Yellow card / Red card usage at 2004 IRI

[Andy Baker]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

My only problem with the yellow card, is that it forces the ref into the red card call the second time, even if the action wouldnt normally be a DQ. If it occurs a second time, and the second time it could very well be an accident, or it is far less severe of an infringment, if you dont call it it looks like favoritism or not being strong enough to DQ.

Sean has a good point here. The solution to this is the fact that a "yellow card" is given for only very serious offenses that are on the edge of being DQ situations. It should be meant to be a smidge bit away from being a DQ. The refs are ALMOST giving a DQ to a team, but they are not 100% sure about it, so they give a yellow card. That is the reason I said this above:

Originally Posted by Andy Baker

...
Yellow Card
- a yellow card is a serious, public warning that this team ALMOST received a disqualification (DQ)
...

-------

Originally Posted by suneel112

But the Refs at IRI were great in that respect. They called penalties if they had the slightest doubt, which is what should be done. Hats off to them.

We appreciate the kind words, but we really only call the penalties if we are sure about the call. There were many times where the refs were not sure (they had a doubt) about something, and therefore we did not call it. This happened with tipping, assisting a goal, and ball corral encroachment.

An example:
"one of those balls might have gone in the goal after touching their robot."
"are you sure?"
"no, it was close, I am not sure"
"then we're not going to call it"

---

As for the yellow card, I like the fact that it puts the onus back on the team. There is no penalty for having a yellow card, but the team knows that if they do something similar in a forthcoming match, they will get DQ'ed.

A detail that needs to be ironed out is the quantity of yellow cards. Karthik brings up a good point above, with the idea of getting cleared yellow card status for the elimination rounds. I would vote against the idea, for 2 reasons:

1. getting cleared status for the finals lessens the severity of a yellow card
2. while there is no penalty for a yellow card in a qualification match, it WILL make an impact on the decisions of a picking team: "should we pick team A or B? they both are good... but team B got a yellow card... hmmmm"

Andy B.

[abeD]

while there is no penalty for a yellow card in a qualification match, it WILL make an impact on the decisions of a picking team: "should we pick team A or B? they both are good... but team B got a yellow card... hmmmm"

Wow good point...this would even further deter teams from trying to live to close to the edge in qualification matches becuase getting a yellow card then would definately lessen the chances of being picked. Being one penalty away from a DQ could end up costing your team a trip to elim's. Knowing this throughout all of the Q. Matches would definately have an impact on the way the drivers compete.

[dez250]

Andy, one thing i saw as working with the displays in the Aux. gym is that there was no field display in there. There was the "pit display" of rankings being projected, but the drive teams that were located in there, if were not present on the field during the explaination of a yellow or red card call is they didnt know it occured, or why it occured. Yes they have the team out on the field in the stands but i know of many teams that dont have communication between the team in stands and drive team much during a competition. So i think if this system is going to be put into work, when a red card or yellow card is given, everyone should be made aware of the reasoning behind it and it should be saved for referance so if a team asks they can be told later on why a car was given.

Also another question would be could these cards follow a team to their next competition. I know that sounds doubtful, but think about it a little. Team X at competition 1 intentionally hooks a robot and get a yellow card for it. They dont do it again at competition 1 but when Team X is at competition 2, they do the same thing over again intentionally and once again get a yellow card. Now if this second occurance would deserve a red card, but due them trying to fool the crew because they are at a new event, should they get a dq for intentionally hooking a bot a second time or will cards thrown at an event stay at that event only?

Any way i think this idea was implemented great at IRI and could be improved into a well thought out and desinged system in which could be used at any/all FIRST competition and would improve the competitions.

Nice job Mr. Baker and other IRI refs on your fair and professional job done at the 2004 IRI.

~Mike

[ngreen]

I finally gathered a my thoughts about the card system at IRI. At the prompting of Aidan I submitted new rule <g35> . This is the card system. I have hit the wall several times on some of the issue you bring up. Do it penalize to much for minor infractions especially in the elims? Should there be different penalties for different things? If you notice, my first and second drafts even have a two match time limit. After watching it play out a IRI I think how it was handled was the fairest and best way to make the system work. I'll list some answers to my questions and then why I think IRI implementation worked the best.

About the penalizing for minor infractions, it could happen. Should it happen, maybe yes maybe no. At some point we as teams have to give some discretion to the referees and accept what they hand down. We can gain a feel for the calls refs throughout the day by the yellow cards they hand out. It is kind of like playing basketball. Some days the refs will "let them play" while other time they want to "be in control of the game". Refs use a lot of discretion in making calls and are expected to make fair and balanced calls. If they didn't we wouldn't love Andy so much.

In the thoughts of different cards for tipping or ramming or other illegal actions I think we shouldn't need to tell teams what they can't do. You should know and gain a feel of how tight they are calling it throughout the day. They keep slimming the rule book for a reason. For you will read it. That whole no entangling, tipping, ramming rule should be followed. I know it can be unintentional because of the distance, line of sight, and controls of the robot. But if you've been warned and you know I might entangle with, tip, or ram that robot that could cause possible harm to it and be DQed, you should stay a little farther away or be more cautious in your controls, aka not coming full speed towards them with your arm out towards them. So no seperate penalties, it's all against the rules. Plus it helps simplify the rulebooks that some people must use to level their workbench.

After watching IRI, I think that the yellow card should carry through both to the matches and elims. Unless the elims next year a greatly different that is how it should be. This makes it fair plus adds that new dimension to the game.

I thought it was implemented great at IRI. The refs and audience knew what was going on and had a great time. Hope to see it used in some form in the coming years. And since we are on the sports penalty topic, this year red cards(soccer) next year instant replay (football). j/k..I don't think we would want that. We would go from 8 matches a regional to 5 matches just for replay.

edit: Dez, I just don't see cards following to next competitions. Clean slate. Can you imagine getting a yellow card in a match in Sacramento but being DQed in ATL for the penalty carrying over. Each competition is seperate.

[Steve W]

I also was not at IRI. Work is such a pain at times. I would like to start by saying that it is good that people are trying to make things better. I am also one person with one persons outlook on things. That being said .....

I still don't like this card thing. The refs this year had a hard enough time knowing what the rules were. Every event that I attended (6 in all) had different rulings and many rule changes. As a hockey ref, baseball ump and player of many sports, one thing is for sure. The rules must be set in concrete before the season starts and they must not change. This is not an option! For some reason FIRST believes that it is their mandate to screw up the teams and their machines by changing the rules. There is no reason for a yellow card. You state that a team does something questionable or not quite bad enough to DQ then they get a yellow card. If they do it again then they will get DQ'd. If there was no foul the first time then there is no foul the second time. They still have not broken the rules. They have, in your ( or the refs ) mind come close to the edge but not quite crossed. That's what this game as well as the world is about. Do your best WITHIN the rules and compete hard to be your best. Will you or others sometime go over the line, yes of course and then you get penalized. But to give warnings that 'you are too close for us and if you make me uncomfortable agin then I will penalize you', are just not in true sportsmanship or in the spirit of competition. Measures are in place to penalize teams that deserve it. Let's just use them and get the rules down before we start the season. Robots are to be make sturdy and designed to the game. Teams that have not protected their electronics should be DQ'd for poor design with safety being sooooo important.

Please excuse my rantings but certain things need to be fixed before we start adding more, less defined, decisions for the refs. I believe that most refs do a great job and do not favor any teams. I believe that they try to call plays according to the interpratation (spelling) they they are given at the time. I believe that they can have one of the most stressfull jobs at the event and they are not given enough credit for wat they do. I would like to thank all of the refs for their willingness to put themselves into this situation

As for the flags, forget it.

[Jeff Waegelin]

My only problem with the yellow card/red card system is that it forces the referees to call a DQ in situations where they might not normally make that call. Sometimes, you might be willing to give a team the benefit of the doubt in a questionable DQ situation, but if that team has already received a yellow card, the standard required for a DQ becomes a lot lower. Basically, I am concerned that actions that normally would not merit a DQ would receive one, simply because the team in question already got a yellow card. While not completely the same situation, I did worry that this is what we did to "Team C" at IRI. Do we want to be lowering the burden of proof for second offenses? Perhaps it is the way we want to go, to make teams consider their actions more carefully, but we must make sure that is the intended result.

[Travis Hoffman]

Whatever rule/penalty system FIRST chooses to employ, in my opinion, it must strike a fair balance between offense and defense. BOTH types of robots and strategies should be evenly encouraged, and FIRST should not favor one style of play over the other. In the case of the yellow/red card system, any yellow card you levy upon a team better be for something above and beyond the normal, competitive pushing and shoving that defensive teams like to use. I do not want to see any "let's protect the prima donna star quarterback from getting a hangnail" rules that have curtailed the aggressiveness of NFL pass rushers. I do not want the referees putting the fear of God into teams that like to employ perfectly legitimate defensive strategies. However, whenever a pass rusher delivers a blow to a QB's head or throws a late hit, I expect to see the proper penalties levied against them.

Ultimately, I still believe that regardless of what system you have in place, the human element is always going to dictate the fairness of refereeing at a FIRST event. At the IRI, we were permitted to go about our usual defensive business without any yellow cards whatsoever. I think Andy and his crew drew the proper line between normal aggressive driving and more dangerous and potentially damaging maneuvers. To be fair, this was also the case 99% of the time at most FIRST events we attended. The yellow/red card system worked at IRI because the referees were fair-minded people who communicated with each other and the involved teams to discuss each issue and reach a consensus conclusion, and they then PERSONALLY COMMUNICATED their decision to the teams and the audience. That is the one big difference I can see between FIRST ref crews and Andy's crew - Andy goes above and beyond the call of duty to explain the ruling to everyone at the event. Many times, at FIRST events, there is insufficient explanation of referee rulings, and I think this generates unnecessary uncertainty, anger, and bitterness. I believe the IRI refereeing style should be the standard practice for ALL FIRST referees. This is the type of referee performance I expect to see in place at every official FIRST event.

[Chris Hibner]

FIRST made great strides this past season in the penalty department. Before this year, everything was all or nothing - DQ/disable or no penalty what-so-ever.

The yellow card system has its merits, but once again, I feel it is a little too binary. Okay, maybe its tertiary since now there's three options - DQ, yellow card, or no penaly.

I would like to see the point penalties moved over to aggressive play. If you tip a team - 25 pts; if you ram them repeatedly - 10 pts; if you entangle - 10 pts; if you get more than X penalties (or perhaps more than Y penalty points), you're DQ'd. Obviously the point values used here are for illustration purposes only and would need to be thought of a little better.

I think it makes it much easier to call a penalty if the penalty fits the crime a little better. I like the football anaolgy: you're offsides - 5 yards; holding - 10 yards; late hit to the head - 15 yards. The current system in FIRST is: offsides - DQ&forfeit; holding - DQ&forfeit; late hit to the head - DQ&forfeit.

With the current system, its no surprise that the refs like to look the other way - who wants to DQ a team? If the ref can simply throw a flag and take take away some points, I think the calls will be made more frequently. I also like the immediate ramification of the penalty rather than having something carry over to future matches.

Anyway, that is just a thought.

[Karthik]

Originally Posted by Andy Baker

A detail that needs to be ironed out is the quantity of yellow cards. Karthik brings up a good point above, with the idea of getting cleared yellow card status for the elimination rounds. I would vote against the idea, for 2 reasons:

1. getting cleared status for the finals lessens the severity of a yellow card
2. while there is no penalty for a yellow card in a qualification match, it WILL make an impact on the decisions of a picking team: "should we pick team A or B? they both are good... but team B got a yellow card... hmmmm"

Here's a question that doesn't have an inherently obvious answer, at least for me. If a team earns a red card and gets disqualified, are they disqualified for any subsequent yellow cards? Since two yellow cards merits a dq, it seems only natural that a red followed by a yellow, would also merit a dq. (A second one in this case)

The cumulative nature of these cards will definitely make teams think twice come alliance selection time. Are we sure this is what we want? Let me give an example.

Originally Posted by Andy Baker

1 yellow card was given team B for grabbing another teams drive base and not letting go (they probably did not mean to do it, but it happened)

From the described situation, although it was accidental, a yellow card was clearly merited. The thing is, this action was an honest mistake. I don't want to end up with a situation, where a picking team sees a yellow card in the standings, and says "oh they're too risky of a pick, let's skip them", especially when the card meriting action was accidental.

I don't want to diminish the value of yellow cards to the point where they're mere slaps on the proverbial wrist, but I also don't want to see an accident, or a single poor decision by a 16 year old driver keep teams out of the elimination rounds.

[Collin Fultz]

Originally Posted by Andy Baker

while there is no penalty for a yellow card in a qualification match, it WILL make an impact on the decisions of a picking team: "should we pick team A or B? they both are good... but team B got a yellow card... hmmmm"

this happened with a team at IRI. they were debating between their pick of two different teams. Team A could/had run the field collecting balls and capping. Team B did well capping and could hold balls, they just didn't have the same dominating style of Team A. The only problem was, Team A didn't play smart, at all. And that was reflected in their yellow card (where Andy literally chased them off the field to explain their warning to them...good job AB). The drafting team drafted Team B who played well and faught hard and were only three balls and a hang away from winning it all.

seconldly...this thread rocks. really great comments from everybody. keep it up!

finally...I agree with Chris Hibner's philosophy, as long as it is done right. The 25 pts for tipping should be "intentional tipping". I know, I know...what is "intentional"? But at Nats, we had two robots in one match drive up us...we stopped driving...they didn't...and they tipped. That isn't intentional...and if you'd see our robot...you'd know we didn't design it with that in mind, the other two teams just had bigger wheels. To think that we'd have to make 10 balls just to alleviate the pain of our opponents tipping makes me scared...especially when we weren't good at getting balls and I wasn't that good of a shooter (it would have taken about 12-14 balls for me to hit 10). Pass interference isn't pass interference if both players honestly go for the ball. Refs at football games make snap decision calls, and they aren't nearly as smart as our refs (sorry if I offended football refs...my uncle is one). Our refs can take the time they need to talk it out, talk with the teams involved (never seen that happen at a football game) and make a fair call. Once again, American football rules over European football.

[Lil' Lavery]

Cards shouldnt carry over to other competitions. Otherwise one foul play at a regional can cost you your chance at a win at another event, by having a team not pick them because of the yellow card carrying over. In many cases drivers/coaches may differ from event to event due to schedule complications and such. Such an occurance happened to our team, where the only constant between our 2 regionals was our HP, and coach, both our drivers were different. If one driver is more aggresive than another, and gains a yellow card, why punish the other? But, that makes it basically an idv. penalty, not a team, and if we pursue that mentality, a) it add another lvl of complexity, and b) teams will rotate drivers to avoid being DQed.
Since intention cant be determine in 4 ot of 5 cases, I say we give them the benefit of the doubt, and not have cards carry over.
But within a competition, it needs to follow into the elims. That is when the penalties and results will matter the most. The yellow card may keep them from the finals, but if it doesnt follow them, their actions may eliminate 3 other team, instead of just holding them out. And I think in 9/10 occaisions, if a team hasnt been DQed, but has 1 yellow card, the team will select them anyway, due to the capabilities of their robot.

[JVN]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

Cards shouldnt carry over to other competitions.

I agree.

Forgive and forget.

New weekend, new regional, clean slate.

[JAH]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

Cards shouldnt carry over to other competitions.

Not to mention that would be a ton of information for the refs to keep up with from comp to comp. A lot of teams go a lot of different places, and the refs would have to have just a 3 ring binder of teams with infractions from each competition.

I was doing the video at IRI, and I personally liked the red and yellow card system. It was nice because the infraction was always explained in detail withat it was the team did to deserve it. The yellow card system just seemed to me to be a friendly reminder that whatever move isn't appropriate and please don't do it again. It was gracious, and it certainly helped the crowd understand what happened. Not to mention us video geeks who were busy running the switcher and didn't always take in what happened in the matches.

[MrToast]

I also really agree with the card idea. My props to everyone who made it work.

(I was not at IRI but) I have some suggestions based on some comments here.

I don't think only two cards should be used. I would proposed a Red, Yellow, and Black card. Black would be the least offensive, Red the most. A black card might be issued for excessive pushing, or dangerous behavior. A yellow card would be issued for repetition of violent behavior, and a red would be for violent behavior and/or excessive damage to other robots (such as partial or complete loss of robot functionality).

Each black card received would subtract 5 points from your alliance's score for the match, each yellow would subtract 10, and a red would subtract 15.

HOWEVER, a team the receives a red card would also be put on a blackball list, meaning that if they receive another red card (or two yellows or 4 blacks), then they would be DQ'd.

ALSO:
4 black cards = 1 yellow card
2 yellow cards = 1 red card
2 blacks and 1 yellow = 1 red

Advantages: A point reduction makes the threat of elimination (DQage?) that much more serious. It could have a negative impact on the standing of that team, which would be a fair penalty. This method also means that two penalites wouldn't be an automatic disqualification, which makes the refs jobs a bit easier. It allows for accidents.

Hope that makes sense...

MrToast

(and cards shouldn't carry over to other competitions. team should have enough honor not to try a stupid move like what was suggested)

[Paul H]

I liked this system because it made it easier to call the tougher calls. Take, for example, If a team is accused of tipping and immediately DQed, the ref will be less inclined to call it. This is due to the fact that it is easy to argue that it was unintentional. If they get a public warning first, and do it again, it makes it harder to argue that it was intentional.

I hope that made some sort of sense, and I hope FIRST does something like this next year.