Bad Call?

[1359th Scalawag]

Entering the Finals, my team's alliance was doing great, we got both robots onto the ramp and would have won but the referees made a strange call. Part of the ramp robot we were on had an innertube under it. They decided not to give us that 60 points and we lost the match because of the rule that states "scoring robots must not be supported by any feild elements".

The intent of that rule is so that none of the robots that are lifted hang on the game structures or sit on innertubes. In this case, the supported robots were only supported by another robot but we were not given those 60 points. We lost the next match and were eliminated from the finals.

I would like imput from other teams. Was thier judgement right?

[Taylor]

Was any part of the lifting robot touching the toroid? If not, then I believe the refs were in error.

[Joe Ross]

Please see the following thread for a discussion of what seems like the same situation: http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...ad.php?t=55742 which includes links to a question about that situation on the Q/A forum.

The Game Design Committee as clarified in updates the Q/A forum does not agree with your interpretation of the intent of the rule. As you can see from that thread, there are many people who don't like the interpretation.

[Mike Martus]

It seems that the Refs are consistant at the three regionals I have attended and called it that way at each.

[Branden Ghena]

It may not be the right call, but it seems consistent with what has been happenning at other regionals. The exact same thing happened to us at GLR.

[Lil' Lavery]

Originally Posted by tawnos23

It may not be the right call, but it seems consistent with what has been happenning at other regionals. The exact same thing happened to us at GLR.

It is the right call, as shown by the Q&A answer above.

[1359th Scalawag]

In this case though, the tube could have been removed and we would have lost no height whatsoever.

[Daniel_LaFleur]

While I don't like the way the rule is interpreted, the call is the right one (as it conforms with both the rulebook and the Q&A clairification)

**Big hint to all rampbots** Make sure the area is clear, even of deflated tubes, before deploying your ramps.

There is a good thread in YMTC
http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...highlight=YMTC

[1359th Scalawag]

Can I please get a link directly to the Q&A about this?

[Daniel_LaFleur]

Originally Posted by 1359th Scalawag

Can I please get a link directly to the Q&A about this?

http://forums.usfirst.org/showthread.php?t=5292

[Richard Wallace]

We had a similar call go against us at Boilermaker. Didn't like it, either -- but it was the right call.

Our student operator on the field asked the head ref about the call right after the match, and pointed out that had the tube been removed the robots would not have changed height. However, as the Q&A response cited above makes clear, "supported" is not interpreted by such a test -- it is implied by contact of a gamepiece under the ramp-bot, and a robot supported by a supported robot is also supported.

[spinmunky]

Originally Posted by 1359th Scalawag

Entering the Finals, my team's alliance was doing great, we got both robots onto the ramp and would have won but the referees made a strange call. Part of the ramp robot we were on had an innertube under it. They decided not to give us that 60 points and we lost the match because of the rule that states "scoring robots must not be supported by any feild elements".

The intent of that rule is so that none of the robots that are lifted hang on the game structures or sit on innertubes. In this case, the supported robots were only supported by another robot but we were not given those 60 points. We lost the next match and were eliminated from the finals.

I would like imput from other teams. Was thier judgement right?

i remember that. There was one match that a robot on the opposing aliance had a tube stuck over it (one of ours) and they got on a ramp and they didn't call it possesion and they got the full points.

[jgannon]

Originally Posted by 1359th Scalawag

Can I please get a link directly to the Q&A about this?

This is the best I can do for you:
http://forums.usfirst.org/showthread.php?t=1522

If you see the thread that Joe linked, there's a lot of discussion as to what "SUPPORTED" means, because it isn't defined in the manual. I'm pretty sure that nobody wants to carry on that particular debate any more. Personally, I don't agree with what the GDC is calling "SUPPORTED", but all I can ever ask for is that the rules are enforced consistently, regardless of how ridiculous the rule is. Tubes that are touching the underside of lifting robots have negated all lifts at every event I have attended or watched, and I applaud the refs for being consistent.

[roborat]

We were on the other side of a ruling like this in palmetto. During our semi final match, the opponent had two robots lifted and was ruled that the bottom robot was touching a field element and did not give the 60 points and then we came back for our second match and found out that the ruling had been reversed and we were now the losing team. They stated the reason was that the lifting robot could touch a field element but the two robots on the ramp were not touching anything so they adjusted the score and we lost that match.

[Lil' Lavery]

Originally Posted by roborat

We were on the other side of a ruling like this in palmetto. During our semi final match, the opponent had two robots lifted and was ruled that the bottom robot was touching a field element and did not give the 60 points and then we came back for our second match and found out that the ruling had been reversed and we were now the losing team. They stated the reason was that the lifting robot could touch a field element but the two robots on the ramp were not touching anything so they adjusted the score and we lost that match.

I watched that match on the webcast, and it was because the arm of the lifting bot was touching the player station wall. The lifting bot was not supported by the wall, and niether of the two liftees were touching the wall.