Video Review Needs to Happen Now

[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.

[bdaroz]

Originally Posted by DonRotolo

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

I would like to volunteer, as I had planned to this year, however as my son is on a rookie team I was needed far more there than the local regional.

I would just like to say, even though emotions and feelings may be running high here, everyone, I believe, wants the same goal. A positive, inspiring, experience for the students/teams, as well as the volunteers. I'm sure refs aren't thrilled to have to handle (or not) "missed" calls throughout a competition. Be it better training, more refs, video replay, better game design, or some combination thereof, we all seem to be trying to achieve a common goal of better officiating, and a better experience for everyone involved.

At the end of the day, let's remember, these are students we're trying to inspire, and volunteers who give their time and energy freely. We owe it to them to respect that, and to respect each other.

[alicen]

Originally Posted by bdaroz

Be it better training, more refs, video replay, better game design, or some combination thereof, we all seem to be trying to achieve a common goal of better officiating, and a better experience for everyone involved.

I just want to say that ref training this year was FAR improved from previous years. It was also far less forgiving!

[EricH]

Originally Posted by alicen

I just want to say that ref training this year was FAR improved from previous years. It was also far less forgiving!

Ouch, yes. I concur. And the on-the-job part (y'all call it practice day) is pretty tough too.

[XaulZan11]

I haven't read this entire thread so I apologize if it was already brought up, but which offseason event will be piloting a replay system? The best way to convince FIRST to make this change would be to do it and show them it works and is practical.

[Lil' Lavery]

Originally Posted by XaulZan11

I haven't read this entire thread so I apologize if it was already brought up, but which offseason event will be piloting a replay system? The best way to convince FIRST to make this change would be to do it and show them it works and is practical.

This I agree with 100%

[Sperkowsky]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

This I agree with 100%

I am going to break my own rule and post here again agreeing.

It is too late for a replay system this year. There could be a couple of better practices in place but I doubt it.

This is probably a thing for the big offseason events (IE Chezy Champs, Battlecry, and IRI) but we will create a system if anyone wants it.

We ran the livestream for the HHH invitational last year (A small local offseason in Long island) and would be willing to help implement a similar system if it was wanted.

[Ryan Dognaux]

Originally Posted by 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.

....

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

This is simply false. Go back and actually read my post. If you want I will gladly post a BOM breakdown of St. Louis FIRST's setup to refute the cost claim.

As far as the claim that 'it will eat up too much time' - in my opinion, above all else, the team experience needs to be the emphasis of the event. I think this is something that is forgotten by some FRC volunteers who have been doing this for decades. It's not about 'keeping the event on schedule' to the exact minute - honestly who cares if we run 15 minutes late? These students have spent countless hours, teams are spending thousands of dollars. I think the least we can do is consider this to improve event quality.

Providing the head referee another tool to make the team experience better and improve the quality of calls at the cost of 15 additional minutes (if EVERY alliance challenged a call in this theoretical scenario) is a no brainer to me.

The argument that 'stuff happens / teams need to suck it up and move on' is weak. It's another excuse to not improve the consistency of calls at events. The solution I'm suggesting gives the head referee another tool to make the correct call - which I think they are always trying to do. The head referee job is really hard. Why wouldn't we want to help them out and give them an option?

Originally Posted by XaulZan11

I haven't read this entire thread so I apologize if it was already brought up, but which offseason event will be piloting a replay system? The best way to convince FIRST to make this change would be to do it and show them it works and is practical.

I volunteer the Gateway Robotics Challenge on October 1st.

[JohnFogarty]

I'll design, setup, and man a replay solution of my own design at SCRIW here in South Carolina.

Just in case you didn't know. SCRIW is played in a high school gym. Much like district events across the country are.

[Kevin Leonard]

Originally Posted by JohnFogarty

I'll design, setup, and man a replay solution of my own design at SCRIW here in South Carolina.

Originally Posted by Ryan Dognaux

I volunteer the Gateway Robotics Challenge on October 1st.

^^^Champions right here.

[patar8746]

Thank you all so much for keeping the discussion going, I've never been the OP for anything nearly as heavily discussed or important. Anyone keeping the subject open makes the discussion bigger and thereby attracting more views, but I really have to hand it to people volunteering to put in the effort through refereeing. I also plan on volunteering as a ref as soon as I'm in a position to (haven't been able to attend an event without teams I'm involved with for years), but those of you designing and building setups and running off season events to test them have the potential to prove to FIRST that this can work, and I know if we are wrong we will admit it, but at least then we'll know, and be much more able to accept the current system. Debate has gotten heated, but people on both sides are really making me proud to be a part of the FIRST community.

TLDR you guys are pretty great.

[ATannahill]

Originally Posted by Sperkowsky

<snip>

Before anyone signs me up on vims know that I already inspect for FTC and plan on inspecting for FRC. I just became a Deans List finalist and I am going to volunteer at worlds. This is not a matter of me complaining just simply supporting the fact that stuff needs to change.

Originally Posted by DonRotolo

<snip>

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

I want to address this. Inspecting is nothing like reffing. I have done both of these jobs (and many more) in the past two years. Reffing puts you in arguably one of the toughest decision making positions many times more than any other position, often without having the ability for someone else (let alone your volenteer lead (LRI, Head Ref, etc.)) to see it happen. An inspector can call another inspector or the CSA over to look at a problem during inspection, refs rarely have the ability to have someone else see what a robot did in the first six seconds of tele-op. Don't get me started on how vastly different the training/tests are for the positions.

I'm not going to totally disregard anyone's claim that calls have been missed or that ref quality could be improved, but it will come with much less weight than the experience of people that have the experience of being in the role for many years.

[jajabinx124]

Originally Posted by XaulZan11

I haven't read this entire thread so I apologize if it was already brought up, but which offseason event will be piloting a replay system? The best way to convince FIRST to make this change would be to do it and show them it works and is practical.

+1

Best way to find out whether it is practical or not.

[Angeliukm]

Originally Posted by Kevin Leonard

So here's a situation that occurred last year:

2015 Tech Valley Regional, 20-5254-3624 had an incredible match in a make-it-or-break-it 2nd quarterfinal match, placing 4 stacks total for the first time. When the scores came up, it had our alliance with something like 119 points, and as we analyzed the score, we realized they had only credited us for 3 stacks!

We sent some students to the question box, and the referees came together and discussed that they did remember us having 4 stacks up.

From my understanding of the situation (I was not in the question box nor in the referee's discussion), they then looked at video provided by two different teams that showed 4 stacks built 5-6 high and ended up reversing the call of that match, which ended up allowing us to move on to the semifinals.

Tech Valley is a generally relaxed event, with some great referees and teams who are always gracious, and I don't think anyone involved thought what the referees did was unfair. Am I wrong?

I recognize that I'm a bit late to this thread, but I'd like to clarify the situation at TVR last year. As the team's drive team mentor for that year, I sent our student coach to the question box after we realized that there had been a scoring error and stood at the side of the field while the head ref talked to our students and then called a meeting with the other referees to discuss the match. While one of our alliance partners had a picture of the field at the end of the match with the correct number of stacks and we had a video, we neither asked the referees to look at them nor did the refs use them to make their decision. Luckily for us, the TVR refs did the right thing, both in terms of making a fair call and following the letter of the rules. Had that call gone the other way, I'm sure the aforementioned picture would have ended up on CD in a thread very similar to this one. I fully understand the sentiment behind the OP, as the desperation and lack of control our alliance felt trying to get the match rescored isn't something I'd wish on any other team. However, it seems to me that posts like these are best made a couple of days after the event once everyone has gotten some sleep and emotions aren't running as high on either side.