Some thoughts on rules, refs, and ranking

[familyguyfreak]

We (DiscoBots 2587) had similar issues at Lone Star with our head ref. A lot of fouls weren't being called that we thought should have been. A lot of teams were frustrated with our head ref but the good thing was the refs were very consistent through out the regional and when the call was needed to be made they called it. I do agree that the refs shouldn't have an attitude (granted that you don't approach them in an inappropriate manner) with any mentors or students when they are questioning a call, but at the same time, you have to move on and focus on the next match. What I told our students was it's ok to be frustrated and upset but you have to learn from it and get better for the next match. Just like with any professional sports league, there are going to be calls that a team doesn't like or agree with but they still have to play on and overcome it. Unfortunately for you, it looks like it ended your regional and I know that's a tough way to end the day. I believe FIRST will address these issues if it turns out to cause more problems and I hope they have it in order by Championships. It's still early and refs are still learning the game as well. It's one of the cons of playing in early events in the season. :/

[nicholsjj]

It looked to me that that call was due to pinning and the technical foul was called when the red alliance hit a blue alliance robot that was defending a red alliance bot touching their pyramid. This is one where I believe an update needs to happen regarding that situation.

[DominickC]

Unfortunately, all of this points back to the fact that some people interpret the same things differently than others.

[xSAWxBLADEx]

My suggestion as a team doing defense for 8-10 years, avoid the pyramid, loading zone, and multi-robot "pinning". Play "smart" defense! Look at Team 16 in the finals at st. louis. They played "smart" defense.

[Racer26]

Originally Posted by alex334

Firstly, the ranking system. This year's seemed to particularly wonky.

I would actually suggest that its less wonky this year than several in recent memory.

Originally Posted by alex334

At a regional as large as NYC, eight matches per team simply don't cut it. How can a robot's abilities be assessed fairly in comparison with the rest when it mathematically does not have the chance to play with/against every other team. A lot of luck seemed to be involved.

Just how would you propose they do it differently? NYC was running on a 7 minute match turnaround. The field crew needs 5-6 minutes to reset the field for the next match, and if you get a 30 pt climber which needs a belay, the time is even longer. With 65 teams, there just isn't room for more matches.

Originally Posted by alex334

The large amount of penalties (I saw 120+ points scored on just penalties) also seemed to skew the rankings, especially when fouls were counted as goal/climb points. Let's face it, not everyone reads the rules.

I agree not everyone reads the rules nearly as well as they should, but all of the fouls were laid out in the manual, for everyone to see, and learn how to play by them. They SHOULD skew the rankings, not playing by the rules is tantamount to cheating.

Originally Posted by alex334

Why punish teams that do by dragging them down?

What? I don't understand. This isn't punishing teams that DO read the rules, its punishing the teams that choose to not abide by the rules.

Originally Posted by alex334

Why not find a better way to rank based on individual performance. I'm not arguing that great teams gravitate towards the top, but shouldn't the best team deserve first place, the second best second, and so on?

In an ideal world, yes, but with a limited amount of time to run the tournament, you have to make compromises. We obviously don't have time to play the game with every permutation of 6 teams at a regional. There are ~82.6 million ways to choose 6 teams for a match from 65.

Originally Posted by alex334

Which brings me to my final complaint. This exact bias in ruling occurred during the elimination matches of the NYC regional this year. (http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/29860861). Not only do I find this unfair, but it all of the refs seemed to disagree on what the large penalty was for. <snip>

Looking at the video: looks like a techfoul on 1635 for pinning to me. Or possibly climb interference on 375.

An iffy call maybe.

Originally Posted by alex334

I asked him to consider watching videos of previous matches in which I would gladly point out more extreme scenarios only a few matches prior which were not penalized.

Refs can't be expected to look at video every time someone feels slighted, see the "not enough time" argument I made above.

Originally Posted by alex334

He refused and told me to relax, because "it's just a game" and the refs are "just volunteers." Well, needless to say, the majority of us are just volunteers. I personally spent two weeks of my college vacation helping my team and countless hours on the bus to see the regional.

You should relax, and it is just a game.

That said, I agree with you that the mentors are volunteers too, and referees and other event staff should be expected to uphold the rules as written in a consistent manner. Anything less is unacceptable, and unprofessional in my mind.

Originally Posted by alex334

He told me that we still accomplished the mission of FIRST, since we learned a lot. He then walked away.

This is correct.

Originally Posted by alex334

I would like to see a lot more prizes celebrating engineering, programming, and business achievements. What do you guys think? Are we lacking in those?

There are several awards that exist for this purpose. See: Engineering Inspiration, Regional Chairman's, Engineering Excellence, Quality, Entrepreneurship, Rookie All-Star, Rookie Inspiration, Gracious Professionalism, Innovation in Control, Industrial Design, and Imagery. More awards would simply dilute the prestige that winning awards carries.

[JohnFogarty]

The senario in the image I have created here is what I understand to be the meaning of "blockading" the field. It sounds like to me that some refs don't understand the proper meaning of the rule.

[IndySam]

I'm not going to comment on the ref's call but I will make a couple points.

#1 There is no way that FIRST can allow video reviews of matches. The NFL spends millions of dollars on equipment and gives the head refs many different angles to review a call and they still don;t always get it right. There is just no way for FIRST to implement a fair replay system, period.

#2 Your info lists you as a alumni. Only students are allowed to question the head ref, the head ref is not even required to talk with you at all. You are lucky he gave you the courtesy of disusing it with you.

[darkember]

Im interested in seeing how FIRST handles this since im sure we werent the only ones to run into this problem.

[1018sophmore]

I would have to agree with racer on all his comments and congrats on the great regional max tech was fun to watch

[xSAWxBLADEx]

Originally Posted by John_1102

The senario in the image I have created here is what I understand to be the meaning of "blockading" the field. It sounds like to me that some refs don't understand the proper meaning of the rule.
http://i810.photobucket.com/albums/z.../Figure2-3.jpg

What the FIRST definition of "blockade"? Maybe you have the definition wrong.

[Racer26]

Originally Posted by John_1102

The senario in the image I have created here is what I understand to be the meaning of "blockading" the field. It sounds like to me that some refs don't understand the proper meaning of the rule.

this is the interpretation that the head ref communicated at GTR East this weekend, provided that R1 is additionally too tall to pass under the pyramid.

[nicholsjj]

[quote=John_1102;1245752]The senario in the image I have created here is what I understand to be the meaning of "blockading" the field. It sounds like to me that some refs don't understand the proper meaning of the rule.

The image you displayed shows a one on one defense in which R1 could go under the pyramid to get free so no this is not an alliance blockading the field.

[familyguyfreak]

Originally Posted by Racer26

You should relax, and it is just a game.

I agree but try telling a student this that has spent 6 weeks building a robot only to have their season end due to a bad call.

[EricH]

Originally Posted by nicholsjj

The image you displayed shows a one on one defense in which R1 could go under the pyramid to get free so no this is not an alliance blockading the field.

Actually, it is. IF R1 cannot go under the pyramid, it is blockading. Or, if a third blue robot B3 was in front of the pyramid, it's blockading.

Additionally, the rule specifically calls out "to stop the flow of the match". If I were a ref, and I saw that setup (assuming B1 and B2 are not on their respective ways elsewhere), I would probably call the penalty regardless of whether R1, R2, and R3 could go under the pyramid, as B1 and B2 are attempting to blockade the field to stop the flow of the match--and the rule does not require a specific opposing robot action attempt to trigger enforcement.

[xSAWxBLADEx]

Thank you Eric, for your eternal wisdom. (no sarcasm) I would love to talk to you in real life. Maybe at St. Louis this year.