Some thoughts on rules, refs, and ranking

[alex334]

In response to some comments:

Racer: I would propose a larger implementation of the district model. That seems to work a lot better and attract smaller amounts of teams.
What I meant by punishing teams that do play by the rules is the fact that multiple teams seem to repeat offenses despite warnings. This can cost an entire alliance the match since penalties, as I've said, are reaching into the 100+ range this year.
How would you feel if they allowed video references during elimination?

On the topic of awards, I wanted to see more appreciation of engineering feats performed by teams that did not do very well in the competition. All of the awards seem to have a "and performed well during competition" clause. Perhaps a "best chassis," "best shooter," etc. awards. I saw multiple teams (271 had an amazing drive train) with amazing engineering achievements that went unrecognized.

Sam: If you could prove your point using the footage available, should that not count?
The fact that I am an alum is true. I do appreciate the fact that he listened to me, despite the fact that I was just following up on my alliance's complaint. I just can't stand to see my team lose a regional because of a bad call.

In general: It seems that these problems are widespread. A solution would be great.