Go to Post Our team calls me "John Regular Neun," because John V-Neun is so spectacular! - John Neun [more]
Home
Go Back   Chief Delphi > Competition > Rules/Strategy
CD-Media   CD-Spy  
portal register members calendar search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read FAQ rules

 
 
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #7   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 13-03-2013, 13:39
Siri's Avatar
Siri Siri is offline
Dare greatly
AKA: 1640 coach 2010-2014
no team (Refs & RIs)
Team Role: Coach
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Rookie Year: 2007
Location: PA
Posts: 1,624
Siri has a reputation beyond reputeSiri has a reputation beyond reputeSiri has a reputation beyond reputeSiri has a reputation beyond reputeSiri has a reputation beyond reputeSiri has a reputation beyond reputeSiri has a reputation beyond reputeSiri has a reputation beyond reputeSiri has a reputation beyond reputeSiri has a reputation beyond reputeSiri has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via ICQ to Siri
Re: A better way to handle fouls?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Line View Post
While I think the original poster's motives are sound (and his post very well written), I would absolutely hate to be in a position as a team mentor (or student) to make the call and say the other team deserves the penalty. Take a DSQ, for instance: suddenly blame starts being placed against teams rather than the refs, and bad blood is created.

I'd much rather have the ref's be the bad guys. It saves a lot of friction in FIRST.
As both a coach and a ref, I completely agree with this. I'd rather continue catching the huge flack I do in the zebra shirt than create bad blood between students that should (and likely were) cooperating very well off the field.


That said, having a better way to determine if contact is 'consequential' is a good goal. However, I don't know that asking the teams is the best way to do that, even on principle. Setting aside the potential animosity, it could well lead to punishing well-designed teams and rewarding those with less reliable systems. I've seen several 30 point climbers that could survive a serious and intentionally consequential pyramid hit. At the same time, I've seen even a few 10 pointers that can fall off even when their allies hang. In many cases, the better design and constructed a robot is, the higher their threshold of 'consequential'. Is it really fair to put that burden of a decision on them?

To those interested, we're examining the idea of more foul feedback here. Also, I've recently asked a follow-up Q&A to my initial 'please define inconsequential' request. Q576:
Does the term "the action" apply to the potentially illegal action, or to the act as a whole? Meaning, would one receive a foul for inconsequentially bushing the pyramid (G27 legal) while simultaneously preforming an otherwise legal but consequential action?

Video Replays: Get DreamWorks or the NFL to handle it for all events, then we'll talk. There's no way most places could pull it off comprehensively, quickly and reliably otherwise. I've been to events that struggle just with the standard live feed. We just plain don't have the resources to do it well--like virtually all high school teams.
__________________
 


Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:30.

The Chief Delphi Forums are sponsored by Innovation First International, Inc.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi