Frank Answers Fridays: July 12, 2013: Question about Q&A

[efoote868]

Originally Posted by apples000

But what is the point of clarifying or giving the intended interpretation of the manual if the judges and referees might not follow them?

The "A" in the Q&A isn't the important part for the GDC, it's the "Q."
The "Q" provides important feedback to the GDC and helps them clear up their verbiage for confusing rules.
As mentioned in the Frank answer, sometimes the "Q" will provide the catalyst for a game manual update, which the referees WILL follow.

[Pault]

I believe what Mr. Merrick is trying to say is 2-fold.

1. Sometimes, the head ref will decide that the situation described in a given Q&A is not exactly the same as the one he is making a decision on. In these cases, he will ignore the Q&A. This might cause teams some frustration, but there is nothing wrong with the head ref doing this. The reason this problem even exists is because the Q&A by nature is situational.

2. There could be a situation where the head ref is going to straight out deny the legitimacy of the Q&A, or refuse to take it into consideration. Mr. Merrick is saying that this can happen, and teams just need to deal with it. And the reasoning behind this is that FIRST needs to draw the line somewhere as to who has the final say in rulings. The game manual and Q&A cannot make decisions at a competition, because they are just words. And the GDC can't make decisions everytime a team at a competition wants them to, because they simply don't have the time and it's not their job. So FIRST has designated the head referee as the supreme judge of all situations at his/her regional.

Now, what I don't like is FIRST's defeatist attitude. Mr. Merrick basically said that if a head ref is making bad decisions, you better hope your not his next victim. Instead, he should be saying "if a head ref makes a decision that you truly believe does not correspond with the rules, please understand that the decision has been made and there is not nothing we can do to reverse that. However, I encourage you to inform us by [insert way to inform them] so that we may properly deal with the issue and make sure it does not happen again." FIRST should actively be trying to ensure that every decision goes exactly as the GDC intended, rather than just accepting bad rulings as a fact of life.

Edit: just wanted to add that this is my interpretation of the blog. I hope that Mr. Merrick himself can provide some clearification.

[dtengineering]

Speaking as a tech inspector, I try to keep up with the Q&A, but don't keep up with it in nearly as much detail as I did when I was mentoring a team. So I won't know ALL of the Q&A when inspecting your robot, and will appreciate it if you know of a Q&A that you think is applicable and bring that to my attention.

I find relevant Q&A responses extremely persuasive, not just becuase they provide insight into how to interpret the game rules, but also because they provide some guidance on how an inspector at another event will likely interpret the rules.

In my experience other FRC volunteers, including refs, have found a great deal of guidance in the Q&A, and while there may be an occasional instance where an official disregards the Q&A, or is unaware of an appropriate Q&A response for a particular situation, I think you will find that Q&A answers continue to be extremely informative and influential in the decision making process.

So the answer makes sense to me...

Jason

[GaryVoshol]

I agree with Jason. With several hundred Q&A's about game rules, it's hard for a ref to keep up. I'm sure it's the same for an inspector. You know the answer to the question that affects your build or strategy, because you asked the question and paid attention to the answer. But we may have missed it.

And then there's those few answers that are just flat out wrong, and don't get fixed until late in build or even during the competition season. Most are minor and don't make a big difference. One example this year was an indication that a robot could get 30 points for climbing interference, and then another 30 points if they actually climbed the pyramid. We could have figured that this would not be possible in the scoring system - yet the Q&A said so until it was corrected.

[nicholsjj]

I agree with Jason when it comes to inspection. I know our team asked a Q&A regarding the window motor gear boxes. We printed the question out and presented it to the inspector in order to prevent any possible confusion.

[Michael Hill]

Originally Posted by Pault

2. There could be a situation where the head ref is going to straight out deny the legitimacy of the Q&A, or refuse to take it into consideration. Mr. Merrick is saying that this can happen, and teams just need to deal with it. And the reasoning behind this is that FIRST needs to draw the line somewhere as to who has the final say in rulings. The game manual and Q&A cannot make decisions at a competition, because they are just words. And the GDC can't make decisions everytime a team at a competition wants them to, because they simply don't have the time and it's not their job. So FIRST has designated the head referee as the supreme judge of all situations at his/her regional.

Yeah, if a ref does this, s/he is a terrible ref. Just telling the truth.

[Pault]

Originally Posted by Michael Hill

Yeah, if a ref does this, s/he is a terrible ref. Just telling the truth.

I absolutely agree. But the point is, who is to say that it won't happen. Even the person who asked the original question said "I have seen Q&A results presented to inspectors been ignored." FIRST can't garuntee that their volunteers are going to be good, so Mr. Merrick has to make sure that teams know things won't always go their way. I just wish that after the fact FIRST would have a way to find out about the incident so that they can prevent it from happening in the future.

[rachelholladay]

I think the important thing to remember is that every inspector and referee is a volunteer and that there is no way FIRST can be responsible for the action of every volunteer. I remember a team once saying (on CD) there was one particular rule from the manual (I believe relating to defense...) that made the actions of their robot legal. Since they kept getting penalties getting called on them, the drive captain resorted to carrying an index card with the rule written out so that he could always respectfully and exactly challenge the penalty. If there is one particular rule or Q&A that you think will be sticky, keep a copy of it with you. After all, there is no harm in being prepared. The official may still disagree and you might not get your way, but at least you will have made the point clearly. In sports calls get made all the time that people disagree with, but you kind just have to deal with it.