Go to Post ..attitude and willingness to work as a team...are the qualities that can make or break a team. - Monochron [more]
Home
Go Back   Chief Delphi > FIRST > General Forum
CD-Media   CD-Spy  
portal register members calendar search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read FAQ rules

 
Reply
Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 3 votes, 5.00 average. Display Modes
  #46   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 20-03-2014, 17:29
Tristan Lall's Avatar
Tristan Lall Tristan Lall is offline
Registered User
FRC #0188 (Woburn Robotics)
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Rookie Year: 1999
Location: Toronto, ON
Posts: 2,484
Tristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Unscheduled Team Update: 3-20-2014

Quote:
Originally Posted by G27
Strategies aimed at and/or game play resulting in the damage, destruction or inhibition of opponent ROBOTS via actions such as high-speed or repeated, aggressive ramming, attachment, damage, tipping, or entanglement of ROBOTS are not allowed.

Violation: FOUL. If strategic, TECHNICAL FOUL. and Potential YELLOW CARD
I'm fine with this change, provided that the "via actions such as" clause applies to everything (which I think it does).

The enforcement logic goes something like this:
  1. There's a judgment call to be made: did one of those actions take place? (And while there is ambiguity, the rule clearly grants sufficient latitude to make nearly any judgment difficult to contest.)
  2. Then there's a fairly straightforward visual determination: did damage/destruction/inhibition occur as a result?
  3. Then another judgment call: was it strategic?
A team with a purposely-frangible robot has control over item 2, but item 1 is substantially harder to manipulate (without building a terrible robot). So I'm not especially concerned about teams gaming the rule.

Item 3 is purely an assessment of intent, which is difficult in questionable cases. But the option to just call a foul is the easy way out: if the referee is unsure, the offence can still be penalized without having to make an unfounded assumption about motive. (And I think that was the point.)

Last edited by Tristan Lall : 20-03-2014 at 17:31.
Reply With Quote
  #47   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 20-03-2014, 17:31
magnets's Avatar
magnets magnets is offline
Registered User
no team
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Rookie Year: 2012
Location: United States
Posts: 748
magnets has a reputation beyond reputemagnets has a reputation beyond reputemagnets has a reputation beyond reputemagnets has a reputation beyond reputemagnets has a reputation beyond reputemagnets has a reputation beyond reputemagnets has a reputation beyond reputemagnets has a reputation beyond reputemagnets has a reputation beyond reputemagnets has a reputation beyond reputemagnets has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Unscheduled Team Update: 3-20-2014

Quote:
Originally Posted by Swan217 View Post
This is not Battlebots - I shouldn't have to design a robot for 6G of impact. Try playing defense that doesn't rely on bodychecking your opponents.
Regardless of what you think the ideal amount of bodychecking is, the fact is that the rules presented to all teams at the beginning of the season permits this. Many teams have realized that a defensive high speed ramming robot is a great idea.

Some teams have realized that an effective offensive robot must withstand this, and have built robots that withstand this defense. I realize that this may be an exaggeration, but a student with me said that it's like if they would have removed full court shooting from last year. It would be removing a perfectly legal strategy from the game and would also negatively affect the robots with full court blockers.

As to JVN's comment of GDC's intention, their stated intention is to reduce violence and defense, in order to, IMO, make the game less like 2003.

Have they succeeded? Probably not.
Reply With Quote
  #48   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 20-03-2014, 17:38
Jay O'Donnell's Avatar
Jay O'Donnell Jay O'Donnell is offline
Division by Pirates
FRC #0229 (Division by Zero)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Rookie Year: 2012
Location: Potsdam, NY/Londonderry, NH
Posts: 1,348
Jay O'Donnell has a reputation beyond reputeJay O'Donnell has a reputation beyond reputeJay O'Donnell has a reputation beyond reputeJay O'Donnell has a reputation beyond reputeJay O'Donnell has a reputation beyond reputeJay O'Donnell has a reputation beyond reputeJay O'Donnell has a reputation beyond reputeJay O'Donnell has a reputation beyond reputeJay O'Donnell has a reputation beyond reputeJay O'Donnell has a reputation beyond reputeJay O'Donnell has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Unscheduled Team Update: 3-20-2014

Quote:
Originally Posted by JVN View Post
There are two questions to ask:
1. What is the GDC's intent?
2. Did they succeed at accomplishing that intent?

I'm surprised how many people in this thread seem to have drastically different assumptions about #1 than me. Maybe I'm misreading the GDC.
Well, how are you reading it? How are you interpreting each change? I'm curious.
__________________
Student on Team 1058 (2012-2015)
Mentor on Team 229 (2016-Present)
Writer for Blue Alliance Blog
Reply With Quote
  #49   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 20-03-2014, 17:41
AustinSchuh AustinSchuh is offline
Registered User
FRC #0971 (Spartan Robotics) #254 (The Cheesy Poofs)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Rookie Year: 1999
Location: Los Altos, CA
Posts: 803
AustinSchuh has a reputation beyond reputeAustinSchuh has a reputation beyond reputeAustinSchuh has a reputation beyond reputeAustinSchuh has a reputation beyond reputeAustinSchuh has a reputation beyond reputeAustinSchuh has a reputation beyond reputeAustinSchuh has a reputation beyond reputeAustinSchuh has a reputation beyond reputeAustinSchuh has a reputation beyond reputeAustinSchuh has a reputation beyond reputeAustinSchuh has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Unscheduled Team Update: 3-20-2014

You guys all seem to be missing the point.

This update doesn't say "don't hit people". It doesn't say "don't push people". It says, don't leave your intake down and play D with it. Intakes can stick out 20". The outer 4-6" of my robot is built like a tank, because incidental contact is what happens. The inside of my shooter, which is almost centered in my robot, is still solid, but can't take repeated hard hits. The rules didn't say that it had to be designed to take a hard direct impact, and now it is quite clear that that is the case.

If you think this isn't currently a problem, then you haven't watched the quarterfinal matches at the Sacramento regional. Count the number of defensive hits inside the frame perimeter, and then check the score. No penalties were called until a robot was flipped.

You don't need to wind up full court and hit someone to play D. Some of the most effective D keeps a robot turned so they can't aim, or boxed out so they can't get somewhere. The rules in prior years used to say "no high speed ramming", and people used to play D then too.

I'm happy to see this change. I think it was overdue, and will force Referees to call the rule how it was intended to be called, rather than ignore it.
Reply With Quote
  #50   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 20-03-2014, 17:46
Jared Russell's Avatar
Jared Russell Jared Russell is offline
Taking a year (mostly) off
FRC #0254 (The Cheesy Poofs), FRC #0341 (Miss Daisy)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Rookie Year: 2001
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 3,080
Jared Russell has a reputation beyond reputeJared Russell has a reputation beyond reputeJared Russell has a reputation beyond reputeJared Russell has a reputation beyond reputeJared Russell has a reputation beyond reputeJared Russell has a reputation beyond reputeJared Russell has a reputation beyond reputeJared Russell has a reputation beyond reputeJared Russell has a reputation beyond reputeJared Russell has a reputation beyond reputeJared Russell has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Unscheduled Team Update: 3-20-2014

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon Zalinsky View Post
"In practice"

Please wait to declare how something plays out "in practice" until there are more than 0 qualification matches played with the current rules.
How can you possibly dispute that there are now more things to watch for?
Reply With Quote
  #51   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 20-03-2014, 17:52
JohnFogarty's Avatar
JohnFogarty JohnFogarty is offline
Trapped under a pile of MECANUMS :P
AKA: @doctorfogarty
FTC #11444 (Garnet Squadron) & FRC#1102 (M'Aiken Magic)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Rookie Year: 2006
Location: SC
Posts: 1,580
JohnFogarty has a reputation beyond reputeJohnFogarty has a reputation beyond reputeJohnFogarty has a reputation beyond reputeJohnFogarty has a reputation beyond reputeJohnFogarty has a reputation beyond reputeJohnFogarty has a reputation beyond reputeJohnFogarty has a reputation beyond reputeJohnFogarty has a reputation beyond reputeJohnFogarty has a reputation beyond reputeJohnFogarty has a reputation beyond reputeJohnFogarty has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Unscheduled Team Update: 3-20-2014

Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinSchuh View Post
It says, don't leave your intake down and play D with it.
If this is all that this rule said. Then no one would be complaining.
__________________
John Fogarty
2010 FTC World Championship Winner & 2013-2014 FRC Orlando Regional Winner
Mentor FRC Team 1102 M'Aiken Magic
"Head Bot Coach" FTC Team 11444 Garnet Squadron
Former Student & Mentor FLL 1102, FTC 1102 & FTC 3864, FRC 1772, FRC 5632
2013 FTC World Championship Guest Speaker
Reply With Quote
  #52   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 20-03-2014, 17:56
Mastonevich's Avatar
Mastonevich Mastonevich is offline
Andrew
AKA: Andrew Elsen
FRC #1987 (BroncoBots)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Rookie Year: 2010
Location: Missouri
Posts: 221
Mastonevich is a jewel in the roughMastonevich is a jewel in the roughMastonevich is a jewel in the rough
Re: Unscheduled Team Update: 3-20-2014

Strategies aimed at and/or game play resulting in the damage, destruction or inhibition of opponent ROBOTS via actions such as high-speed or repeated, aggressive ramming, attachment,damage, tipping, or entanglement of ROBOTS are not allowed.

Inhibition is such a broad term:

All references from dictionary.com

inhibition
1. the act of inhibiting.

inhibiting
1. to restrain, hinder, arrest, or check (an action, impulse, etc.).

hinder
1. to cause delay, interruption, or difficulty in; hamper; impede: The storm hindered our progress.
2. to prevent from doing, acting, or happening; stop: to hinder a man from committing a crime.

I think the important part comes in the terms:
high-speed or repeated, aggressive ramming

You can play defense, just no use of high speed, or repeated aggressive ramming the way I read it.

Godspeed to the referees!
__________________
~Andrew

Regional Chairman's: 2013-Alamo, 2010-Oklahoma, 2009-Colorado
Engineering Inspiration: 2016-Hub City, 2012-St. Louis, 2008-Minnesota
Regional Wins: 2010-Oklahoma
Reply With Quote
  #53   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 20-03-2014, 18:02
kenavt's Avatar
kenavt kenavt is offline
Registered User
AKA: Colin S
no team
Team Role: Alumni
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Rookie Year: 2010
Location: Ann Arbor
Posts: 253
kenavt has a reputation beyond reputekenavt has a reputation beyond reputekenavt has a reputation beyond reputekenavt has a reputation beyond reputekenavt has a reputation beyond reputekenavt has a reputation beyond reputekenavt has a reputation beyond reputekenavt has a reputation beyond reputekenavt has a reputation beyond reputekenavt has a reputation beyond reputekenavt has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Unscheduled Team Update: 3-20-2014

Quote:
Originally Posted by JVN View Post
There are two questions to ask:
1. What is the GDC's intent?
2. Did they succeed at accomplishing that intent?

I'm surprised how many people in this thread seem to have drastically different assumptions about #1 than me. Maybe I'm misreading the GDC.
Quoting what appears to be the GDC's literal intent, for reference:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Team Update 3/20/2014
The rule change to G27 attempts to discourage ROBOT to ROBOT damage, while still allowing defensive play. On the FIELD, we want to encourage FRC Teams to work with their ALLIANCE partners to demonstrate their technical prowess and game play skills. While pushing and bumping are reasonable game play efforts, anything that resembles intentionally damaging behavior is not. Additionally, the change to G27 enables Referees to issue penalties for causing opponent ROBOT damage, even if not strategic or intentional.
Will they succeed? I think not.

The first large issue has been raised again and again - the amount of things referees have to pay attention to. There are three big items now that I think will cause debate this weekend. The first have been: human player zone violations alongside under G40, and scoring matches: assists, trusses, and goals (alongside the lag issues inherent in the FMS). I fear that the requirement of referees to catalogue and track every robot-to-robot interaction to see if 1) there is damage, destruction, or inhibition, 2)Is it accidental or strategic, is simply just piling something else upon the referees' plate that will not receive the attention it deserves (not to the referees' fault).

The second large issue is the possibility of attempting to draw fouls under this rule, despite the existence of G14 (which I have seen very, very rarely enforced). For instance, I can see the possibility that low-traction drivetrains that can be pushed readily by skid-steer drivetrains with lots of traction (e.g. mecanums, omnis versus tread wheels) could easily stage penalties to show "high-speed or aggressive" ramming, by not fighting pushing from the aforementioned skid-steer robots.

I am confused as to how the GDC expects the example actions in G27, "high-speed or repeated, aggressive ramming", to satisfy their intent to discourage damage while encouraging robots to perform to their best. What is to stop robots with "technical prowess and gameplay skills" from running down the field with a ball playing offense, accidentally hitting a poorly designed robot, breaking something, and incurring a foul? Similarily, their additional intent "Additionally, the change to G27 enables Referees to issue penalties for causing opponent ROBOT damage, even if not strategic or intentional," is intended to raise the level of competition, encourage stronger design skills, or be fair (when it comes to discrepancies between robots' build quality), or do anything but encourage penalties like in the situation with the offensive robot mentioned above.

I hope that referees take these rules as invitations to make sensible, subjective, reasonable judgements that fall in line with the GDC's intent (WITHOUT the GDC stating so - that also seems like a major omission).
__________________
University of Michigan Computer Engineering '17

FRC 2337 student alumni (2010-2013)
Reply With Quote
  #54   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 20-03-2014, 18:25
Max Boord Max Boord is offline
Registered User
FRC #0179 (The Children of The Swamp), FRC #1592 (Bionic Tigers)
Team Role: Tactician
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Rookie Year: 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 239
Max Boord has a brilliant futureMax Boord has a brilliant futureMax Boord has a brilliant futureMax Boord has a brilliant futureMax Boord has a brilliant futureMax Boord has a brilliant futureMax Boord has a brilliant futureMax Boord has a brilliant futureMax Boord has a brilliant futureMax Boord has a brilliant futureMax Boord has a brilliant future
Re: Unscheduled Team Update: 3-20-2014

Quote:
Strategies aimed at and/or game play resulting in the damage, destruction or inhibition of opponent ROBOTS via actions such as high-speed or repeated, aggressive ramming, attachment, damage, tipping, or entanglement of ROBOTS are not allowed.
Violation: FOUL. If strategic, TECHNICAL FOUL. and Potential YELLOW CARD
Ok so lets dive into what this really means:

Strategies/ game play resulting in damage, destruction or inhibition: if you physically stop your opponents from doing what they would like.
High-speed or repeated aggressive ramming: hitting them when they are not moving
Tipping: what happens when 2 150lb objects collide.

If it is an accident: 20pt foul.
If you meant it: 50pt foul.

I this as a game changer. If refs are strict on it then we could see a complete ban on defense. If refs are lenient on it then I think we will see every single match score be challenged.
Reply With Quote
  #55   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 20-03-2014, 18:36
jman4747's Avatar
jman4747 jman4747 is offline
Just building robots
AKA: Josh
FRC #4080 (Team Reboot)
Team Role: CAD
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Rookie Year: 2011
Location: Atlanta GA
Posts: 422
jman4747 has a reputation beyond reputejman4747 has a reputation beyond reputejman4747 has a reputation beyond reputejman4747 has a reputation beyond reputejman4747 has a reputation beyond reputejman4747 has a reputation beyond reputejman4747 has a reputation beyond reputejman4747 has a reputation beyond reputejman4747 has a reputation beyond reputejman4747 has a reputation beyond reputejman4747 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Unscheduled Team Update: 3-20-2014

Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinSchuh View Post
You guys all seem to be missing the point.

This update doesn't say "don't hit people". It doesn't say "don't push people". It says, don't leave your intake down and play D with it. Intakes can stick out 20".
This is absolutely correct and is fine however there is still no mention of the foul being based on who initiated contact. A defender can still run into me while I'm sitting still and cause me to lose 50p. Most intakes are not ramming devises. They are designed to pick up balls to play a normal offensive scoring game.

GDC further penalizing offensive teams for having intakes that are rigid.
__________________
---------------------
Alumni, CAD Designer, machinist, and Mentor: FRC Team #4080

Mentor: Rookie FTC Team "EVE" #10458, FRC Team "Drewbotics" #5812

#banthebag
#RIBMEATS
#1620
Reply With Quote
  #56   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 20-03-2014, 18:42
Chris is me's Avatar
Chris is me Chris is me is online now
no bag, vex only, final destination
AKA: Pinecone
FRC #0228 (GUS Robotics); FRC #2170 (Titanium Tomahawks)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Rookie Year: 2006
Location: Glastonbury, CT
Posts: 7,768
Chris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to Chris is me
Re: Unscheduled Team Update: 3-20-2014

Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinSchuh View Post
You guys all seem to be missing the point.

This update doesn't say "don't hit people". It doesn't say "don't push people". It says, don't leave your intake down and play D with it. Intakes can stick out 20". The outer 4-6" of my robot is built like a tank, because incidental contact is what happens. The inside of my shooter, which is almost centered in my robot, is still solid, but can't take repeated hard hits. The rules didn't say that it had to be designed to take a hard direct impact, and now it is quite clear that that is the case.

If you think this isn't currently a problem, then you haven't watched the quarterfinal matches at the Sacramento regional. Count the number of defensive hits inside the frame perimeter, and then check the score. No penalties were called until a robot was flipped.

You don't need to wind up full court and hit someone to play D. Some of the most effective D keeps a robot turned so they can't aim, or boxed out so they can't get somewhere. The rules in prior years used to say "no high speed ramming", and people used to play D then too.

I'm happy to see this change. I think it was overdue, and will force Referees to call the rule how it was intended to be called, rather than ignore it.
The rule seems to prohibit any kind of "aggressive ramming", regardless if an appendage is used or not. The fact that Sacramento refs were not calling blatant infractions of existing rules does not mean this is a necessary change. What is "aggressive"?
__________________
Mentor / Drive Coach: 228 (2016-?)
--2016 Waterbury SFs (with 3314, 3719), RIDE #2 Seed / Winners (with 1058, 6153), Carver QFs (with 503, 359, 4607)
Mentor / Consultant Person: 2170 (2017-?)
.
College Mentor: 2791 (2010-2015)
-- 2015 TVR Motorola Quality, FLR GM Industrial Design -- 2014 FLR Motorola Quality / SFs (with 341, 4930)
-- 2013 BAE Motorola Quality, WPI Regional #1 Seed / Delphi Excellence in Engineering / Finalists (with 20, 3182)
-- 2012 BAE Imagery / Finalists (with 1519, 885), CT Xerox Creativity / SFs (with 2168, 118)
Student: 1714 (2009) - 2009 MN 10K Lakes Regional Winners (with 2826, 2470)
2791 Build Season Photo Gallery - Look here for mechanism photos My Robotics Blog (Updated April 11 2014)
Reply With Quote
  #57   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 20-03-2014, 19:18
George Nishimura's Avatar
George Nishimura George Nishimura is offline
Lurker
no team
Team Role: Alumni
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Rookie Year: 2007
Location: London
Posts: 231
George Nishimura has much to be proud ofGeorge Nishimura has much to be proud ofGeorge Nishimura has much to be proud ofGeorge Nishimura has much to be proud ofGeorge Nishimura has much to be proud ofGeorge Nishimura has much to be proud ofGeorge Nishimura has much to be proud ofGeorge Nishimura has much to be proud ofGeorge Nishimura has much to be proud of
Re: Unscheduled Team Update: 3-20-2014

Preface: My team haven't competed yet and I have never been a referee.

I think this rule update makes sense.

The update, from my perspective, says this:

High speed collisions, if accidental and damaging/inhibitive, foul.
Repeated, aggressive ramming, or purposeful high speed collisions, technical foul.

I fail to see how this 'kills defense'. Every sport, from hockey to football, draws the line somewhere for how much 'roughness' is allowed. The intent (to address JVN's point) is to reduce the amount of damage on robots. I think we can all get behind that intent.

High speed collisions and repeated, aggressive ramming are not the cornerstones of good defence. Pushing, blocking and pinning are all still legal under this update. Every sport relies on the subjectivity of the referees to decide what constitutes dangerous play or unnecessary roughness and precedents will eventually be set.

I actually think this ruling empowers referees, more than burdens them. As far as I'm aware they already watch out for dangerous robot-robot interactions. This gives them the chance to penalize clumsy/overzealous yet good-intending teams without the huge 50pt swing.
__________________
Team 1884 - The Griffins (2007-2014)

Last edited by George Nishimura : 20-03-2014 at 19:36.
Reply With Quote
  #58   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 20-03-2014, 19:32
jtechau jtechau is offline
Registered User
AKA: Jeff Techau
FRC #1388 (Eagle Robotics)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Rookie Year: 2006
Location: Arroyo Grande, CA
Posts: 21
jtechau is just really nicejtechau is just really nicejtechau is just really nicejtechau is just really nice
Re: Unscheduled Team Update: 3-20-2014

Having been in Sacramento, I understand Austin's perspective. That was an unnecessarily aggressive Regional.

I’m glad to see this rule update. FRC is about building strategic robots, not battle bots. Of course the robots need to be able to take some abuse. But being able to dole out abuse shouldn’t be a team’s strategic advantage.

Defense is of course allowed. Push all you want. Ramming is a judgment call, though. Certainly some amount of ramming is unavoidable - even desirable - and must be allowed. But if any referee thinks you’re doing it with the intent of damaging a robot, or even carelessness to the extent that could result in damage, expect to draw a penalty.

Also, a bit of advice, paraphrased from the Game Manual:

When reading these rules, please use common sense rather than “lawyering” the interpretation and splitting hairs over the precise wording.
Reply With Quote
  #59   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 20-03-2014, 19:50
mrnoble's Avatar
mrnoble mrnoble is offline
teacher/coach
FRC #1339 (Angelbotics)
Team Role: Coach
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Rookie Year: 2004
Location: denver, co
Posts: 983
mrnoble has a reputation beyond reputemrnoble has a reputation beyond reputemrnoble has a reputation beyond reputemrnoble has a reputation beyond reputemrnoble has a reputation beyond reputemrnoble has a reputation beyond reputemrnoble has a reputation beyond reputemrnoble has a reputation beyond reputemrnoble has a reputation beyond reputemrnoble has a reputation beyond reputemrnoble has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Unscheduled Team Update: 3-20-2014

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gnishi2011 View Post
Preface: My team haven't competed yet and I have never been a referee.

I think this rule update makes sense.

The update, from my perspective, says this:

High speed collisions, if accidental and damaging/inhibitive, foul.
Repeated, aggressive ramming, or purposeful high speed collisions, technical foul.

I fail to see how this 'kills defense'. Every sport, from hockey to football, draws the line somewhere for how much 'roughness' is allowed. The intent (to address JVN's point) is to reduce the amount of damage on robots. I think we can all get behind that intent.

High speed collisions and repeated, aggressive ramming are not the cornerstones of good defence. Pushing, blocking and pinning are all still legal under this update. Every sport relies on the subjectivity of the referees to decide what constitutes dangerous play or unnecessary roughness and precedents will eventually be set.

I actually think this ruling empowers referees, more than burdens them. As far as I'm aware they already watch out for dangerous robot-robot interactions. This gives them the chance to penalize clumsy/overzealous yet good-intending teams without the huge 50pt swing.
+1.

Hockey is probably the sport with the most in common with this year's game in a number of areas. Professional hockey continues to adjust the types of legal interactions between players; what was acceptable 30 years ago (the Goon) is now frowned upon in most places and at most times, because it was overall bad for the game. GDC is attempting to adjust based on what they saw last week. While for most of CD FRC is highly competitive, GDC doesn't just consider the competitive team's needs and wants. There are far more teams who will field a box on wheels with a weak frame and appendages made from stuff that is easily damaged. Can FRC really tell them that they just should've prepared better when the bot is completely destroyed? Discouraged noncompetitive teams will end FRC within a couple of years. And can you, who build competitive bots and field teams that make it into elims regularly, not figure out a way to play against those teams that doesn't require ramming? I bet you can.
Reply With Quote
  #60   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 20-03-2014, 20:15
raptaconehs raptaconehs is offline
Registered User
FRC #3200
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Colorado
Posts: 54
raptaconehs will become famous soon enoughraptaconehs will become famous soon enough
Re: Unscheduled Team Update: 3-20-2014

This update is a true game changer. It limits the amount of super physical defense that can be played. The biggest issue with this rule change is that refs will not be able to be consistent. The refs have plenty to do already and it doesn't appear that the GDC is making things easier. This is going to change a lot of the strategy that goes into the game. I am interested to see how FIRST teams will react to this update tomorrow during qualifiers.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 23:59.

The Chief Delphi Forums are sponsored by Innovation First International, Inc.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi