2012 Mid-Atlantic Robotics FRC Region Championship

[dodar]

Originally Posted by bduddy

Is there a rule that says they have to?

Was their match goal to get 28 points in penalties?

[bduddy]

Originally Posted by dodar

Was their match goal to get 28 points in penalties?

The fact remains that it wasn't their own actions that caused those penalties, it was the actions of the other alliance. If [G45] wasn't intended to apply to that kind of scenario, what it is supposed to apply to?

[dodar]

Originally Posted by bduddy

The fact remains that it wasn't their own actions that caused those penalties, it was the actions of the other alliance. If [G45] wasn't intended to apply to that kind of scenario, what it is supposed to apply to?

it was their own actions, they parked in front of 341 in between them and the bridge. G28 also says there should have been a TF for consequential contact, i.e. instant 49 points for repetitive contact with the bridge.

[bduddy]

Originally Posted by dodar

it was their own actions, they parked in front of 341 in between them and the bridge. G28 also says there should have been a TF for consequential contact, i.e. instant 49 points for repetitive contact with the bridge.

But the direct cause of those penalties was the driving of the red alliance - if they had gone at the bridge from the other side, for example, there would have been no penalties. Also, [G28] assigns Technical Fouls only for purposeful, consequential contact, and this was not purposeful. Not really sure where you're getting the 49 points from, because the extra 40 points would come from [G25], which you can definitely not be forced into committing...

[dodar]

Originally Posted by bduddy

But the direct cause of those penalties was the driving of the red alliance - if they had gone at the bridge from the other side, for example, there would have been no penalties. Also, [G28] assigns Technical Fouls only for purposeful, consequential contact, and this was not purposeful. Not really sure where you're getting the 49 points from, because the extra 40 points would come from [G25], which you can definitely not be forced into committing...

If you read the italicized print from G25 you'd see that it reads: Techincal-Foul, if the act of balancing is interfered with, also a red Card with the bridge will be counted as balanced with the maximum number of robots possible for that match. They interfered with the act of balancing. This defines what happened in that match.

[Grim Tuesday]

Originally Posted by dodar

If you read the italicized print from G25 you'd see that it reads: Techincal-Foul, if the act of balancing is interfered with, also a red Card with the bridge will be counted as balanced with the maximum number of robots possible for that match. They interfered with the act of balancing. This defines what happened in that match.

Aah, but the G28 exception from G44 doesn't apply to G25.

[dodar]

Because it doesn't matter. If it happens it gets the penalty called no matter what.

[Grim Tuesday]

Originally Posted by dodar

Because it doesn't matter. If it happens it gets the penalty called no matter what.

[G44]
Generally, a rule violation by an Alliance that was directly caused by actions of the opposing Alliance will not be penalized. Rule [G28] is an exception to this rule.

We are talking about the same rule, right? G25 (the bridge rule) falls under the jurisdiction of G44.

[dodar]

Originally Posted by Grim Tuesday

We are talking about the same rule, right? G25 (the bridge rule) falls under the jurisdiction of G44.

Q. Does rule G25 apply at all times? What happens if a robot is pinned against an opponents bridge (does rule G44 apply)?

A. Yes, Rule [G25] applies throughout the Match. The Referee will determine if Rule [G44] applies given the exact circumstances.

[EricH]

Originally Posted by dodar

Q. Does rule G25 apply at all times? What happens if a robot is pinned against an opponents bridge (does rule G44 apply)? FRC3005 2012-01-11

A. Yes, Rule [G25] applies throughout the Match. The Referee will determine if Rule [G44] applies given the exact circumstances.

And what does [G44] say? Generally, a team can't be forced into a penalty. If they were pushed up the bridge, I'd definitely call that forced into a penalty.

[nahstobor]

Well since no one has said this yet, congratulations to teams 341, 25, and 1640 for winning the first MAR championship. There was only one playoff match where this alliance scored less than 100 points .

[Deetman]

Congrats to 341, 25, and 1640 for a truly impressive set of elimination matches and for winning the MAR Championship.

All the teams in the elimination rounds really stepped up their games and created some of the most exciting elimination rounds I've seen in person.

Congrats to both 75 and 433 for their well deserved MAR Chairman's Awards.

[bjbmcd]

Scott. Thanks for the ranking spreadsheet. You asked "Are there errors on the sheet or incorrect numbers there?" I believe 3974 should have 4 championship award points. 2 for Highest Rookie Seed Award and 2 for Rookie Inspiration Award.

Team 3974 (E=mCD) would like to thank everyone from the MAR District for making our rookie season terrific. The GP shown by all the teams was incredible. One question we heard many, many times at the events was “What does the mCD stand for". It is short hand for our school name Bishop McDevitt.

[chris1592]

Originally Posted by bduddy

The fact remains that it wasn't their own actions that caused those penalties, it was the actions of the other alliance. If [G45] wasn't intended to apply to that kind of scenario, what it is supposed to apply to?

G45 states: Strategies exploiting Rule [G44] are not in the spirit of the FRC and are not allowed.
Violation: Technical-Foul and Red Card

G44: Generally, a rule violation by an Alliance that was directly caused by actions of the opposing Alliance will not be penalized. Rule [G28] is an exception to this rule.

and G28:
Robots may not touch an opponent Robot in contact with its Key, Alley, or Bridge.
Violation: Foul; Technical-Foul for purposeful, consequential contact.

[EricH]

Game - The Game » Robot-Robot Interaction » G28
Q. Is a strategy to exploit G28 considered to be a strategy to exploit G44 which would be a technical foul and red card according to G45?
A. Yes.

Game - The Game » Penalties » G45
Q. Red robot is in its key lining up to shoot. Blue robot approaches close to red robot to block the shot. Red robot intentionally pushes blue robot back to clear the way for its shot, contacting blue robot while red robot is still in contact with its key. Is this a violation of [G45]?
A. We cannot make a definitive statement on a hypothetical situation, and the final decision on violations of Game Rules is left to the Head Referee at each event. However, generally, if a Robot is attempting to play the game, not simply create Fouls for the opposing Alliance, Rule [G45] will not be violated.

That is what the Q&A has to say on this matter (or a related one).

If it was a strategy to rack up the penalties, [G45]. However, if a robot seems to be trying to play the game, say by knocking another robot away from the bridge, then that's not a strategy to rack up penalties, and no [G45]. YMTC. (And please let the refs at the event do the same--it's their call that counts.)