Video Review Needs to Happen Now

[Kevin Leonard]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

So, your solution to the time delay is to add additional volunteers? With a potentially different interpretation of the rules, and who quite possibly did not see the event first-hand given that they were reviewing another match?

You're essentially adding another "key volunteer" position. Something that many events already struggle to fill.




So, the district system is over then? Because you're not going to find many high school gyms with the scaffolding/catwalk to support an overhead camera like that. Heck, I'd bet more than 50% of regionals would have to find new venues as well, as plenty of college gyms and convention centers wouldn't be able to support that.


I've watched plenty of videos. Mistakes will always be made, but mistakes are part of any sport. Not just FRC. Video replay is not a panacea to fix those officiating errors, which is my point. It's a lot of added cost and complexity, for minimal return. There's still plenty of opportunity for blown calls. Anyone who has followed the NHL this season, and its roll out of expanded video review, will attest to that. More people are complaining about the additional video review than any other officiating issue this season.


That "simple solution" isn't viable in the majority of FRC venues. That simple solution doesn't solve anything regarding interactions underneath bumpers. Specifically, that system cannot answer close calls in terms of CROSSINGS this year, because it cannot see underneath the frame/bumpers of a robot to know if its wheels fully cleared the defense.

I believe Ryan Dognaux explained a pretty low cost solution to this problem.

And all you seem to be doing right now is attempting to refute someone's position using examples of challenges to the idea. Challenges that can be worked through instead of pretending they're insurmountable. What's your alternative?

If your alternative is to pretend the problem doesn't exist, I have to disagree. Students getting turned off to a career in science and technology due to a referee's call isn't something we like to see in FIRST.

Personally, I would implement a hardware solution like the one described by Ryan and only allow for official challenges and video review in eliminations to start, with each alliance getting a "challenge" coupon of some sort.

[patar8746]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

So, the district system is over then? Because you're not going to find many high school gyms with the scaffolding/catwalk to support an overhead camera like that. Heck, I'd bet more than 50% of regionals would have to find new venues as well, as plenty of college gyms and convention centers wouldn't be able to support that.

Even if we can't get the ideal view of the field, it doesn't mean there's no sense in trying to get as good a view as possible. Some things can be imperfect but still very much worth implementing due to great improvements (ie having refs that occasionally make mistakes as opposed to not having refs at all)

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

I've watched plenty of videos. Mistakes will always be made, but mistakes are part of any sport. Not just FRC. Video replay is not a panacea to fix those officiating errors, which is my point. It's a lot of added cost and complexity, for minimal return. There's still plenty of opportunity for blown calls. Anyone who has followed the NHL this season, and its roll out of expanded video review, will attest to that. More people are complaining about the additional video review than any other officiating issue this season.

I'd argue that we aren't adding much complexity with cameras already set up for streaming, and I wouldn't call overturning matches minimal return. While the NHL has had problems, when the MLB introduced video review it undoubtedly improved the fairness of the game in a huge way despite not being called up nearly as much as other video review systems.

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

That "simple solution" isn't viable in the majority of FRC venues. That simple solution doesn't solve anything regarding interactions underneath bumpers. Specifically, that system cannot answer close calls in terms of CROSSINGS this year, because it cannot see underneath the frame/bumpers of a robot to know if its wheels fully cleared the defense.

Some things are easier to call than others, and with a game like this no matter how many cameras you have there is bound to be a little ambiguity. However as I've said before, video evidence should only overturn calls if it indisputably proves the call incorrect as judged by referees reviewing the video. This may lead to a lot of improvements, and it may not, but I can definitely say that it can only help to give it a shot.

[alicen]

Originally Posted by dodar

Taking 2-3 minutes of a ref's time during 7 minute field reset wont add any time.

EricH beat me to exactly why this isn't as simple as you want to make it sound.

Refs don't just idly stand by while field reset is going on, much of the time they're running around like crazy doing 100 different things, or (heaven's forbid!) taking a half a moment to run to the bathroom so they don't delay matches

[dodar]

Originally Posted by alicen

EricH beat me to exactly why this isn't as simple as you want to make it sound.

Refs don't just idly stand by while field reset is going on, much of the time they're running around like crazy doing 100 different things, or (heaven's forbid!) taking a half a moment to run to the bathroom so they don't delay matches

The Head Ref is standing by for questions, arent they? How would this change that?

[alicen]

Originally Posted by dodar

The Head Ref is standing by for questions, arent they? How would this change that?

Head refs also need to take bathroom breaks, stay hydrated, sit down every once in a while. Sometimes the head refs have to review difficult calls with the other refs, discuss how something needs to be called, talk to various other volunteers (LRI, Scorekeeper, FTA) about field related issues, the list goes on.

I'm not trying to say that the refs are perfect, I'm just trying to say that the job is hard and instead of telling these volunteers that they have to be better, work with this amazing community to find a solution that can be implemented to make calls more consistent without adding unnecessary complexities

[Lil' Lavery]

I'm going to leave it at this. Find me one example of a student who changed career paths because of a blown call in a FIRST match.

I'm willing to wager they don't exist. Because the real value of FIRST isn't what happens on the field. It's what happens in your shop, in your pits, at your outreach events, and at your meetings. The real value of FIRST is the time spent working with mentors and teammates. It's not a 135 second period of shooting a foam ball into a fake castle.

[patar8746]

Originally Posted by alicen

side note to the line in the original post for the thread about ruining the chances of some very deserving students -- were the students on the opposing alliance not deserving? I think everyone is deserving, but please be GP!

I definitely agree that the other alliance was well-qualified, being the first seed, winning the third match without error, and bringing it to within single digits with the error accounted for. However, having lost in quarterfinals as a student plenty of times, it was easy to be GP and congratulate the winning alliance because we knew we had lost fair and square. I still believe the way that second match was judged was unfair, but ultimately as of that event the scoring dispute was handled exactly according to the rules: we sent student representatives to discuss the situation, Referees listened to all we had to say but couldn't overturn the call. The situation was played by the rules so I can't do anything to change what happened to my students.

What I can do is spread awareness of the problem and open up discussion about what the best way to solve it is. Specific implementation of a replay system will be tough to figure out, but as you said, every team is deserving. To me that means every team deserves as fair an evaluation as can be given to them, and an opportunity to advance based on those fair evaluations. A video system is one of the best ways I can see to ensure fair evaluation for this game.

Game design can make things easier, like how some years (ex: Ultimate Ascent, Recycle Rush, Logomotion) almost all scoring could be calculated based on the state of the field at the end of the match, notable exceptions being autonomous bonuses and penalties. This, however, is not such a year, so I see no other way to ensure games are always judged properly.

[It'sAScoot]

Originally Posted by alicen

"An average professional football game lasts 3 hours and 12 minutes, but if you tally up the time when the ball is actually in play, the action amounts to a mere 11 minutes."

11 minutes of play turns into 3 hours and 12 minutes. I'm fairly certain that if we reviewed video every time someone had a complaint or saw something that they felt a ref missed, regionals would take upwards of a week. Or you'd get about 4 matches total out of the whole thing.

I think you are not thinking about other factors which may influence the length of a football game. By no means is the 3:12 time due to review, but to timeouts, huddles, every 15 min of play a 30 min ish break... A regional would not lengthen if a field review took place between matches during a reset.

[dradel]

Originally Posted by EricH

That's something to bring up with the RD/VC. I'd like to think that if a ref crew was missing crossings, they'd like to know that they need to keep a sharper eye out.

By the way, you weren't looking at any spy-bots by any chance, were you?

Not spy bots. I have noticed it more with the low bar. Although I have seen it happen on other defenses as well. In one match I watched today (shame on me for not writing down the match or team numbers) one team opened the sallyport from tower side then second team drove over to door and held it while first team drove completely away second bot then drove part way into sallyport as not to let door close then first bot came in and both crossed one after another. Only one cross was given.
I am not saying things aren't going to be missed, and I am quite certain that if I were a ref I would also miss things. But I would make sure at a minimum that teams that cross in auto would absolutely get the points earned.
I see first hand how much time and effort gets put into not just the building of the robot, but the effort programming puts forth to improve and get various auto programs to work well. Again I expect things to be missed during teleop with so much going on, but in auto there isn't a single reason a cross should be missed.

[DonRotolo]

tl;dr.

No. This is a bad idea. Ignoring the cost and logistical challenges (which are not trivial), the time consumed is far too high.

It is a game folks. Not everything is rainbows and unicorns, same as real life. It can as easily go against you as in your favor, so just let it be.

Side note: If you have never volunteered as a referee, you got nothing to say.

[It'sAScoot]

Originally Posted by DonRotolo

Side note: If you have never volunteered as a referee, you got nothing to say.

That's not true. Anyone can provide input. A similar thing can be said that the referees and GDC are not taking our input because they have never lost 2 matches in a row with a game changing alliance including 2 below 40 teams against first seed. They don't know how huge of a hit that was on all of our alliance members.

[alicen]

Originally Posted by It'sAScoot

That's not true. Anyone can provide input. A similar thing can be said that the referees and GDC are not taking our input because they have never lost 2 matches in a row with a game changing alliance including 2 below 40 teams against first seed. They don't know how huge of a hit that was on all of our alliance members.

You realize that a growing number of volunteers used to be on FIRST teams when they were in high school?

I was on a team before, now I volunteer. I argue many of my points because I've been on both sides of the driver station wall.

[EricH]

Originally Posted by alicen

You realize that a growing number of volunteers used to be on FIRST teams when they were in high school?

I was on a team before, now I volunteer. I argue many of my points because I've been on both sides of the driver station wall.

Yep. Not the driver station wall, but when play that would have passed on one field as good is an alliance DQ with a disable on another, and you're in the audience... Ouch.

[Sperkowsky]

Originally Posted by It'sAScoot

That's not true. Anyone can provide input. A similar thing can be said that the referees and GDC are not taking our input because they have never lost 2 matches in a row with a game changing alliance including 2 below 40 teams against first seed. They don't know how huge of a hit that was on all of our alliance members.

Agreed. I may be slightly biased as I was on the team they picked but, that quoted statement (not yours) is invalid.

I am 16 and all of our drivers/hps/ect are also under 18. There was only 1 adult coach on our alliance.

But we know the rules well arguably better then some refs. We are personally very invested as well. This is the first time our team has gotten into playoffs at an event since 2012. 2013,2014,and 2015 were extreme failures. This year we knew we had some sort of chance so we studied the rules well. Everyone on our team took a 13 page test and had to pass. I have gotten to the point where I can read fouls off my their prefix and, overall I knew the rules and so did our alliance partners.

I volunteer when I can but I can not volunteer as a ref yet so why say that sort of stuff. It is extremely petty.

I will probably leave this thread in fears of it getting too heated and I know now its a small conflict of interest.

I entered alliance selections not thinking we were going to be picked and was extremely happy to be an alliances first pick. I won DL and our mentor won WFFA I can not ask for much more. Coming from a team that has not won an award since 2009. Time to hang up our first blue banner.

[MikLast]

Originally Posted by DonRotolo

Side note: If you have never volunteered as a referee, you got nothing to say.

And why not? Are students and other mentors/volunteers opinions worthless to you? Are they below a "Refs" saying?

Im not saying that they will be correct, but that doesnt mean that they should be ignored. Explain, and help them understand.