Let's hear it for the Refs !

[alicen]

Originally Posted by headlight

This is different from the referees, whose job is to enforce the rules as they are written,

When rules are written "FOUL if INTENTIONAL" and then I have .01 seconds to decide if that was intentional, which foul/tech foul/YC/RC to give, look down to hit the button on the panel, radio my head ref to inform them, and still watch everything else going on in my area, I'm gonna mess up once in a while.

Originally Posted by headlight

the referees aren't a team,

I'm sorry, but yes we are. We have to work as a TEAM to try our best to make good calls, get everything right, and provide the best experience possible for all teams at an event.

Originally Posted by headlight

they aren't a player, they're supposed to be an unbiased entity, not play the game, they're basically an extension of the field.

The unbiased entity part is where I think it gets tricky to ask heavily involved mentors to step up and ref at events. They want to watch their team do well, so they might not pay as much attention to their end of the field.

Refs are an extension of the field in a weird sort of way, but the field also breaks sometimes. And under certain circumstances that means a match is replayed. Like broken field bits, refs can "break" too and mess up. Sometimes this means a score/penalty/foul/etc is changed after the fact.

Originally Posted by headlight

So when the referees seem like they're influencing the game too much it gets frustrating.

I think you're meaning influencing as refs missing crossings for example, or calling are lots of fouls? I'll say that yes, a ref can influence a game heavily by missing crossings, but I won't say that it's the ref's fault if many fouls are called. I put that one squarely on the GDC for the game, or the team for their choice in strategy

side note -- I will continue to be a ref for as long as I can, however I will probably be picky about the events I ref at, knowing that one bad call could land me in the Hall of Ref Shame on CD

[catmanjake]

Originally Posted by rich2202

I agree, but sometimes that is First's only option.

I was chatting with Refs at Champs, and they said they could have used more Refs. One Head Ref complained about a Ref not being up to the task.

IMHO, each seasoned team (teams at least a few years old) should be required to put a Mentor through Ref Training. All the Refs would be required to ref a few practice matches. It would give the Head Ref the option to sub-out a Ref if a Ref is not up to the challenge. The trained Mentor gives the Team a different perspective on the game.

BTW: I also think that every team (including rookie teams) should put a Mentor through Robot Inspection certification, and have to complete the inspection checklist for their team's robot before Stop Build. It would help to identify problems in advance, and guide building of the robot next year (make certain things more easy to inpsect).

If any of the above as far as mentors going through Robot Certification or Ref training is truly available, I would appreciate someone private messaging me how to go about this. I know I seen calls this year that i wasnt sure about but it was more about trying to find out why something was or wasnt called versus complaining about a call. Anytime a team member (student or mentor) questioned something, i tried to find info on CD or on Questions and Answers website.

Our team went to a practice regional and a handful or so teams were told their robots were not in compliance. This was vety near the end of build season. I know most of them were new teams or 2nd year teams that had not dealt with bumpers before. I could see myself going through inspection training and then visiting local teams on a weekly or do schedule to give them insights into how well they are doing to pass an inspection.

Let me know your thoughts.

[headlight]

Originally Posted by alicen

When rules are written "FOUL if INTENTIONAL" and then I have .01 seconds to decide if that was intentional, which foul/tech foul/YC/RC to give, look down to hit the button on the panel, radio my head ref to inform them, and still watch everything else going on in my area, I'm gonna mess up once in a while.

Oh completely, the rules this year had a fantastic amount of subjective conditions attached to them.

I'm sorry, but yes we are. We have to work as a TEAM to try our best to make good calls, get everything right, and provide the best experience possible for all teams at an event.[/quote]

My phrasing was poor, I should have used the term "player", "competitor", "contestant", or "alliance" instead to make the meaning even more clear. I hoped that the rest of that paragraph would have provided sufficient context for the use of the word "team".

Originally Posted by alicen

Refs are an extension of the field in a weird sort of way, but the field also breaks sometimes. And under certain circumstances that means a match is replayed. Like broken field bits, refs can "break" too and mess up. Sometimes this means a score/penalty/foul/etc is changed after the fact.

I completely agree. However, I think the instances of the refs changing a call are significantly rarer than the refs making a poor call. Its a shame and I understand that the refs are doing the best with the resources they have, which is why I think the refs need more resources (as described in the last two paragraphs of my post).

Originally Posted by alicen

I think you're meaning influencing as refs missing crossings for example, or calling are lots of fouls? I'll say that yes, a ref can influence a game heavily by missing crossings, but I won't say that it's the ref's fault if many fouls are called. I put that one squarely on the GDC for the game, or the team for their choice in strategy

You got it! Missed crossings as well as weird calls regarding crossings and boulder possession were probably the most irritating parts of this game.

I am going to assume that you didn't quote my last two paragraphs because you agree with them. From my perspective the refs are often setup to fail by the requirements of their role, the rules, and the regulations governing their position. I hope that someday referees are able to be used to their full potential, making the subjective calls necessary to influence the way the game plays and keep it fair and fun for all entities involved. Until then, I'm going to have to keep explaining to parents that the question box is really just for clarification, not contesting a penalty. And that yes, I know they missed it, I know you got it on video but unfortunately it doesn't matter because refs don't review video, yes that is an actual rule, I'm sorry, please don't go talk to them, it really won't change anything.

Every year the refs put up with one of the most difficult jobs on the field. I appreciate their contribution and hope that someday there is a game where their jobs are are appropriate in scope and setup for widespread success.

[bdaroz]

Originally Posted by rich2202

IMHO, each seasoned team (teams at least a few years old) should be required to put a Mentor through Ref Training. All the Refs would be required to ref a few practice matches. It would give the Head Ref the option to sub-out a Ref if a Ref is not up to the challenge. The trained Mentor gives the Team a different perspective on the game.

BTW: I also think that every team (including rookie teams) should put a Mentor through Robot Inspection certification, and have to complete the inspection checklist for their team's robot before Stop Build. It would help to identify problems in advance, and guide building of the robot next year (make certain things more easy to inpsect).

I completely agree with both of these. I'd really like FIRST to consider not making the ref/inspection training materials "hidden" or secret (or whatever non-public status that have now). And who knows, perhaps they'll get a few more volunteers out of the process as well.

[Kevin Leonard]

Wow this thread fell apart quickly.

Referees are definitely underappreciated. But it's really easy as a competitive person to throw the blame for your loss somewhere else, especially if it seems like a controversial call made all the difference.

My final year as a student in 2014, we were eliminated at the championship event on foul points alone. I was furious at the time, and I ended up crying in the pits, snapping my safety glasses in half, etc. (Not my proudest moment)

In my mind I had put in hours and hours of work with the goal of a championship in mind, then we lost because of "stupid fouls".

In hindsight I know it wasn't any referee's fault, and upon reviewing match footage and such, I can see why a referee called what they did.

And I think that last part is key- looking at the situation from the referee's point of view. Referees are just trying to enforce a set of rules handed to them. Some are subjective, some are based entirely on intent, and some are called differently event-to-event.

And there aren't a ton of sports where referees never make controversial calls. Even seasoned referees at sports that have been around for ages make mistakes, and you expect referees that learned the game less than 5 months ago, oftentimes a day or two prior to be infallible?

Criticism is okay, as long as it's constructive and considerate, not fueled by anger. Referees are people too, and I don't know a single referee who isn't doing their best to make the right calls at all times.

[EricH]

Originally Posted by catmanjake

If any of the above as far as mentors going through Robot Certification or Ref training is truly available, I would appreciate someone private messaging me how to go about this.[...]

Our team went to a practice regional and a handful or so teams were told their robots were not in compliance. This was vety near the end of build season. I know most of them were new teams or 2nd year teams that had not dealt with bumpers before. I could see myself going through inspection training and then visiting local teams on a weekly or do schedule to give them insights into how well they are doing to pass an inspection.

Let me know your thoughts.

Inspection and ref training typically is released in late build season, and is only available to inspectors and refs respectively.

So, your best bet is to figure out who your area's LRI typically is (seeing MN, you'll want to PM Jon Stratis), and say "Hey, I would like to inspect next year, can I run through some practice in the offseason?" And then you volunteer in VIMS for a regional. Similar for the refs, though for that you'll just contact your local offseason about volunteering as a ref. (If they can't take you, ask who the head ref is, and contact them directly. Works wonders.) Then you put in in VIMS. Side note, don't do both at the same event. Trust me, it's not fun, particularly on practice day.

That being said, I know that the local pre-bag scrimmage in my area had one ref (me, having passed the training the previous night) and two inspectors (my dad, and myself). The purpose of that scrimmage is to get teams on the field and tell them what they need to fix, while they have a few days to do the fix. We found some possible pretty serious issues there, and I saw every one of those teams in competition later that year. Very few of them still had those issues, because they Knew about them, and they could Plan to deal with them.

[draconar]

Background: I've been a ref since 2008 at different events with different ref crews and head refs. Before that I was a student on a team for three years (Hi Alicen!), including time on the drive team.

I appreciate the sentiment from the OP, but I think it's perfectly reasonable and understandable for people to post questions about close calls. Most of the discussion is constructive, and as a ref I'm interested to see how the rules are interpreted by teams.

That said, in many posts relating to questionable calls, I see comments like "refs don't care about the teams" or the idea that refs are out to call as many fouls as possible. FIRST is a big place, but I've never met a ref with that attitude. From the refs I've volunteered with, I get the same attitude: I want teams to succeed. I want them to play fairly. I want to give teams who have put in the effort to understand the rules the game they deserve. And I hate when penalties swing a close match.

At the same time, I'm not perfect. I'm not a professional -- although I do put in hours of training and take time off work because I believe in FIRST's values. Have I missed calls this year (and other years)? Absolutely. Did I miss a few crossings over a few hundred matches (not even counting the poorly designed sally port)? Yes.

Originally Posted by headlight

However, I think the instances of the refs changing a call are significantly rarer than the refs making a poor call.

After the match is over, this is probably true. In most cases, changing a call means replaying a match, which is suboptimal for everybody involved (not that a bad call is optimal). And when games have lots of fouls, sometimes you don't even remember what foul you called a few minutes before, much less all the circumstances. At the same time, what people don't see are the internal discussions where a foul isn't assessed, or refs reconsidering a scenario during a match and deciding to "un-call" a penalty. I've flagged things, entered a foul, and then thought for a few seconds before deciding it was legal or ambiguous enough to give the benefit of the doubt.

One last thing, to those who say that people don't target refs personally or that refs aren't driven away because of negative reactions: Several years ago, I was at an event where we DQed an alliance in an elimination match because the rules were strict that year and that's what they prescribed. It was a close call, and the head ref (and the rest of the crew) were booed from the stands. Shortly afterwards a couple CD threads were started attacking the refs for the call. The experience contradicted everything FIRST stands for (although the team later apologized), and if it had been my first year I definitely wouldn't have come back.
It isn't being thin-skinned to be affected when people tell you you're doing a bad job. And even less so when you're doing that job because you want students and this organization to succeed.

[BrennanB]

Originally Posted by Kevin Leonard

In hindsight I know it wasn't any referee's fault, and upon reviewing match footage and such, I can see why a referee called what they did.

And I think that last part is key- looking at the situation from the referee's point of view. Referees are just trying to enforce a set of rules handed to them. Some are subjective, some are based entirely on intent, and some are called differently event-to-event.

And there aren't a ton of sports where referees never make controversial calls. Even seasoned referees at sports that have been around for ages make mistakes, and you expect referees that learned the game less than 5 months ago, oftentimes a day or two prior to be infallible?

Criticism is okay, as long as it's constructive and considerate, not fueled by anger. Referees are people too, and I don't know a single referee who isn't doing their best to make the right calls at all times.

All of this. Refs have a hard job, and I can see why refs may miss fouls, and to be honest don't really fault them for it. The majority of refs are fabulous individuals that put a ton of time into understanding how to make the right calls in the right situation in order to keep things being fair.

That being said...

Bad head refs really really grind my gears. If I come up to you with the rule book in my hand to try and convince you of what I consider a correct interpretation of the rules, and the head ref feels the need to make up additional requirements beyond what is written into the ruling or is unable to come up with a reason that I am incorrect, all without changing their interpretation of the rules... That is when I become frustrated with the referees. I interpret that as a "I don't want to admit I am wrong" kind of attitude. It is unfortunate that some head refs with a lot of event experience, knowledge, and respect act this way, and unfortunately I have only had these experiences with a few of the world championship head refs. The guys that are supposed to be the best of the best and be on your side when trying to understand your positioning. These are the kinds of refs that I don't want on my field. I appreciate their contributions, but the execution of their contributions bug me.

tl;dr

97% of refs are awesome, 3% are not, and are unfortunately often in the head ref role

[alicen]

Originally Posted by headlight

I completely agree. However, I think the instances of the refs changing a call are significantly rarer than the refs making a poor call. Its a shame and I understand that the refs are doing the best with the resources they have, which is why I think the refs need more resources (as described in the last two paragraphs of my post).

Yes and no. While refs aren't supposed to talk about the calls that they do or don't make and the discussions that are had about whether or not to make specific calls, there's almost always a lot going on "behind the scenes" where the refs may change a call even without a team challenging it.
I completely agree that refs need more resources, and said since kickoff that we were going to be shortchanged with the number of refs watching the field

Originally Posted by headlight

I am going to assume that you didn't quote my last two paragraphs because you agree with them. From my perspective the refs are often setup to fail by the requirements of their role, the rules, and the regulations governing their position.

You are correct, I agreed with what you said, I mostly just wanted to clarify a few points. And yes, refs are set up to fail, the position is one of very little mercy, but it's sooo much more fun to be right where the action is

Also, Hi Michael! I didn't know you were still reffing! You should come on down to one of the new PCH District Events sometime!

[Chief Hedgehog]

Thank you Refs and all the rest of the Volunteers that make FIRST happen!

[Madison]

Originally Posted by alicen

I completely agree that refs need more resources, and said since kickoff that we were going to be shortchanged with the number of refs watching the field

Do you believe you were able to convey this information to people who could make a difference? Was your feedback acknowledged or acted upon?

[FrankJ]

Originally Posted by bdaroz

I completely agree with both of these. I'd really like FIRST to consider not making the ref/inspection training materials "hidden" or secret (or whatever non-public status that have now). And who knows, perhaps they'll get a few more volunteers out of the process as well.

I can only speak for inspector training. But there is very little hidden. There is LRI training at First headquarters. Individual LRIs can train there inspectors, but there is no formal training, just a test of robot rules. The best resource is the inspection checklist. It is published mid build. I strongly recommend every team post a copy in their build site. If you can legitimately check off every item, chances are you will fly through inspection.

[GaryVoshol]

I'll just say that on the soccer board I frequent, the sentiment from teams is that they lose because of the refs, and win in spite of the refs.

We're the only "team" that can never win, because you can't make everyone happy.

[Padava]

Originally Posted by Kevin Leonard

Referees are definitely underappreciated. But it's really easy as a competitive person to throw the blame for your loss somewhere else, especially if it seems like a controversial call made all the difference.

The way I see it, FRC has a lot of factors beyond your control. Maybe the schedule doesn't go your way, maybe the refs made a bad call.

The thing is, you can't focus on what you can't control. Time and effort spent complaining about refs won't make your bot or teams attitude better.

It's frustrating to lose because of a refs call, but when it happened to me in 2014, I asked myself "was it really the refs fault?" I tried to think of all the things our team could have done better. Raking higher, making a better pick list, building a better bot, and driving better. Rather than focus on a factor beyond my control, I focused on how I could influence the team next year to a point where factors beyond our control could be ignored.

Its kind of like when a single player "messes up" a game in football by missing the last second field goal for the tie. He isn't truly the one at fault. Sure he misplayed, but his teams defense could stopped more plays or their receivers shouldn't have dropped passes.

I never liked playing the blame game. I feel a lot more can be gained we always look inwards for who to pin the blame on.

[alicen]

Originally Posted by Madison

Do you believe you were able to convey this information to people who could make a difference? Was your feedback acknowledged or acted upon?

Nobody has ever asked me that!

I'm lucky enough that volunteering for FIRST is a family affair (mom is head ref, dad is scorekeeper), so we talk openly about many, many things. One of which was that we felt that there would not be enough refs on the field to make reffing easier. (We've said the same thing for other games during other years as well). My family agrees with me, but we've all been doing this long enough that we just do our best to know the rules and make as few bad calls as possible.

There have been a few times throughout our volunteer history where my head ref would throw her hands up and say "I'm doing it this way because it will give the teams a better experience."

I don't believe refs who aren't head refs have a decent avenue to give feedback to FIRST and the GDC on their experience (what was hard, easy, what was not fun, what they would suggest changes for, etc).

In short - no my feedback isn't acknowledged and no, nothing is acted upon.