FRC Blog - It Wasn’t Against the Rules

[Racer26]

Originally Posted by vBulletin Message

You must spread some reputation around before giving it to Travis Hoffman again.

Ref mistakes are one thing. When they are consistently detracting from the playability of the game? Its completely different.

[Kevin Sevcik]

Originally Posted by Travis Hoffman

Perhaps for some, their best isn't good enough?

While I respect in general what volunteers bring to the table at each event, and I know in particular a referee's job can be difficult; what I do not, can not, and will not respect is repeated demonstrated ineptitude at doing one's job, especially when it is to the detriment of numerous paying customers in attendance. Mistakes here and there can be accepted; however, repeated infractions that affect single teams are inexcusable. Is it not a natural expectation of PAYING CUSTOMERS to expect referees to learn from their mistakes and make adjustments to their methods such that these mistakes are not repeated on a regular basis?

It is exceedingly silly to me to observe numerous documented cases where goal score entry is delayed by 10 seconds or more such that teams are ABSOLUTELY CRIPPLED IN THEIR ABILITY TO PLAY THE GAME, especially when these oversights occur late in close match situations.

Pardon me for not skipping through the GP daisies and blindly accepting such things repeatedly happening to multiple teams at a competition.

Whole heartedly agreed. The volunteer badge is not a magic talisman against criticism. The only way situations will improve is if problems and issues are brought up and actually addressed. All the good will and wishes in the world won't fix things if the actual problem is the person doing the job. The only fix is to address things with said person and replace them if they can't perform the task.

[Racer26]

Originally Posted by Kevin Sevcik

Whole heartedly agreed. The volunteer badge is not a magic talisman against criticism. The only way situations will improve is if problems and issues are brought up and actually addressed. All the good will and wishes in the world won't fix things if the actual problem is the person doing the job. The only fix is to address things with said person and replace them if they can't perform the task.

I actually don't blame the refs, despite that its their mistakes causing the problem.

The game design this year has given the refs a nigh-impossible task, resulting in a high degree of error from the overworked refs.

[Daniel_LaFleur]

Originally Posted by Kevin Sevcik

Whole heartedly agreed. The volunteer badge is not a magic talisman against criticism. The only way situations will improve is if problems and issues are brought up and actually addressed. All the good will and wishes in the world won't fix things if the actual problem is the person doing the job. The only fix is to address things with said person and replace them if they can't perform the task.

While I agree that the volunteer badge should not be protection against criticism, I believe just complaining without action is useless diversion. My hope (by my previous post) was to spur action.

[Marc P.]

I usually try to stay quiet in discussions like this, but I feel the need to address this:

Originally Posted by Kevin Sevcik

The only fix is to address things with said person and replace them if they can't perform the task.

If replacing them is that easy, take on the roll of volunteer coordinator and do it. See how easy it is. Referee roles are the most difficult to fill because of the demands placed on people in that position, this year more than any other. Each year there has always been a shortage of people signed up to referee, typically because not many people volunteering their time want that level of responsibility. It's very much a thankless job, when every call and action/inaction is subject to the scrutiny of potentially thousands of people.

It usually takes weeks of active searching and solicitation to recruit the base number of refs just to make the event happen. I'm not saying that justifies mistakes being made, but if the alternative is an untrained reallocated field reset person to act as a warm body to fill the role, or at worst, no one at all to hit End Cycle, how is that any better?

To the most critical people, all I can say is step up, volunteer, and prove you can do better.

[MikeE]

Originally Posted by Marc P.

To the most critical people, all I can say is step up, volunteer, and prove you can do better.

^This.

[Bob Steele]

I guess when I stop making any mistakes myself....then I will start complaining more about other people's mistakes. Especially volunteers...

This my new mantra. I have certainly been guilty in the past....

I do think that constructive comments can be valuable but I know that if I were a volunteer referee in a brand new game I would certainly not be able to get everything absolutely correct and I know for certain I would not see everything

I used to work as a paid referee in the past with long established games and I know I made mistakes from time to time. This was after being a player myself for years and the being professionally trained and tested. I also know that the perspective as a player and a referee is quite different. It made me a better player after I was a referee.

Good luck to EVERYONE on the field

[Travis Hoffman]

There is a huge gap between expecting perfection (I do not) and expecting competence such that mistakes are minimized, learned from, and not repeated (I do).

I am seeing a LOT of repeated, glaring mistakes, with little being done to correct them. Quite a few mistakes are occurring in situations where FMS issues are irrelevant, when the action is occurring less than 10 feet directly in front of an individual.

Does the FMS system make it harder this year for a referee to do their job? Unquestionably.

Are some quality referees making more mistakes as a result of the above? Undoubtedly.

Are there sub-par referees out there who are unqualified for the role, either due to lack of skill or lack of preparation/training, whose mistakes are being magnified exponentially as a result of increased scrutiny upon this game? Undeniably.

I believe event staffs should prioritize "competition-critical" volunteer recruitment and training (and retention) over many other aspects of event planning; however, it seems many are burdened with the need to chase down enough sponsors for the event to even exist. It is unfortunate that anything so critical to the "team and spectator experience" could be an afterthought at any competition. One wonders if Manchester couldn't invest more to assist events in addressing this glaring need?

Also, for the if you don't like it, volunteer yourself crowd, I have a simple answer - NO. Volunteers are being stretched to and beyond their limits by a system in need of fundamental change. Dumping more volunteers into that system (especially johnny come lately's who are likely even more inexperienced and ill-prepared than those who signed up ahead of time) isn't going to solve anything. If you wish to direct your attention toward the people who could and should help fix the "competition experience" problem, affix your gaze toward Manchester, NH and collectively speak your minds.

[Jared Russell]

Originally Posted by Travis Hoffman

Volunteers are being stretched to and beyond their limits by a system in need of fundamental change.

This seems to be your primary thesis. How, specifically, do you think it should change? Your very next sentence asserts that adding more volunteers does not solve anything, so you must have some idea in mind for what these fundamental changes should be.

Also, my understanding of the system is that volunteers are assigned to specific roles by local leadership (Regional Directors and the Regional Planning Committee), not by Manchester. Unless your proposal for fixing the perceived volunteer issue is to centralize all detailed Regional-level planning in NH, I am not sure how affixing your gaze towards Manchester will help in this specific instance.

[Alan Anderson]

Originally Posted by Travis Hoffman

Also, for the if you don't like it, volunteer yourself crowd, I have a simple answer - NO. As an added bonus, I feel no desire or obligation to explain that answer further.

That attitude has nearly erased the sympathy I had for your position.

If you're going to refuse to put yourself in the position of those you are complaining about, and especially if you don't propose a solution beyond "they need to do better" and "something must be done," your complaints become mere noise.

[Steve W]

Originally Posted by Alan Anderson

That attitude has nearly erased the sympathy I had for your position.

If you're going to refuse to put yourself in the position of those you are complaining about, and especially if you don't propose a solution beyond "they need to do better" and "something must be done," your complaints become mere noise.

I have known Travis for quite a few years now. I understand were he is coming from. He also spends countless hours at events with his team and others making them the best they can be. He has even come to event without his team just to help other teams. Is he a volunteer? Sorry Travis, he is. Just not in the official event status.

I believe that what he wants are volunteers that rise to the challenge. Ones that spend extra hours making sure that they know their responsibilities and strive to be the best in their role. Is that asking too much? This is a fantastic program with fantastic people. What we need to do is encourage mentors that are just watching from the sidelines during competitions to become involved. I personally clear all of the volunteer roles that I take with the mentors of the team I am with. They are either more that willing to get rid of me or willing to sacrifice a bit to hopefully make the event better. I am still available for the team if needed but volunteering at the event keeps me busy and out of our pit area.

Choose a job at an event that you can contribute your skills to and volunteer. It is a great experience and a new challenge. I am not pointing a finger here at you Alan but at all mentors in FIRST.

[BrendanB]

I think one of the problem that Travis is getting at is that we are going into Week 4 and FIRST has yet to come out and address the pedestal problems or come up with a fix that works. Even from the start of scrimmages there was a known problem so its not like these issues have just come out of the blue they have always been an issue. There has been a mixture of reasons to why pedestals aren't lighting up of referees not seeing because too much is happening on the field, touch screen delays/bugs, entering in penalties during a score which again detracts from watching the field, and reported software bugs that it was input correctly but the pedestal just didn't light up.

The worst part is that while penalties are one problem of the game that FIRST has slowly been addressing this area has not and it is critical to a game. FIRST made a game where one ball can be used by three robots at a time and that's great. The fundamentals of the game have been setup to deliver a different but good game. However the process of scoring and getting a new ball started is just flat out unacceptable with teams being delayed by 10+ seconds. Then there are teams who are given replays for these issues and others who are not.

If volunteers are doing the best they can to try to deliver this game to teams but its not working then this needs to be put back on FIRST in a serious manner. If Week 4 goes by and the pedestals still are an issue there needs to be an alternative system put in place using humans to override a system that does not work. This is similar to the manual counting of frisbees after each match because the automatic system did not work and was later replaced by a few volunteers behind each alliance wall with a computer to enter in scores. This year we have gone through 4 weeks of competitions with a faulty system which is completely unacceptable (by FIRST not the volunteer who is just doing the job they were told to do).

The system was already going to have slight delays as a referee has to see that a ball is scored and then enter in the data on screen taking a few seconds here and there. The best method is there should be a referee next to each pedestal that tells human players when they can grab a ball (allowed once the ball is scored in a goal).

This is not unrealistic. Yes life is not fair however in life if you can't deliver on your promise to someone you do whatever is in your power to make it right. I would hope FIRST would do the same for teams.

[Racer26]

I don't really understand why the field can't use a photobreak sensor array to detect the ball crossing the plane of the alliance wall and automatically score it high or low and relight the pedestal.

The refs could still have to hit end-cycle (to capture those last second possessions), but the next cycle beginning needn't be delayed while that happens (the human player is going to take 2-3 seconds to return the ball to the field anyway).

[Jon Stratis]

Originally Posted by Racer26

I don't really understand why the field can't use a photobreak sensor array to detect the ball crossing the plane of the alliance wall and automatically score it high or low and relight the pedestal.

The refs could still have to hit end-cycle (to capture those last second possessions), but the next cycle beginning needn't be delayed while that happens (the human player is going to take 2-3 seconds to return the ball to the field anyway).

How would this handle the following situations:
- Ball scored in the wrong goal (I've seen this happen more than once!)
- Autonomous ball scored during teleop while there's still at least 1 other ball in play
- Ball passes through the goal without qualifying as a scored ball (for example, going in on a truss shot)

[Racer26]

Well, the system already knows how many auto balls must go through.

It would need to deal with the ball not really being scored scenarios somehow though.