[moderated]: Worst Call Ever and Congratulations from San Jose

[Gordon Bell]

I must say that I am stunned that any FIRST alumni would post such an irresponsible and unprofessional post without knowing all the details.$@# What you have posted is clearly based on some preexisting bias you have, contains a certain degree of ignorance (stating incorrect facts and not knowing the details of what he is posting), and is borderline slanderous. You're agenda here seems clear to me.


I have been involved in FIRST having been a referee and head referee at 6 or 7$@# competitions over the past 4 years.$@#$@# While I have never posted on ChiefDelphi before, I will make an exception to address the post made by Mr. Katzer.$@# While I don't feel any need to defend the decision we as a group of referees made, I do feel that the teams involved and the accusations of Mr. Katzer to deserve a response.

FIRST - I had a great group of referees in San Jose, and the majority of them had already refereed 1 or 2 events already this year.$@# The penalty in question was called about 30 seconds into the match.$@# The referee clearly held up a flag, waved it, and then dropped it on the floor as was done the entire competition.$@# The fact that you claim to have been standing on the side of the field and didn't see the flag shows that you were not paying attention quite as well as you claim.$@#$@# Let me explain this for you:

A blue robot hit a red robot in the human player loading station while a human player was in process of delivering a tetra.$@#This is a very dangerous situation and therefore there is no "no blood, no foul" attitude with regards to penalties. This red robot was unpowered, as the student was off the pad.$@# This is a clear 30 point penalty, and I'm sure all would agree we'd get many complaints from that school and those parents if we never called this penalty during the event, teams got more carefree around the HP zone, a student got hit, impaled, or serious injured by such an incident.$@# Unfortunately, this exact situation was not as easy and clear as some others.

Here's a brief synopsis of what happened: A red robot was in the human player loading station.$@# A blue robot was driving across the field, holding a tetra, on their way to a goal.$@# A red robot in front of the center goal, also holding a tetra, turned and hit the blue robot to intercept them (makes sense, good strategic move).$@# While engaging the blue robot, the red robot pushed the blue robot into the dead red robot in the loading zone.$@# Our interpretation of the chain/cascade rule was that the red robot was responsible for the violation, that the blue robot was clearly avoiding the loading stations and going to score but was pushed into the zone by another red robot.$@# We are confident that there was no intention whatsoever by the red robot to do this - all six teams were playing great, they were all trying to score, and there was very little overly aggressive play in the finals.$@# Good defense at times, but nothing malicious or destructive.$@# Intentional or not, it was a rule violation, and we made the call we did.$@# You might not agree with it, but it was discussed at length before we made the score final.$@# As I'll explain later, the person you question pursued every possible option to see if there was justification for us to CHANGE our decision. Please note that during the playoffs, especially the championship match, tensions and everything is "on-the-line", but we cannot simply stop making penalty calls, especially when it comes to safety.

Second - For you to make veiled insinuations that you "saw" a discussion is so irresponsible I don't even know how to reply to that.$@# This is probably the worst acusation I have heard, and to hear it from a fellow referee is truly disappointing. To clear this up for you Mr. Katzer, the person you are questioning is the Regional Director of the event.$@# "Keeping my eyes on the field" as you put it, I completely witnessed the play in question, saw my referee (correctly) throw a flag, knew it was a unique situation because of the chain/cascade of robots, and turned to Jason to inform him that I'd like to have the rules and updates available to confirm what I felt was the rule before we post a score.$@# That was it Mr. Katzer.$@# I discussed the situation with the referees, we turned in the scorecard, I told our decision to the announcer, the scorekeepers, and the staff.$@#$@# It was entirely our decision, and in the end mine - for you to imply someone influenced our calls is disgraceful.$@# The only thing Jason Morrella did was ask us to postpone posting the score so he could take some time looking at the update and rules to ensure we had the correct interpretation of the rule - his "discussions" could result in only one thing, the score being changed and team 254 and their alliance getting a loss.$@# You don't mention that.$@# You don't mention that Jason was delaying the posting of the score on the chance that he could find a mistake which would take the win away from the team he has been affiliated with in the past. My goal was to ensure that the correct call was indeed being made. With so much on the line, we owe it to all teams to make sure of that.


Mr. Katzer, let me also point out something else to you. Referees are told that if they are unsure of a rule, they can ask FIRST staff who know the rules if they wish.$@# Regardless of what the staff tells them, they still bring up the question to The Head Referee during our after match discussion and the Head Ref makes the decision regardless of what the FIRST staff interpretation of a rule is.$@#$@# Some calls are judgment calls, and if the Head Ref and their team feels their judgment should result in a certain call - we will turn in that call regardless of if Jason, Dave Lavery, Woodie, Dean or anyone disagree.$@#

Mr. Katzer, here's another situation you had no knowledge of and which you'd be happy to know of since you have questioned his integrity.$@# After a match while we were adding up the score, a referee informed me of a flag he threw to confirm amongst ourselves if it was the right call.$@# I did not see the exact scenario because I was watching another part of the field - but this is why we have 6-8 refs.$@# In one of the last qualifying matches on Saturday, Team 254 was undefeated and going for the number one seed.$@# In this match, a close one, the 254 robot got it's wheels caught in a Tetra.$@# The ref observed their robot attempting to pick a Tetra up off of the loading station, but couldn't because the Tetra they were stuck in prevented them from getting close enough to the loading station. He was unsure of the unique situation and wasn't sure if there was a penalty because the tetra they were stuck in was touching the loading zone but not their robot - but they had never actually retrieved a tetra.$@# He asked Jason (who was on his side of the field) and Jason informed him if 254 touched the tetra without their robot touching the triangle, that he should throw a flag on them regardless of any obstruction preventing them from getting into the loading zone. Even though they had failed they had touched the tetra both times.$@# Now we would have made this call regardless of Jason's input, because the ref would have asked me anyway. When asked for input by the referee, Jason told the ref to call whatever he had seen, but that if he felt 254 had touched the tetra twice, even if it was two attempts in just a couple seconds, that should throw 2 flags on them. But understand Mr. Katzer - 254 had won that match, but lost it because of those two penalty flags, and lost the number one seed as a result.

THIRD - I am not a judge, but I was a Head Ref last year also and do remember that the Bellarmine team won the Chairman's Award and then the Championship Chairman's Award last year.$@# I don't know all the details of this award, but they obviously did enough to impress the judges.$@# It seems strange that you would question the students on that particular team and make a claim that they have everything "given" to them.$@# I have observed many great teams in FIRST doing many things to help other teams, 254 and many others.$@# If you have never been a member of that team, how in the world can you make a comment and judgment that they have everything "given to them".$@# I think you owe the students and mentors on that team, and the FIRST community as a whole an apology.$@# It is my understanding that any team that gets those awards must be doing a lot to share, to give back, to help other teams, and to be a positive team in the FIRST community.

FOURTH -We call the games as we see them.$@# We always hope there will be no penalties.$@# Sometimes there are penalties, and it's our job to call them.$@# Most our fairly straightforward, but some are close judgment calls.$@# In those situations we make the best call we can knowing that no matter what we decide, one alliance will think it was a good call and one will not.$@# You should know that.$@# You have the right to root against any team you wish, 254 and others.$@# You also have the right to disagree with a call made by referees.$@# But the instance you posted about was a close call and either way we called it would have upset one alliance.$@# As a referee, you statement that it was the "worst call ever" is childish, petty, and does not reflect well on your gracious professionalism.$@# I wouldn't ask you to agree with the call, and you have the right not to - but as a past referee you should know it was a judgment call, that we discuss all such calls with the entire ref crew before we turn in the scorecard, and that we made the decision we felt was right.$@#$@#


LAST - Your post makes it very clear that you have some issues or biases against certain teams.$@# You may not realize it, but I think most who read your post probably do.$@# You exhibited some of these biases when you refereed in San Jose last year, and unfortunately on occasion seem to let your relationships with teams, and views of other teams, impact your "judgment" while watching matches.$@# You should seriously reconsider your ability to be a referee at this point, and I would think FIRST would seriously reconsider your ability to referee.$@# You're assessment of the situation you started this post about was inaccurate and slanderous, and certainly not a post I would expect to see from a FIRST alumni who volunteers at many events (which you do and should be commended for).

To all who competed in San Jose - you should be very proud of yourself.$@# The level of competition was incredible, the skill of the drivers, the strategies of the coaches and drivers were very well executed, and teams have clearly learned how to play the game (many fewer penalties than in previous weeks).$@# The teams were very impressive, almost all were very gracious, and almost exhibited good sportsmanship throughout the event.$@# Congratulations to all of you, you make FIRST the truly great program that it is.$@#

As for me, I will continue to VOLUNTEER each year, even though every missed day of work costs me lost wages. That's correct, I am "paying" to do this tough job, taking time away from not only my job, but also taking time away from my family. I appreciate the posts of support on this thread~

Gordon Bell
Head Referee from Silicon Valley Region