'd hear myself say that.

[Grim Tuesday]

Or the refs there were the most leniant...

I remember that last year, when we went to Philly, after being at FLR, there were tons of penalties our team noticed that went un called. Three cheers for Dante!