Running over a boulder foul

[philso]

Originally Posted by Jake177

Based on what I saw from the stands, the way the refs at the Hartford District called G38 seemed very fair. If a robot was in possession of a boulder and happened to drive over a second boulder, a ref would signal a five second count (similar to a pin count). After five seconds, if the robot was still in possession of two boulders, a foul was called. This kept the refs from having to judge "intent" while still allowing a case for a no-call on incidental violations. It also gave the drivers a clear signal that they were doing something wrong with time to correct it before the foul was called.

This seems to be the most fair thing, especially with the Defenses (and robots, even low ones) blocking the drivers vision. Our robot sometimes got stuck for short times on the Boulders that started at the mid-line after pushing hard to get over the Defenses back in the the Neutral Zone. Occasionally, it would end up on top of two Boulders. I also saw a robot that was supposed to play defense against us come over the Defenses into their Courtyard and got stuck on top of a Boulder. Their robot had very little ground clearance so the Boulder supported most of the weight of the robot, leaving only one wheel barely touching the carpet. They ended up stuck on "the Soft Terrain" for almost half of the Teleop period, slowly spinning in circles until the Boulder rolled out. I suspect that the driver probably thought the Boulder would just get pushed out of the way rather than going under his bumper.