|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Rules G-30 and G-18-1
Last year... when the moved out of the safe lane and tapped for a penalty it was rarely given any penalty points more than the first time. last year we also did not have G 18-1
Strategies aimed solely at forcing the opposing ALLIANCE to violate a rule are not in the spirit of FRC and are not allowed. Rule violations forced in this manner will not result in assessment of a penalty on the target ALLIANCE . Violation: TECHNICAL FOUL I am not sure how this rule is to be used... If a long shooter sits in the corner and drives out to pick up a penalty... is that not a strategy? It would force an opposing robot who is NOT in violation to be in violation.. I know it is annoying for the full field shooters... but if a robot sits in a position that is legal and the shooter does the movement... I don't see how moving out to cause a penalty on the other robot is not a strategy... I think the best bet is to ask the Head referee how they are going to call it. I can see it go either way... I do believe that the 60/84" height rules were put in for a reason...I would think that they are there so a robot shooting into their own goal could always shoot from a height above a blocking robot in their own area. Perhaps they are also there to impede a robot from doing full field shooting?? from the opponents home field... We don't know the intent of the height restrictions... My personal opinion is that the rules would not be created to allow for a single answer to the game..... and the rules committee must have considered the issue of a full field shooter. It is an interesting dilemma... Last edited by Bob Steele : 25-03-2013 at 19:43. |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|