[FTC]: New De-Scoring penalty interpretation

[PhilBot]

During the Northern Super Regional we had a very weird call on our team during one of the late matches of the day.

My team was on the Red alliance with another robot who’s task was primarily blocking.

During some strong back and forward action near our opponent’s pendulum, there was a sequence of events that caused a block to be de-scored from our opponent’s basket. The call that was made by the refs was: Our alliance robot had forced our opponent’s robot into the goal, which then causes one of our opponent’s blocks to be de-scored (it essentially catapulted out of the basket)

Our alliance robot was never accused of touching the basket, pendulum or block... just the opposing robot.

Because of this action the ruling was that our alliance “caused” the de-score so we were penalized by 50 points.

A review of the game video shows that we didn’t force the opposing robot into the pendulum, however, even if we had, we don’t see how this action would constitute a penalty on us.

The opposing alliance robot clearly hits the pendulum and bounces the cube out of the basket, so taken in isolation GS3 would require that they would incur a penalty. However, if the refs decide that our alliance caused them to do this, G11 would negate the penalty (it specifically says” no penalties will be awarded).

There is no rule that says the penalty should be transferred to us. This seems like an arbitrary application of a penalty, which could lead to a whole new strategy of laying in wait to descore your own block when an opposing team is nearby.

Our team captain attempted to request a clarification of the ruling, but the refs did not want to entertain a discussion.

Has anyone seen another example of this sort of penalty interpretation?

Phil.

[CENTURION]

The full text of the rules in question for anyone wondering:

<G11> The actions of an Alliance or their Robots shall not cause an opposing Alliance or Robot to break a rule and thus
incur penalties. Any rule violations committed by the affected Alliance shall be excused, and no penalties will be
assigned.

<GS3>Robots may not Score or de-Score Blocks in the opposing Alliance’s Pendulum Goals during the End Game.
Violations will result in a Major Penalty and the Opposing Alliance will be awarded with a Balance Score.

<GS4> Robots may not de-Score Blocks from the Pendulum Goals, however they may be de-Scored from the Floor
Scoring Area. If Blocks are de-Scored illegally, the offending Alliance will incur a Major Penalty. In other words,
once a Block is Scored in a Pendulum Goal, it may not be removed by any Robot, even one of the same
Alliance’s color. De-scored Blocks will not contribute to an Alliance Score.

If the ref thought your alliance partner rammed the other robot into the pendulum, then I think it's reasonable to say that they caused the block to be de-scored. They just used the opponent's robot to do it.

I think it's not about the penalty being "transferred" to you, it's that you incurred the penalty via the other robot.

Imagine if a robot with a very powerful drivetrain rammed you into a field element, and damaged it. Should you be penalized for the field damage, or should they?

You are correct though, the rule doesn't directly cover this specific case.

[PhilBot]

Originally Posted by CENTURION

If the ref thought your alliance partner rammed the other robot into the pendulum, then I think it's reasonable to say that they caused the block to be de-scored. They just used the opponent's robot to do it..

I would agree if it was egregious ramming. But I think if you look at this clip you will see that it was pretty mild interaction that caused the opponent to catch on the pendulum and flick the cube out when it pulled back.

If this type of interaction is to be penalized with 50 point hits then we may as well coat the robots in bubble wrap.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?featur...jjQwkc#t=12 9

[CENTURION]

Oh yeah, looking at the footage, I definitely wouldn't fault you for that one (But then I'm not a Ref ).

They were moving under their own power, and the block came out when they were turning, not being pushed.

You know, I wouldn't be very surprised if FTC eventually followed in FRC's footsteps and started requiring some sort of bumpers. But then, that would only encourage the people who call it "FRC lite".