This year we need instant replay

[Bill Moore]

Originally Posted by Petey

Since when did fun and competition preclude accurate playcalling? They're not mutually exclusive.
--Petey

But, at the FIRST events I have attended, I have witnessed accurate playcalling.

It isn't that the referees "missed" something. Usually they saw the exact play that is disputed, and usually from a better vantage point than any camera or other spectator. It's the interpretation of what was viewed that is the dispute. A camera won't change the interpretation of a rule.

The teams need to discuss a questionable call with the referee based on the interpretation of the rules.

Let's play Devil's Advocate for a moment:
How many teams, in videotaping their matches, would be willing to rush up to the referee after they win a match, and provide video evidence that they actually should have lost the match?

If you claim to want "accurate playcalling" for a competition, you must be willing to do this. Otherwise, you just want "accurate playcalling" when it benefits the preferred team. (Preferential referee accuracy)

Instant replay should be used just as vigorously to prove you lost a match as to prove you won one. That's a tough pill to swallow, but it is an honest one.

[Jack Jones]

In Detroit we were eliminated in the semifinals on a thirty-point penalty.

At West Michigan we were never paired with any seeded teams, yet faced them a couple times each in the quals. We ended up seeded eighth and got creamed.

At IRI some early ten pointers took us out of contention and we didn’t get picked.

At Kettering our alliance partner got stuck in a goal while touching a tetra and took us out in first match in the quarters. In the second match the autoloader attendant was daydreaming with ten seconds left – jammed our partners and us up – we both ended the match a second or less from scoring the winner.

At Rah Cha Cha our partner took a ten-point penalty that forced us to play a third match in the quarters. Our other partner lost all function in their mechanism so they went out and played defense. We ended up champions.

Now to you the truth, I can’t say which event I enjoyed more. They were all good. A reversed call or two due to instant replay or vociferous protest might have changed an outcome, but it could not have made things one bit better.

So go ahead and have instant replay. I’m still going to ref. I’m still going to mentor. It won’t change a thing from my point of view. There will still be winners and losers. The winners will be the ones who go away happy. The losers will be the ones who feel they got screwed.

[Ashley Christine]

I dont really think that a replay would be needed. We have refs to make calls, and if they didnt see something happen or didnt know the rules, well... I guess it happens. No one is perfect.

Plus, if you had replay... it would deffinately draw out the events, think about how many teams would want to argue calls. I think it would cause a bunch of trouble to be able to change a call.

I say just give the refs a break, they are doing the best that they can, and I know I appreciate it.

Replay/video isnt a BAD idea, its just not a GOOD idea for FIRST.

[Wayne C.]

FIRST does have instant replay. Its called the off season.

We all come out to play again and have fun. The stiff regulations of the official season are relaxed.

Ramp Riot did it perfectly this past weekend- like Outback- "No Rules- Just Right"

WC

[Stu Bloom]

NO !

[petek]

Originally Posted by Wayne C.

FIRST does have instant replay. Its called the off season.

We all come out to play again and have fun. The stiff regulations of the official season are relaxed.

Ramp Riot did it perfectly this past weekend- like Outback- "No Rules- Just Right"

WC

Speaking as a RR ref, thank you Wayne! I think you may have pointed out one area which FIRST can address: too many rules. At RR, the focus was on throwing penalties only where people's and robots' safety was at stake. If this was FIRST's prime directive to the refs, I think most of the calls for instant replay would go away.

Refereeing Triple Play was hard work. So much happens so fast all over the field, it is easy for the refs to miss things. I know there were a couple of times that tetras broke or were descored in front of me that I didn't see until it was too late to know for sure how it happened, because I was watching to see if the human players were touching the robots, or there was heavy robot contact distracting me. My hat's off to everyone who volunteered to ref this year!

Slightly off-topic, but as an off-season ref (PARC and RR), I have a couple of peeves with FIRST's rule-making:
- There are a number of penalty rules for Triple Play which could be relaxed or eliminated without much effect on the game (does it really matter if the human player is touching their tetras during autonomous play?).
- Releasing the rules as a "work in progress", with many interpretations and revisions throughout the season seems to create a lot of confusion.
- Leaving obviously contentious issues poorly-defined, such as for robot tipping. These should be clearly defined so that the refs are clear as to what is acceptable and what is not.

[dlavery]

Originally Posted by Stu Bloom

NO !

Yeah, what Stu said.

[Billfred]

Originally Posted by dlavery

Yeah, what Stu said.

Wait a minute, did Dave just say something flat-out? Like something that didn't cryptically refer to a hint that will still not make any sense whatsoever four weeks into build?

I knew that slice of pizza I had the other day tasted funny.

[Rich Kressly]

Stu for President!
Please go see the other 437 threads where I explained my views on this topic.
We are SUPPOSED to be actively engaged in a culture-changing activity that focuses on what is truly important in our society so all of mankind makes progress.

How on EARTH would instant replay ever help get that done?
It would only INCREASE the incidences of red-faced people who want to have calls changed (because we've elevated the importance of the on-field competition) and ultimately we'd become this angry bunch of individuals, lose the overall message, and turn into what we all see WAY too much of in our community athletic programs.

We are different, on purpose, for a reason. No one in FIRST should EVER forget that.

OK....rant over.... carry on

[Katie Reynolds]

Originally Posted by Billfred

Wait a minute, did Dave just say something flat-out? Like something that didn't cryptically refer to a hint that will still not make any sense whatsoever four weeks into build?

... Unless, of course, he was referring to something else Stu said in a different post.

[Tim Delles]

I must agree with Jay on this one. Being a 229er, in High School and now as a mentor, we have always been told that the refs do there best job. There should never be argueing about what a ref calls, they are doing the best that they can. As Andy and some others said, if you think there should be Instant Replay put into the game, just think about what the refs already have to go through. In addition it would go against the rules of FIRST, were every year it is known that the refs decisions are final, as there decisions and calls should be respected anyways.

[Jessica Boucher]

Ok, is everybody breathing? Good, you better be.

This is a subject that comes up every year, and as many posts previous have stated, it's not entirely feasible for all of the competitions to make this accommodation due to various types of limited resources: time, volunteers, and money.

There are many ways to make a difference in the refereeing process, many of which have been stated, and some of which have no place at this time of year. It is, quite honestly, too deep in the schedule to make a global accommodation for this in 2006. If you would like to recommend it for 2007, I'm sure your local team forum would be happy to listen, which is the most appropriate time frame for this request to be handled correctly.

Thank you for bringing it up for discussion, but the question has been explored, a general consensus has been achieved, and there are many more productive ways to spend our time right now. Let's move on.

[Tom Bottiglieri]

I think the bottom line is: Who really cares?

Build a robot.
Go to the event.
Have Fun.

If winning that individual match is more important to you than being there in the first place, then I believe you've got your priorities in the wrong spot.

[Jon Jack]

I agree that there should be some sort of review. Last year in Vegas there was a match we were in that had a questionable penalty, we asked to have it reviewed and the judges refused. The penalty was a 25 point penalty and it lost us the match.

[Jay Trzaskos]

Originally Posted by dlavery

Yeah, what Stu said.

Originally Posted by Billfred

Wait a minute, did Dave just say something flat-out? Like something that didn't cryptically refer to a hint that will still not make any sense whatsoever four weeks into build?

Of course, it's so simple... Dave's just copying what Stu said!! Next year we will have 2 of the exact setups on each side of the field, whichever alliance is Red go's first... they have 30 seconds to do a task and then the Blue alliance must do the exact same task on their side of the field in the same order. They then have the next 30 seconds to complete another task. Then the Red alliance goes again, copying what Blue did in theirs second 30 seconds. after that comes autonomous... using only sensors !!!


... nah, just kidding. But back to the task at hand.

JT