Tip over/knock over - when is it a foul?

[Willyspu]

We have a low, powerful and fast robot. At the last regional we played against several top heavy robots. There were two incidents where the taller robots tipped over when hit by our robot. One was without foul the other resulted in a technical. Neither of these situations were because the smaller robot charged from a long distance before hitting the taller robot.

Can someone explain under what circumstances this would be considered a foul?

[IronicDeadBird]

Was the first one not called as a foul but the second time it happened was it called a foul?

[Woolly]

Originally Posted by 2014 FRC Manual

G27- Strategies aimed at the destruction or inhibition of ROBOTS via attachment, damage, tipping, or entanglement of ROBOTS are not allowed.
Violation: TECHNICAL FOUL and YELLOW CARD

Which in this case means that if your robot blatantly tries to tip a robot, or repeatedly tips a robot, you will get a technical foul

[ErvinI]

The way I've seen it called usually is if the attacking robot "follows through" the tip. In other words, after the charging robot unbalances the second robot, if they back off and the other robot still tips over, I typically don't see refs calling it. If, on the other hand, the tipping robot already has a few wheels elevated but the attacking robot is still pushing them and this causes them to be knocked over, then the foul is usually called.

That being said, I have seen some pretty nasty tips that are not called, so it really depends on the ref. I have yet to see a team get a foul after they backed off, however.

[CalTran]

Originally Posted by Willyspu

We have a low, powerful and fast robot. At the last regional we played against several top heavy robots. There were two incidents where the taller robots tipped over when hit by our robot. One was without foul the other resulted in a technical. Neither of these situations were because the smaller robot charged from a long distance before hitting the taller robot.

Can someone explain under what circumstances this would be considered a foul?

If you can post a link to a match video in which the situations happened we would be able to perhaps give a definite answer.

[switte]

Originally Posted by CalTran

If you can post a link to a match video in which the situations happened we would be able to perhaps give a definite answer.

I or any part of my team does not own this video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XwmP...e_gdata_player

My team was on the other end of the tipping. We know that our robot does have a high center of gravity and have been trying to get that as low as possible without compromising our design, but still thought the play was a bit foul.

We also believed that there were many G28 infringements made by the 2144 robot that were not called. They were trying to play defense with their intake down, and ended up many some dents in our A frame, the back of our shooter and the bottom of our bellypan and also ripped off a sensor wire off the back of our shooter. They would have also taken out of several encoders and our main timing belts on our arms had we not made proper guards for them. I worry for other teams that may have not taken the precaution we did would be damaged for several matches and may not even be able to compete.

After seeing how 2144 was playing defense one of our mentors went to talk to the team. They talking to them after the match, we did not get the sense that they understood or even cared about what they did on the field.

I am not trying go after this team, and maybe there is a side of the story I have not heard yet, but I do want to express the concern that the driving was reckless and will not be accepted lightly at any competition. I recommend that this team work to play cleaner because they did field a well performing robot that could do very well if it played cleaner.

[Chris is me]

Originally Posted by switte

here's the video

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XwmP...e_gdata_player

At 40 seconds the tip begins. At 41 the robots briefly stop with 971 on top of 2144. At 42 seconds, 2144 pushes forward for about two seconds until 971 goes all the way over.

To me, the illegal part of the action is when the driver stopped, realized they were in an advantageous position for a tip, and then pushed into the robot they had destabilized. The pause and then continue indicates clear intent, otherwise there would have either have been no pause or the robot would back off.

[EricH]

Originally Posted by switte

My team was on the other end of the tipping. We know that our robot does have a high center of gravity and have been trying to get that as low as possible without compromising our design, but still thought the play was a bit foul.

And 3 separate refs agreed, judging by the flag-X T-foul markers.

That one was a CLASSIC intentional tipping foul. Robot starts to go over, pushing team pauses, then pushes farther, robot tips all the way. Any ref that DOESN'T call that is probably going to get the tipped team in the question box asking why it wasn't called. Ervin is dead on on that.

Willy, I'd pay attention to what Sean is saying about playing defense with your intake down, too. I've seen a lot of teams draw fouls for G28. If you're going to play with your intake down all the time, try running into other teams in reverse--it could save you a lot of trouble (assuming they don't tip over).


(BTW, 971: awesome bounceback. It's been far too long since I've seen a team do one of those!)

[TheRamAlakazaam]

Pretty sure when your robot is obviously under the robot and continue to push forward

In our semi-finals match in Dallas we were under the winning alliance robot and about to tip it over ,but we began to move back after doing so. It didn't tip over ,but showing that you didn't mean it and quickly moving away after something like that happens should keep you on the safe side even if it does tip over.

In your case you ripped two robots twice it might have been overlooked the first time then seeing you do it again might make the refs thing it was part of your strategy all along especially if the robots you were against have been pretty stable against other bots.

Not sure just my opinion.

[Willyspu]

Originally Posted by switte

I or any part of my team does not own this video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XwmP...e_gdata_player

My team was on the other end of the tipping. We know that our robot does have a high center of gravity and have been trying to get that as low as possible without compromising our design, but still thought the play was a bit foul.

We also believed that there were many G28 infringements made by the 2144 robot that were not called. They were trying to play defense with their intake down, and ended up many some dents in our A frame, the back of our shooter and the bottom of our bellypan and also ripped off a sensor wire off the back of our shooter. They would have also taken out of several encoders and our main timing belts on our arms had we not made proper guards for them. I worry for other teams that may have not taken the precaution we did would be damaged for several matches and may not even be able to compete.

After seeing how 2144 was playing defense one of our mentors went to talk to the team. They talking to them after the match, we did not get the sense that they understood or even cared about what they did on the field.

I am not trying go after this team, and maybe there is a side of the story I have not heard yet, but I do want to express the concern that the driving was reckless and will not be accepted lightly at any competition. I recommend that this team work to play cleaner because they did field a well performing robot that could do very well if it played cleaner.

I am the mentor that your mentor spoke with and I purposely did not post links to the video because of the situation that you mentioned. We are trying to learn from the incident and will make adjustments to our strategies and that is why I posted the matter without the video. I told your mentor that I would review the video, talk to our driver and make changes. I have done that and am currently learning through this process. We admire the craftsmanship and technology designed into your robot and did not intend to damage your robot during that match and I told your mentor that we were sorry as a team if we were too aggressive.

Our intake arm has been adjusted so that it will be up when not picking up the ball.

The other tip over occurred in a earlier match where a robot was positioned between our robot and the ball with the ball against the wall. While going for the ball the opposing robot was turned over thus trapping the ball between the wall and the other robot.

As you can see in the video posted our robot does not have any unusual device that would cause a robot to fall over other than a low center of gravity and the standard AndyMark KOP drive system. We are not out to destroy other robots but we do want to play competitively.

Thank you for all of your comments we appreciate them and will learn from them.

[switte]

Thank you. We know that this is a learning process, we just want to make sure that it something is being done about it. Sorry if I ruined your intentions by providing a video link.

[Tom Line]

Originally Posted by Willyspu

I am the mentor that your mentor spoke with and I purposely did not post links to the video because of the situation that you mentioned. We are trying to learn from the incident and will make adjustments to our strategies and that is why I posted the matter without the video. I told your mentor that I would review the video, talk to our driver and make changes. I have done that and am currently learning through this process. We admire the craftsmanship and technology designed into your robot and did not intend to damage your robot during that match and I told your mentor that we were sorry as a team if we were too aggressive.

Our intake arm has been adjusted so that it will be up when not picking up the ball.

The other tip over occurred in a earlier match where a robot was positioned between our robot and the ball with the ball against the wall. While going for the ball the opposing robot was turned over thus trapping the ball between the wall and the other robot.

As you can see in the video posted our robot does not have any unusual device that would cause a robot to fall over other than a low center of gravity and the standard AndyMark KOP drive system. We are not out to destroy other robots but we do want to play competitively.

Thank you for all of your comments we appreciate them and will learn from them.

That's an awesome response.