IRI Ball denial and G31

[Gdeaver]

OK, not much discussion. Maybe allot of people are hoping I'll shut up and this issue will evaporate and they can go on with their very effective strategy. My problem is as a mentor what do I tell my team. Do I work with our in-bounder to implement this strategy? Do I take the high road and instruct them to follow the rules to the letter even if it puts us in a disadvantaged position. Siri and jblay have hinted at the strategy. It goes deeper. I watched several matches have the out come changed by one alliance use this strategy and the other follow the rules and loose. It does change the game.
Now that that has been brought up I'll discuss another in-bounder rule violation that has become common. Most teams have treated the line in front of the in-bounder station as a line of death. How ever it does not take much of a line infraction to greatly increase the power and accuracy of an in bounder shot. I've noticed that as the season has progressed, in-bounders have more and more taken advantage of this and it has become quite common. So do I teach my in-bounder to start behind the line and take a step forward across the line and then rock back behind the line? Other teams do it or again do I take the high road? This one can only be caught by having a ref behind the wall. Try it some time to see how much of an advantage it is.
These 2 problems are because First over looked the number and placement of refs. Having 2 refs at the in-bounder station enforcing in-bounder play would take the game back to First's original intent. Ignoring it is the same as saying we don't care and condones these strategies.
What I don't want to happen is this burden placed on the current refs. Their plate is full with the field play. I don't want them taking their eyes off the field to worry about the in-bounder issue.
So IRI is coming up. How will the game be played?
I know this is a touchy subject, but I feel it needs to be brought out. Feel free to agree or disagree. Just my opinion.

[Brandon Holley]

Originally Posted by Gdeaver

I know this is a touchy subject, but I feel it needs to be brought out. Feel free to agree or disagree. Just my opinion.

I think knowingly violating rules to gain an advantage is something we have all been taught (through FIRST and through life) to be unethical.

-Brando

[Bjenks548]

I think we need to look at the intent of the rule to decide strategies. Breaking a rule on purpose is not always a bad thing, however breaking a rule with the intent of not geting caught is. Rules/pentalties are in place not to see them as an evil to avoid at all costs, but as a tradeoff. Example, last year if there was a tube we needed in the opponents lane and time was running out, go get it and take the -3 points and finish your logo. I personally will not employ a strategy with the intent of breaking the rules without getting caught and I hope others don't. If I'm beaten by this, at least I can hold my head high and know I played my best with the rules I was given.

[Gdeaver]

I have always taken the high road and made a great effort to maintain the ethical integrity of my business. I have been rewarded by a loyal customer base. Why do they hire me as opposed to many other companies. Because they feel they can "TRUST" my company to solve their problems fairly and ethically. Many of my competitors have no problem employing deceptive business and marketing practices. I continue to follow the high road. As a small company I consider it a competitive advantage and a survival strategy. How ever many large companies push the envelope of ethics and legality ever day. A large legal department is critical for them. Microsoft comes to mind. You can win by cheating intelligently. So how do we play the game at IRI?

[LeelandS]

So, here's my take.

I've taken a stance previously in that breaking the rules during the match (as long as it doesn't damage your opponents robot, is overly aggressive, etc.) is okay. It can provide a strategic advantage that can be just as much a part of the game as any other. In 2011, it was taking tubes from the opponent's lane. I advocated that strategy because it wasn't aggressive, and it was blatant and obvious. So there is one take on it.

On this particular strategy, I'd have to take an opposite stance on this matter. Yes, it's an applicable strategy, and yes, it's not overaggressive or damaging. But the problem I have with it is you're attempting to take advantage of a staffing issue. You're not blatantly breaking the rules in the game, you're trying to sneak a rule violation by the referees. And THAT I don't think is really fair, not just to the other teams, but to the referees who volunteered their time to learn these rules and are trying to enforce them to the best of their abilities. Imagine you were a referee. How would you feel if you found out teams have been blatantly breaking the rules just because they knew/thought you couldn't see it? I know I'd feel very disrespected and disappointed in the conduct of those team. But maybe that's just me.

In short, yeah, you may be able to get away with this strategy. But is it really a competitive advantage worth teaching your students that it's okay to cheat as long as you don't get caught?

Just my thoughts.

[JaneYoung]

I think one reason you aren't seeing a lot of discussion is because you are talking about IRI. When you talk about IRI, you are not only discussing the caliber of the referees but you are also discussing the caliber of the members of the planning committee and the emcees who will be running the show. (I can't help but giggle when I think about a certain emcee who has no problem letting folks know when they are messing with the rules and jeopardizing the fair play of the game.)

There are many people who are proud of, and protective of, the reputation of IRI. It has been built on years of hard work, achievement, and the pursuit of excellence. If that reputation is threatened, all of those people who are proud and protective of it - could potentially come down hard on those threatening it. I'm one of those people who is very proud because I know that the folks who are running, and helping to run the event, will do their very best to make sure the teams can play the game to their very best ability and the game will be played the best that it can be. They want to make sure everyone has a great time and they are very aware of the prestige that goes with participating in the event. They aren't going to mess with it.

You can discuss this but I don't see it as a big problem. If it is, I will be very surprised.

Jane

[IndySam]

FIRST did not add additional refs to watch the human actions because they expect teams to follow the rules and police themselves (this is straight from the horses mouth.)

To hear that a team or teams would deliberately violate these rules is absolutely duscusting to me.

[jvriezen]

Originally Posted by jspatz1

The strategy is not to keep the balls for human player shots. The strategy is to gain control of most of the balls (hoarding), then score with them (with robots) late in the match when it is too late for your opponent to score with them again. Not promoting it as wise, just explaining the concept. Again it would take great confidence, execution, and timing.

The strategy can also be useful when you know your opposition plays a better tele-op game (higher points per ball acquired.) The more balls that cycle thru the more point differential they will accumulate for tele-op points. If you know you have a large enough lead after autonomous, or think that you can out score them in bridge points to make up the current deficit, then it may be to your advantage to 'slow down' tele-op where your opponents are able to out gun you, as the effect is minimized through starvation.

Shooting your possessed ball (going for 2pts or a lower % 3pt attempt) and turning the ball over to your opponent who has a higher shooting % is not a good idea when you are ahead ( or know you will be at end of game based on bridge success predictions.)

[Siri]

It drove me just as crazy as IndySam to hear it from the horse's mouth and watch the repeated violations during the season, but I have to agree with Jane that I would be surprised if it's an issue at IRI. I mean, it's IRI. It's not just the refs and the planning committee and the scary awesome MC, it's the teams. I have to believe that the IRI teams have already made the "high road" choice long ago. They certainly prove it every day. (Note that, at least in my humble opinion, missing many of the G31s described in this thread is not a reflection of referee caliber. I've mourned from afar as some absolutely excellent refs miss these calls on their own.)

Plus, you know, Paul rocks.


I'm more worried about next year's game setup given FIRST's ruling this year.

[Ed Law]

I don't know why this is a problem. Our team has been in matches where our alliance has been called for having too many balls and human player stepping over the line in a Michigan offseason event. You don't think think the refs at IRI will pay attention to these things especially after you bring this up.

If you know a team is doing this on purpose, get Paul to have a talk with them. That will take care of it.

[Gdeaver]

You don't think think the refs at IRI will pay attention to these things especially after you bring this up.

That's why I posted. Proactive as to reactive.

[smurfgirl]

I just wanted to say that I've reffed at three events this year and been to three others in different roles, and teams have definitely been penalized for hoarding the balls - I've called it at least a few times per event myself, and I've seen others do the same. The refs are watching for it. From what I've seen though, most people are making a good effort to get the balls back onto the field in a timely manner. These penalties have also decreased in frequency as the season has gone on and people have become more familiar with the rules.

[Jay O'Donnell]

I've been my team's human player for a majority of the season, and I have not once seen or thought about this strategy. Every other inbounder I've worked with has been adamant about not breaking this rule and returning balls to the field. However, holding the maximum of six balls has occasionally proven to be a viable strategy. Based on what others are saying here, it's clear that this has been a problem at some events. Whether this is strategy or just a lack of knowledge about how to be a human player doesn't matter, the balls should be returned to the field (assuming you are holding more than six) It seems to unethical to me to blatantly break a rule because you think you can get away with it. I hope this doesn't happen at IRI, but I think it can be handled by the refs and possibly any volunteers.

[JosephC]

Originally Posted by Jay Money 1058

I've been my team's human player for a majority of the season, and I have not once seen or thought about this strategy. Every other inbounder I've worked with has been adamant about not breaking this rule and returning balls to the field. However, holding the maximum of six balls has occasionally proven to be a viable strategy.

Likewise. To think that a inbounder would purposely break the rules astounds me. I know I've stepped over the line a few times without being called on it, but it was always accidental and I noticed after the fact was done, and would accept a penalty without argue. Never have I seen an alliance holding 7+ balls behind the wall, but I know firsthand multiple strategies that involve holding balls.

For example: There was one match against a team with an awesome intake system. They would cross the bump and steal any balls on the ground. Because if this, we withheld balls until they were needed to keep them from getting stolen. At one point we were forced to inbound balls, or else we would be holding too many.

Rules are there for a reason. If someone was to just go around breaking rules, especially if they are trying not to get caught, then you might as well make an overweight robot, or extend past your frame perimeter too far, or hold 4 balls in your robot during teleop. The list goes on and on.

My last point, FIRST is unlike any other sport because we are all gracious professionals. It's my personal belief that breaking rules, because you know you won't get caught, is not very gracious or professional. It also says a lot about someone's character if they'll do something only because they won't get punished for it.


My 2 cents.

[Siri]

Originally Posted by smurfgirl

I just wanted to say that I've reffed at three events this year and been to three others in different roles, and teams have definitely been penalized for hoarding the balls - I've called it at least a few times per event myself, and I've seen others do the same. The refs are watching for it. From what I've seen though, most people are making a good effort to get the balls back onto the field in a timely manner. These penalties have also decreased in frequency as the season has gone on and people have become more familiar with the rules.

Please don't misunderstand us. It's definitely called. From 8 events this season, I've called it myself and had it called against and for my alliance before. Mostly from a ref- or a drive team's- eye view, it looks like you're/we're doing pretty well (not that it's always easy). Then you watch some bird's-eye webcasts and pay attention while you're waiting in queue... not so much. It's not that it's every event or every time, it's that it happens at all. Way more than it should (which is never).

Thank you to all the HPs who've noted they don't do this.