Why does everyone hate this game so much?

[Abhishek R]

Originally Posted by Zebra_Fact_Man

Many of the complaints to this year's game regarding rules are very reminiscent of sports to me. For instance, whether a pass interference will be offensive or defensive can sometimes be entirely up to the referee calling the play, and we all know how an umpire can skew the results of a baseball game by a simple safe/out call. Or in basketball whether or not something is a foul or whether or not it is a flagrant foul; subjective to the collective referee crew.

Do we always agree with the calls? No. But upon, further consideration, I honestly don't believe there is much that could be done to improve the current rules we have without the degrading the integrity of the game (maybe lessening a few individual penalty values from 50 to 20ish, but only a few if any).

I see your point, but in basketball, 20% of the matches teams play are NOT decided by fouls. By the amount of drama that's been rising at at least one regional every week, there is clearly a problem that needs to be addressed.

[Zebra_Fact_Man]

Originally Posted by Abhishek R

I see your point, but in basketball, 20% of the matches teams play are NOT decided by fouls. By the amount of drama that's been rising at at least one regional every week, there is clearly a problem that needs to be addressed.

I don't know about that. I can think of quite a few matches where if Team X had/hadn't shot free throws, it would have changed the entire gameplay of the final seconds. Maybe not 20% I suppose, but definitely 10%.

Take today's Wichita State game for example. If that final foul had been a flagrant, it could have changed the whole dynamic of the situation (note: the correct call was made in that instance). And that's just today.

Everyone's getting all worked up about something that isn't new by any stretch of the imagination.

[Abhishek R]

Originally Posted by Zebra_Fact_Man

Everyone's getting all worked up about something that isn't new by any stretch of the imagination.

It is, however, very different in FRC compared with Ultimate Ascent, Rebound Rumble, and LogoMotion.

[PayneTrain]

Originally Posted by Jared Russell

Many of your points have merit, but statements like this make it hard to be sympathetic to them. A rational critique is usually more effective than a tantrum.

My favorite part of this year's game is watching how many things are amplified. I know you know and I know I know what it's like to be a financially poor FRC team, and Brandon is in that situation right now. You know what? He threw a tantrum. However, this game is also making people ask bigger questions. How much are we supposed to go to "defend our kids"? I took over the drive coach position under fire from others on my team until they saw how rough this game can be on the teams. I don't want to puff my chest out too much, but I am there to protect a bunch of smart and talented kids from getting nothing short of screwed over by people who lack understanding of the game they are playing. They know the strategy.

Last year you could get by in a match when a partner committed a foul, one robot went limp on the field, or the volunteer referee clue whiffed on a call or 3. This year, when I go to a week 4 event and have to ask referee crews to check team updates from prior weeks before they misspeak at a driver's meeting, that is objectively NOT GOOD. When I have to stare at a glowing trashcan for 13 seconds, that is also NOT GOOD. When I see a question box 12 teams deep and a rulebook on tap and the foghorn sound effect is getting its biggest workout in half a decade, these are all not good things.

However despite our earlier than planned exit at our last event due to some unsavory no-calls, we still get to play one more time. 254 still gets to play one more time. Brandon's kids ran into overdrive over 7 weeks to put together a very fantastic robot (2nd overall pick at LSDR) only to get booted over a hasty and poorly thought out Team Update that came down the pipe half a week earlier. They don't get to go back and start planning for a surefire trip to MAR or World Champs. They may nto have a shop to go back to if the school district cuts the program if they see it as underperforming from last year.

Yeah, Brandon got emotional. He screwed up. He's not the only person who screwed up this year. People who have really dropped the ball this year are paid to NOT do that kind of thing, ever. You and I get to book our hotels under the arch while Brandon's team is asking why they even bothered trying to build a robust machine when the GDC suddenly changed the stance of "robust machines win" over to "play extra nice".

It's one thing to say that you went out there, left it all on the field, and made your team, your sponsors, your school, and yourselves proud. We didn't win an event, but I'm proud of my team. 254 has won 2 events, and I guess/assume you're proud of them because there's no doubt you guys pushed your own limits and earned your wins. 2495 went out, left it all on the field, and then some, but had the deft hand of incomplete thought wipe them out of the competition, probably for good, in 2014. I can understand that.

[Alex2614]

Coming from someone who has had horrible luck in the past with referee calls, iffy rules, dead alliance partners, judging discrepancies/bias, other types of adversity etc. I can see why some people have seen the need to call out those responsible. But I just want to throw out a word of caution as we proceed.

Two years in a row, we were eliminated from regionals because of an alliance partner that invoked a red card (or two yellows) completely accidentally and unknowingly. My junior and senior years of high school. Talk about devastating. 2009 we saw many many robots that drove around, had no way of scoring, but still made it to the top seeds of an event. Point is, every year we see problems, and every year we have complaints. Every year, we think we have the winningest design, and poured countless hours, dollars, and manpower building a winning machine. Our team even have a team of students/alumni whose main job is figuring out how the game will be played so we can design accordingly. And every year, we are faced with problems on the field that prevent us from winning. It happens, and it has actually prepared our students for the real world more than anything else.

Every year, we see problems with the games and everything associated with it. Yes, the GDC has made some mistakes with this particular game. They tried to go in a new direction this year with input from the students and mentors with feedback from the previous year. This kind of change is healthy and refreshing. It was a learning year for all of us involved. But again, to quote Dean Kamen, life ain't fair.

But saying things like that will only make things worse. The GDC has one of the toughest jobs in the world. Honestly, they do. And, in trying to put ourselves in that position can maybe help us understand a little better. Honestly, I can guarantee that if we all sit back, take a couple deep breaths, get one or two nights of sleep, we will have much fewer regrets.

Speaking out against FIRST and the mistakes it has made in the forms of tantrums, rants, raves, etc. only reflects very poorly on FIRST and only succeeds in tearing the organization apart, rather than constructively seeking change. If we, as a community want to see change, it is our duty and responsibility to seek such change from our leaders. Nothing is more frustrating as a leader than to see those you lead talk negatively about mistakes you have made behind your back and not constructively with you. I'm sure this is something those persons on the GDC right now are going through. Talk to them personally about why they made the decisions that they did. Find out what went into making the rules this year. I guarantee you will gain a fresh new perspective on things, and rather than seeing the issues through an "emotionally charged lens" and more through a critical and informed one.

The best thing we can do, as a community, is continue through this year graciously and professionally. At our next events, figure out what we can do to win (whether that is what you initially had in mind in January or not). Then we can go from there. If we don't have any next events, continue supporting FIRST's missions and spreading their ideals through outreach, service, etc. as well as cheering on our fellow teams. No amount of complaining, ranting, raving, etc. is going to make the situation any better. I guarantee the GDC has learned their lessons this year. And if we want to be entirely sure, I'm sure they will welcome personal feedback. I can't wait to see what they have in store for next year, and I certainly can't wait to watch the competition in St. Louis (whether from home or in person).

/rant. Sorry if the length or breadth of what I have said is inappropriate. I tend to get more wordy the later I stay up. I'm not trying to say that I'm better than anyone; I have gone through these situations many, many, many times before, and I am only simply offering what has worked best over the years both in FIRST and in the many other organizations/communities in which I preside. I look forward to working with and talking with all of you in the coming times. Thanks for listening.

[AllenGregoryIV]

Originally Posted by Alex2614

Talk to them personally about why they made the decisions that they did. Find out what went into making the rules this year. I guarantee you will gain a fresh new perspective on things, and rather than seeing the issues through an "emotionally charged lens" and more through a critical and informed one.

I find this part of the post interesting. How exactly do you recommend people speak to the GDC?

I'm not entirely sure who is even on it anymore. Serching the FIRST website only gives this result from 2010. A google search turns up the video from 2010. I know Dave and Woodie resigned in 2011. They also introduce themselves in the 2012 kickoff video. Did I miss another announcement somewhere, did they post all their email addresses and phone numbers somewhere that I missed?

[Akash Rastogi]

Originally Posted by Brandon_L

Off to sleep on it.

I don't think Brandon necessarily needs a lecture about what he posted, as much as I respect Jared and others. I'm sure he realizes what he has posted is emotionally charged, which is why he will sleep on it. He is more mature than his post reflects.

This is really the best solution to a hard day. Sleep on it, gather your thoughts, and at the end of the day, remember that this is a high school robotics competition. Yes, your hard work was diminished on the field due to terrible rulings and a flawed rule book, but don't let that diminish how hard you really worked. I know it, you know it, your kids know it. Leave it at that for now. Unfortunately, everything else is slightly out of your control.

For what it's worth, I think there is nothing wrong with speaking directly about what is wrong with FIRST on CD. I would rather see mentors post their honest opinions than sugar-coating the situation because someone might be reading these posts. I'm sure anyone from FIRST reading this understands the frustration coming from teams, and probably has thick enough skin to deal with it.

Originally Posted by PayneTrain

My favorite part of this year's game is watching how many things are amplified.

This is the most accurate description of this season I've read so far.

[Alex2614]

Originally Posted by AllenGregoryIV

I find this part of the post interesting. How exactly do you recommend people speak to the GDC?

I'm not entirely sure who is even on it anymore. Serching the FIRST website only gives this result from 2010. A google search turns up the video from 2010. I know Dave and Woodie resigned in 2011. They also introduce themselves in the 2012 kickoff video. Did I miss another announcement somewhere, did they post all their email addresses and phone numbers somewhere that I missed?

I understand, and partially rescind my comment. However, I will reference this http://www.usfirst.org/roboticsprogr...idays-11112013 where persons will be given the opportunity to express opinions of the game through feedback via open-ended comment boxes. Letters (digital or snail-mail) can also be sent directly to FIRST headquarters, where they will be forwarded to the correct parties.

There are also usually times at the championship where questions can be answered directly by the director and other parties of FIRST. And if you cannot attend the championship, these things are usually available via live webcasts. These among other resources FIRST provides are sometimes great avenues to get our messages across.

My point is, there are ways to get your opinions known to the right parties at the right time. The GDC will be looking over CD posts, I'm sure. And if all they see is hateful comments or emotionally-fueled complaints and/or "tantrums" for lack of a better word, they will only get angry (at least I would) and may even be less likely to listen to what you have to say. Again, just personal experience both in and outside of CD and FIRST, in other organizations, with other people.

Originally Posted by Akash Rastogi

For what it's worth, I think there is nothing wrong with speaking directly about what is wrong with FIRST on CD. I would rather see mentors post their honest opinions than sugar-coating the situation because someone might be reading these posts. I'm sure anyone from FIRST reading this understands the frustration coming from teams, and probably has thick enough skin to deal with it.

I do not disagree. However, I often find that comments filled with emotion directly after things happen are not honest opinions. Yes, at their core they may be, but they are delivered in such a way that is not honest or true to the intended message. I'm not trying to call Brandon or anyone out personally. But I see this all the time across CD and other places of the internet, not just on this thread or this topic either. I have done the same thing personally many times and have learned that people are more likely to listen to what you have to say if your comments are not fueled with heat-of-the-moment emotion. Usually, the person who says something like that (again, guilty myself) realizes later on that what they said was not exactly what they intended.

Clearly thought through, well-organized, and even-tempered arguments, criticisms, or general feedback is not sugar-coating anything. It's dealing with it graciously and professionally.

Again, I truly am not trying to call any one person out, so please don't read into this as if I am. We are all guilty of it. I'm just giving some friendly reminders .

[JosephC]

I've been hesitant on posting in this thread, because I know my views aren't exactly the most popular, and very few people, if any at all, share them.

I've read through countless Chief Delphi threads and Facebook posts. I've heard both sides of the argument, and been a volunteer at an event every week. I've had key-chains thrown at me, drive teams screaming in my face, and people complain that the balls aren't inflated properly. I've listened to people complain about the rules, the penalties, how they lost because of penalties.

And you know what? I love this game. I find no issues with the rules, the fouls, or the GDC. For once, a team of average robots can destroy an alliance of great robots. And no, it's not because they got a lot of fouls. Just look at the Great Lakes Bay Region District from this past week. It seems this year that everyone and their grandmother have something to gripe about. As a drive team member of 68 back in 2012, I can tell you that losing your regional because someone on your alliance drew a tech foul is NOTHING compared to what happened at Worlds back in 2012. Did you see flocks of students running to Chief Delphi complaining and letting their emotions run wild? No. Your Alliance drew the foul. It was completely within your control. Unless someone else took control of the robot and caused you to get the foul, it was your alliance's fault. If you accidentally broke a robot on the opposing alliance because they built a non-robust robot, then maybe you shouldn't have hit them so hard. If a piece of your robot fell onto the field and caused you to lose the match, maybe you shouldn't have pieces of your robot that can fall off so easily.

Eliminations is a best 2 out of 3. If you lose one match due to fouls, you still have the other two matches to prove you have the better alliance. If you lose the second match because of fouls, then you're doing something wrong.

Worst of all, you're taking the victory away from the alliance that beat you. They also spent countless hours and money on their robot. What makes your time and money anymore valuable then theirs? Their students worked just as hard as yours, and you should be congratulating them instead of complaining that you lost because of a tech foul.

The game manual and the rules have been here since January 5th. If you don't know them well enough to not draw a foul, it's your own fault. No one elses. Freak accidents happen, yeah. So go on out in your next two elimination matches and prove that you deserve the win.

Sincerely,
Tired of the Gripe

[hardcopi]

My biggest issue is that nothing is the same from match to match. Fouls seem to be called at the whim of the referee. I don't think they are doing it out of spite but because the rules are vague. Our bot played very little defense but got called out when ever we tried to get away. We had one foul out of many that I agreed with (we ran over to slow down another bout and hit the pretty hard. Other times we got fouls called on us for no real reason that anyone could see our tell us.

As a rule we don't go to the question box. This year though we are thinking of how to decorate it because we seem to live there. Not that we ever got a real answer.

I am not really sure how our if they can fix it. The referees are trying their best though to enforce vague at best rules and it really hurts the game.

What do we tell or drive team? How can they not draw fouls? They get hit while trying to pick up the ball they might they might they might get a foul.

[DampRobot]

Originally Posted by JosephC

And you know what? I love this game. I find no issues with the rules, the fouls, or the GDC. For once, a team of average robots can destroy an alliance of great robots.

And this is a good thing because? We usually build robots that are only a little bit above average, and I'd much rather see the best robots win than the average robots beat those that are fundamentally better. If they could, why would we bother trying to built the best bot we can?

Originally Posted by Brandon_L

GDC needs to be fired. Straight up, just going to say it. Go home. I'm tired of you.

...

GDC if you want to inspire teams to enter engineering fields, you're doing it wrong. Very wrong.

Hey JVN and Vex folk, nows the time to start up a FRC-Sized VEX event. I'm sure more then enough teams will be happy to jump ship at this point.

Before this season started, I was dreading the day this would happen, and the rift it would create between the FRC and the VRC Pro people. After this season, I look forward to the day we can choose.

[Koko Ed]

Originally Posted by Brandon_L

GDC needs to be fired. Straight up, just going to say it. Go home. I'm tired of you.

Then who would design games for you to play?
I give the GDC credit they put the game out there and let people take full on headshots at them without flinching when it would be just as easy to say "screw all of you" and walk away and leave us with nothing to do but reminisce about the good old days when we had a FIRST competition.

[cstelter]

Originally Posted by jeremylee

I see flags waived for 1 red technical, 2 blue technicals, and 1 red foul. I only see penalty points scored for the 2 blue technicals and the 1 red foul? Odd.

Looks to me red initiated the tie up twice playing defense on blue. It also looks like red initiated the final pull apart the 2nd time driving away from blue at which point the robot then became disabled. Technical on blue only for this? Or was it to be a technical on both and the red wasn't scored?

The 2nd blue technical appears to occur at the 1 minute mark when the head ref points to the red robot on the right as they moved in/out of a defensive position triggering the 2nd blue flag wave. Correct call?

Quarter Final 2 Match 2 is another story of a match ending with penalties potentially swinging the outcome. A similar tie up occurred between the same robots with penalties accessed upon them separating. Maybe someone has video of this also?

Before I begin, I want to make clear that I am not continuing this discussion in an effort to prove that the match was scored correctly. I'm only trying to arrive at a common understanding of the most likely reason that the score wound up the way it did. I truly empathize with all team members involved on both alliances-- this was a harsh way for the quarter final to end.

I do have video of the Q2 Match 2 you refer to but have not viewed it yet. I will try to post as time permits.

Honestly, I hadn't watched the video of match 3 in full screen until after I posted it. I had watched it numerous times on my camcorder that was used for the recording, but that is a 3" screen. I was going on my memory of what was announced as the final score was read-- not based on the actual flags waved during the match.

I only see 4 flag waves although the video does not capture the ref in the lower left corner-- a red flag first while pointing at red followed by the start of bumping wrists (but not much conviction), then two blue flag waves each followed by distinct bumping wrists together. All 3 of these signals are within a few seconds. Then later around 1:33 a red foul no wrist bump indicated by the lower right ref pointing at some activity that is out of frame on the video but can be seen by looking at the audience screen in the video. I'm thinking that must have been the announced possession in that red was inhibiting blue from getting at its ball to score.

Also, I hadn't noticed on my small screen, but the first 50 points of the two blue TF's was actually scored around the 2:10 point in the video. You can see the ref who waved the fouls accessing the panel in the upper right corner of the field. Red score jumps from 87 to 137.

I have no answer why the ref first signaled a red TF that was clearly never scored. Perhaps the gesture was a mistake (miscommunication between head judge and ref?). Even when he switched to the blue flag he pointed at the red robot while waving the flag. Since the ref who signaled the red TF clearly was involved in the scoring, my best conclusion was that the red TF signal was a mistake.

As to the question of which robot initiated contact. I guess it boils down to this bit of G28:

A ROBOT with an element outside its FRAME PERIMETER may be penalized under this rule if it appears they are using that element to purposefully contact another ROBOT inside its FRAME PERIMETER. Regardless of intent, a ROBOT with an element outside its FRAME PERIMETER that causes damage to another ROBOT inside of its FRAME PERIMETER will be penalized, unless the actions of the damaged ROBOT are the catalyst for the damage.

There was a minor entanglement as red tries (successfully) to interrupt a pass between 93 and 1736 at 0:36 on the video. Red is fully within its frame perimeter (all appendages in) at this point and pushes 1736 as it is trying to receive the ball from 93 and successfully defends the pass. Just after 93's arm catches on some part of 3018, but it is minor, no damage and not worthy of any foul on either side in my eyes.

I see 3 events that led to the next entanglement/eventual damage. Red pushes blue in a way that allows blue to enter its frame perimeter. Blue articulates its arm vertical while inside red's frame making disentanglement impossible. Red and blue attempt to disentangle leading to the eventual disconnection of the radio.

I do not think that blue was trying to intentionally entangle when it articulated its arm vertical. But if blue does not articulate, the two robots easily separate and continue playing after red pushes blue aside, similar to how the first entanglement was resolved at 0:36.

So was red *the* catalyst for the damage it received? I personally don't think so, but of course I'm biased. I can see how some might see it that way. Unless one can definitively say that red was 'the catalyst' that caused the damage, the 50 points has to go in red's favor. That's the only exception to robot A causing damage to robot B while inside perimeter (at least that's how I read G27)

As for the *second* blue TF-- well, I'm not at all sure. I don't see it.

[sircedric4]

Originally Posted by AllenGregoryIV

I find this part of the post interesting. How exactly do you recommend people speak to the GDC?

I'm not entirely sure who is even on it anymore. Serching the FIRST website only gives this result from 2010. A google search turns up the video from 2010. I know Dave and Woodie resigned in 2011. They also introduce themselves in the 2012 kickoff video. Did I miss another announcement somewhere, did they post all their email addresses and phone numbers somewhere that I missed?

This is the best question I have seen raised. Another question I would add to this is: Has anyone on the GDC been a mentor or a member of an actual team? I am wondering if the things that are causing such grief this year is because no one on the GDC has actually been down in the thick of it. How do we find out the history of our GDC members?

I have never seen the overall level of grousing, grief and general disappointment in a game on CD in my memory. You can love or hate this particular game (I personally am disappointed in it for reasons I already elaborated) but you have to admit that there is something different about this game than other years by the general noise and aggression level around here. I sincerely hope the lessons are being noted so that we get a return to better years like Ultimate Ascent, Rebound Rumble, Breakaway for next year's game.

[Koko Ed]

Originally Posted by sircedric4

This is the best question I have seen raised. Another question I would add to this is: Has anyone on the GDC been a mentor or a member of an actual team? I am wondering if the things that are causing such grief this year is because no one on the GDC has actually been down in the thick of it. How do we find out the history of our GDC members?

I have never seen the overall level of grousing, grief and general disappointment in a game on CD in my memory. You can love or hate this particular game (I personally am disappointed in it for reasons I already elaborated) but you have to admit that there is something different about this game than other years by the general noise and aggression level around here. I sincerely hope the lessons are being noted so that we get a return to better years like Ultimate Ascent, Rebound Rumble, Breakaway for next year's game.

Linda Maulding is a long time mentor on my team but she helped design the last two games. Not this one.