Galileo Division 2013

[Racer26]

QF4-1: Redabot1 pushes Blueabot1 into Blueabot2 who is climbing. Blueabot2 falls off the tower.

Penalty? Refs said no. I feel like it should be a 30pt climb+tfoul.

[Abhishek R]

On another note, the 1241, 610, 1477 QF-2 was really exciting, with both alliances scoring over 200 points. Who knows what the third match will bring? It seems like traffic is going to become a problem.

[Gregor]

SF 1-1.

43 fouls points for red. Did anyone hear what they were for?

[TheMadCADer]

Originally Posted by Gregor

SF 1-1.

43 fouls points for red. Did anyone hear what they were for?

G30 preventing a climb, both times it seems. 1114 awarded full 30 point climb as well.

[AaronLeondar]

So many high-profile matches lost because of Technical Fouls...

[LeelandS]

Originally Posted by Racer26

QF4-1: Redabot1 pushes Blueabot1 into Blueabot2 who is climbing. Blueabot2 falls off the tower.

Penalty? Refs said no. I feel like it should be a 30pt climb+tfoul.

I agree with this. While it's not written in black and white as a foul, I felt it would make sense to call this as interfering with an oponents climb.

[EricH]

Originally Posted by LeelandS

I agree with this. While it's not written in black and white as a foul, I felt it would make sense to call this as interfering with an oponents climb.

No, it's not specifically called out as a foul. I can't think of a way to call it as one, either. UNLESS... you could make the argument, somehow, that the transitory property ascribed to the Pinning rule (that is, if there's an object between pinner and pinnee, it's still a pin) also applies to contact with a robot attempting to climb its tower. That would be the only way to even have a chance at calling it, unless someone can dig up a Q&A that says otherwise.

Now, that doesn't seem quite right--after all, they're still interfering with a climb--but that's the way it works.

[LeelandS]

Originally Posted by EricH

No, it's not specifically called out as a foul. I can't think of a way to call it as one, either. UNLESS... you could make the argument, somehow, that the transitory property ascribed to the Pinning rule (that is, if there's an object between pinner and pinnee, it's still a pin) also applies to contact with a robot attempting to climb its tower. That would be the only way to even have a chance at calling it, unless someone can dig up a Q&A that says otherwise.

Now, that doesn't seem quite right--after all, they're still interfering with a climb--but that's the way it works.

I guess you could say the transitive property applies here. Though I wouldn't term it like that. While red1 is pushing blue1, blue1's movements are a direct response to red1's actions. When blue1 bumped blue2 during their climb, causing them to fall, it was a result of red1 actions. Red1 should be held responsible. It's a gray area in the rules, but it seems to me a judgement call should have been made to penalize red1's actions.

The point is more or less moot, as I don't believe a 30pt climb + tech foul would have changed the outcome of the match; still, I think it should have been made clear that it was not an okay move.

[DCA Fan]

Galileo! What a great division! Rubber matches in nearly every level of eliminations, then taking it to Einstein for rubber matches at both Semi's and Finals. Great job to all the teams!

Galileo 2013: We don't stop playing until we get a rubber match.

[robotsfan]

There were some intense matches in the elimination rounds. Does anybody have full court videos showing all the action at once they could post?

[billylo]

You can find elimination games that alliance #5 - 1241/1477/610 were involved in on Team 610's youtube channel - 2013 champs playlist.

[thanks, Adrian Chan]

[nick_sheets]

Does anyoen have all the matches for galileo?

Thanks!

[Basel A]

Originally Posted by Racer26

QF4-1: Redabot1 pushes Blueabot1 into Blueabot2 who is climbing. Blueabot2 falls off the tower.

Penalty? Refs said no. I feel like it should be a 30pt climb+tfoul.

I thought it should be a penalty when I saw it, but the situation doesn't seem to be accounted for in the rulebook. It definitely looked like a penalty, but in FRC if it looks like a penalty and smells like a penalty, well, unfortunately it might not be.

[Louisiana Jones]

Originally Posted by Basel A

I thought it should be a penalty when I saw it, but the situation doesn't seem to be accounted for in the rulebook. It definitely looked like a penalty, but in FRC if it looks like a penalty and smells like a penalty, well, unfortunately it might not be.

We also thought it should have been a penalty because we thought redbot1 pushing bluebot1 into the pyramid would have been a penalty for contacting a robot that was contacting its pyramid, but I was told by some teammates who rewatched the video that bluebot1 never actually hit the pyramid, so there wouldn't have been a penalty for that.... Seems to me like it was a great defensive play....

[Racer26]

FWIW, the eventual 2013 World Champion alliance (Galileo #5) played the most matches possible in order to win. 610, 1241, and 1477 played their 8 Qualification matches, and then played 15 Elimination matches (9 on Galileo, 6 on Einstein), going to 3 in each set.