Petition: Lower technical foul values to make this game better

[DampRobot]

Originally Posted by BBray_T1296

The intent of the rule is so people don't get their arm ripped off when they get snagged by a robot intake

It is hard to say that a similar hazard exists from an off sides in football

Large hits in football can and do cause severe injury, including broken bones, paralysis, and brain injury.

Safety is an issue. But would people really be any less safe if they were only penalized 30 points for going inside the safety zone?

Another solution is to make G40 a yellow card. It only hurts the team that breaks the rule in quals, and is extremely severe, just like a 50 point penalty (which seems to be a plus for some people). Teams won't win or lose on G40 infractions any more, and the team that violates the rule will be extremely careful from then on.

[Navid Shafa]

Originally Posted by billylo

If you feel the same way as I do (or differently), please comment below.
(Yes for support, No for no support; either way, feel free to elaborate.

Yes. Throw up a poll in the thread?

[sircedric4]

Something should change I agree. Technical fouls swung the finals at the Arkansas regional. Technical fouls called and deliberated on after each of the last two games were over and not in real time were levied on the blue alliance. These technical fouls changed the results of the regional finals.

The technical foul levied in the last game was not even G40 but the herding the opponent's ball penalty. I challenge anyone to not accidentally bump the ball in the high intensity, and high contact match of a finals game.

This particular game puts too much control in the referee's hands with the size and human judgement aspect of the penalties. An honest mistake on the referee's part can literally cost an alliance an entire regional championship.

[mizscience]

Two weeks of regionals have passed. Changing this now would no doubt anger any teams who were negatively impacted by 50point TFs in those first 2 weeks. Yes, the 50 points is harsh - but I think it needs to stay as-is for the remainder of the season. Hopefully the GDC will take note of threads like this and factor these concerns into future game designs.

[pigpenguin]

Originally Posted by mizscience

Two weeks of regionals have passed. Changing this now would no doubt anger any teams who were negatively impacted by 50point TFs in those first 2 weeks. Yes, the 50 points is harsh - but I think it needs to stay as-is for the remainder of the season. Hopefully the GDC will take note of threads like this and factor these concerns into future game designs.

On the other hand you will anger future teams by keeping this rule in place. So if in any case someone will be mad you might as well make the game better for future players. Although I have a feeling that it will be left until next year.

[Nemo]

50 points is way too high for incidental possession of an opponent's ball. What bothers me is that if you do bump the other ball a single time, you shouldn't even get a penalty, yet it still gets called some of the time. If a random minor bump isn't enough of a possession to earn an assist, then by definition it also isn't enough to warrant a possession penalty.

[scaryone]

No,
learn the rules, understand the system, deal with it like everyone else has to. BTW not trying to sound coarse.

[mwtidd]

Based on what I saw at UNH, I would say no. The refs were doing a really good job of only calling egregious violations. Also, it is certainly possible for a team to make up for these penalties even in the elims. Take for instance our first semifinal match:

#FRCNHDUR TY E MC 16 RF 122 BF 107 RA 3280 213 319 BA 4555 58 3467 RFP 0 BFP 70 RHS 50 BHS 25 RTS 72 BTS 12

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8HCV...lMsJyhDvk57J7Q

We racked up 70 points in penalties and still won the match. Also note that this was against the alliance that inevitably went on to win the banner (after going through 3 semi final match 3s due to replays).

I was very impressed with the reffing, and never felt that a penalty we were called on wasn't warranted. Even when it altered the outcome of a match, I think the calls were fair.

Take for instance this match:

#FRCNHDUR TY Q MC 27 RF 83 BF 73 RA 1289 3499 501 BA 1307 5265 319 RFP 70 BFP 20 RHS 10 BHS 11 RTS 3 BTS 42

In a game with 60 point cycles and 75 points up for grab in autonomous, the 50 points is just enough to make it hurt when it happens. I equate the 50 point penalties to pass interference call. They can certainly affect the outcome of a game, they are sometimes controversial, but if they were less they may not be enough of a deterrent.

[mathking]

As quite a few posters have said, the high point value for inadvertent fouls is a problem. I think smaller point values would make for a better game. If you are really concerned with keeping play clean perhaps the point values ratchet up for multiple instances of the same infraction in the same match. One thing I think that would dramatically improve the game would be to have six scorekeepers, whose only job is to watch one team for possessions and scores. Then the referees could look just for fouls and not have a divided responsibility.

As a side note, I don't think any of the fouls called against us were wrong. We had our robot go well past (at least 3 or 4 inches) the safety zone once and in another match while trying to pick up a ball we hit 2171 very hard with our grabber, that happened to be about two feet up in the air right at the level of the Anderson connector for their battery, which we wrecked. It was inadvertent but consequential contact (we apologized to them and they gave us the wrecked connector for "pointing out a design flaw in their robot" and no one ended up angry) with another robot inside its frame perimeter. Both were clearly our fault and should have been called. So I am not complaining because I think we got treated unfairly. But I did see several instances where other teams were trying to gather a ball and a robot came at them from the side, hitting an extended grabber and drawing a foul. Given the game there is just no way to avoid such contacts.

[scaryone]

Originally Posted by lineskier

Based on what I saw at UNH, I would say no. The refs were doing a really good job of only calling egregious violations. Also, it is certainly possible for a team to make up for these penalties even in the elims. Take for instance our first semifinal match:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8HCV...lMsJyhDvk57J7Q

We racked up 70 points in penalties and still won the match. Also note that this was against the alliance that inevitably went on to win the banner (after going through 3 semi final match 3s due to replays).

I was very impressed with the reffing, and never felt that a penalty we were called on wasn't warranted. Even when it altered the outcome of a match, I think the calls were fair.

Take for instance this match:


In a game with 60 point cycles and 75 points up for grab in autonomous, the 50 points is just enough to make it hurt when it happens. I equate the 50 point penalties to pass interference call. They can certainly affect the outcome of a game, they are sometimes controversial, but if they were less they may not be enough of a deterrent.

Agree with MathKing (Bob). UNH fouls seemed very reasonable, even with the 5 match Semi. The UNH officials did a great job and made the right call. You guys played us very hard and it was fun.

[Michael Hill]

I would like a "keep-out zone" marked on the field 20" from any human player zone. If there are any robots in that zone when a human player extends over the field, make it a technical foul. Otherwise, a regular foul.

[Karthik]

Originally Posted by BBray_T1296

The intent of the rule is so people don't get their arm ripped off when they get snagged by a robot intake

It is hard to say that a similar hazard exists from an off sides in football

Ya, you know, other than life altering, dementia inducing concussions.

[sircedric4]

Originally Posted by lineskier

Based on what I saw at UNH, I would say no. The refs were doing a really good job of only calling egregious violations. Also, it is certainly possible for a team to make up for these penalties even in the elims. Take for instance our first semifinal match:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8HCV...lMsJyhDvk57J7Q

We racked up 70 points in penalties and still won the match. Also note that this was against the alliance that inevitably went on to win the banner (after going through 3 semi final match 3s due to replays).

I was very impressed with the reffing, and never felt that a penalty we were called on wasn't warranted. Even when it altered the outcome of a match, I think the calls were fair.

Take for instance this match:


In a game with 60 point cycles and 75 points up for grab in autonomous, the 50 points is just enough to make it hurt when it happens. I equate the 50 point penalties to pass interference call. They can certainly affect the outcome of a game, they are sometimes controversial, but if they were less they may not be enough of a deterrent.

And based on what I was seeing at the Arkansas was exactly opposite. This is a personal amecdote just like your anecdote. The problem is that there is too much for the refs to do in order to have a consistent experience across all the venues. The fouls are too subjective and too penalizing. My experience with Aerial Assist, this is not a game of highest scoring alliance winning but who the referees allow to win.

I am happy you had good refs, I was not happy with ours. A change in the game rules is necessary to eliminate as much of the human subjectivity as possible. First should strive for consistent game experiences and that requires doing something with referee calls swinging games.

[wlaroche]

Originally Posted by AllenGregoryIV

That's a bit of an exaggeration. Teams/students are consistently around operating robots on the practice and learning to work safely near machines is part of being on an FRC team. The rule could be "don't get your hand/arm near a robot and don't leave in the field for too long" and it would be much more enforceable and just as safe. If you've been in FRC for any reasonable length of time you have probably been hit by a robot and you probably weren't injured. I am all for safety but 50 points for pointing too enthusiastically with no robots around is extreme.

Again the rules are the way they are written this year, but they should be looked at closely and drastically improved in future years.

I am not eying to be mean here, but what is to close and what is to long? When things are bashing in front of you time is flying by. Even with the hard rules we referee by we have to make calls on who initiates the contact when both sides are running full tilt at each other.

[IronicDeadBird]

Changing point values after matches have been played WILL cause a firestorm. Everyday since kickoff I have switched from checking facebook first when I have access to the internet to checking FRC Manual, then Delphi, then I lose track of time checking Delphi.