FIRST does have other options re Enistein.

[de_]

I am a seasoned FIRST electrical/computer engineering mentor. I had the luxury of attending the championship strictly as an observer. Unfortunately my observations are that in all certainty the wrong outcome was realized. Just review the Archimedes finals and pay attention to the scores and the fact that triple balances were the norm and compare that to Einstein results. As an engineer I am truly sorry for an incorrect result based on technology failure. That alliance could not have paid a higher price as there is no material chance they will all be at the championship and in the same division at once ever again.
FIRST does have options. Do nothing with a promise to do better next year is not the only one. I feel strongly that the FIRST board should step up and should review the videos and if their conclusion is the same as mine, issue a one time special recognition championship flag and trophy to that alliance both to recognizes the alliance but also to remind us that technology can and regularly does let us down and never become complacent in our blind faith trust in it.

Science is based on facts. The facts in the Archimedes finals videos are undeniable.

After two full days of thinking about this non-trival issue, as a mentor I find if I didn't post this I would be disrespecting the alliance and the FIRST philosophy.

UPDATE: Okay I realized this would controversial. If there were alliances in other divisions that could regularly score say 60-70 ball points and triple balance every time against high end teams AND lost out in their division due to unexplained dead robots, then this changes everything. If you know of an example, could you please post the field and a team # from the alliance so I can take a look and possibly retract my post.