Curie Semifinal 1 - 3, what happened?

[slickguy2007]

Originally Posted by xzvrw2

my whole thing is, the arm wasnt attached to the robot any more tho, so how could it have been apart of the robot?

I agree, I am just stating what happened.

[Joel J]

I'm on 1114's side on this one.. not only because of the fatality suffered by their robot, but because of how consistently poor the calls were by the refs this weekend. I don't know.. 229 partially suffered from a few bad calls (scored ringers not counting, tipped alliance partners not resulting in any form of penalization, etc), but nothing really that compares to what I witnessed in the divisional eliminations as I walked around.

I'm speechless this year.

No one could have predicted how nationals turned out this year, AND FOR GOOD REASON.

The referees decisions are final-- and that has been shown by the record books, but I'll just have to say their POWER in these situations does not strongly correlate with their ABILITY to ensure that these finals calls are just-- that is, inline with what has been written in the rules.

This whole year has been weird, and I must say that I'm glad its over.

[Nawaid Ladak]

does anybody have names of the refs and what regionals they reffed at.

if these guys have never worked together this season, then i think it is fair to say that a whole team of refs should be put onto a field, not ref x from y regional and ref w from z regional...

That could solve alot of these problems for next year.

I was uncival about this in another thread, therefore there is no need for me to restate my opinion.

[Frenchie]

Originally Posted by Joel J.

I'm on 1114's side on this one.. not only because of the fatality suffered by their robot, but because of how consistently poor the calls were by the refs this weekend. I don't know.. 229 partially suffered from a few bad calls (scored ringers not counting, tipped alliance partners not resulting in any form of penalization, etc), but nothing really that compares to what I witnessed in the divisional eliminations as I walked around.

I'm speechless this year.

No one could have predicted how nationals turned out this year, AND FOR GOOD REASON.

The referees decisions are final-- and that has been shown by the record books, but I'll just have to say their POWER in these situations does not strongly correlate with their ABILITY to ensure that these finals calls are just-- that is, inline with what has been written in the rules.

This whole year has been weird, and I must say that I'm glad its over.

I am sorry to say that I agree. FIRST Teams are asked to be more and more professional as the years come by, and yet the infrastructure itself remains very amateurish. Maybe we should try and work out the few glitches that remain before trying to mass export a beta product.

Francois.

[Nawaid Ladak]

Originally Posted by Joel J.

I'm on 1114's side on this one.. not only because of the fatality suffered by their robot, but because of how consistently poor the calls were by the refs this weekend. I don't know.. 229 partially suffered from a few bad calls (scored ringers not counting, tipped alliance partners not resulting in any form of penalization, etc), but nothing really that compares to what I witnessed in the divisional eliminations as I walked around.

I'm speechless this year.

No one could have predicted how nationals turned out this year, AND FOR GOOD REASON.

The referees decisions are final-- and that has been shown by the record books, but I'll just have to say their POWER in these situations does not strongly correlate with their ABILITY to ensure that these finals calls are just-- that is, inline with what has been written in the rules.

This whole year has been weird, and I must say that I'm glad its over.

I just wanted to bring up a suggestion, Just like they have in football, why don't these refs have a booth review, just like the refs bothered to do at waterloo in qf2.4. allow a team to throw a red flag onto the field to call a challenge, just like in football, if the challenge is overturned, then it's overturned, but if the ruling stands, then that alliance loses their timeout. I think that would really help stuff like this from ever happening.

[IndySam]

Originally Posted by FreedomForce

I just wanted to bring up a suggestion, Just like they have in football, why don't these refs have a booth review, just like the refs bothered to do at waterloo in qf2.4. allow a team to throw a red flag onto the field to call a challenge, just like in football, if the challenge is overturned, then it's overturned, but if the ruling stands, then that alliance loses their timeout. I think that would really help stuff like this from ever happening.

In football they have 20 cameras covering every play and very expensive production equipment. Do you want your entry fee to double?

We have to rely on humans and humans aren’t perfect. We just need to suck up our GP and go on.

All-in-all I think the refs do an amazing job under pretty intense and stressful situation. I’m glad so many hard working people give up their vacation days and come help us play our game.

[AdamHeard]

We recieved ramming penalties for defense much less rough than that... The reffing was not consistent this year.

[Rick]

Originally Posted by Joel J.

I'm speechless this year.

No one could have predicted how nationals turned out this year, AND FOR GOOD REASON.

The referees decisions are final-- and that has been shown by the record books, but I'll just have to say their POWER in these situations does not strongly correlate with their ABILITY to ensure that these finals calls are just-- that is, inline with what has been written in the rules.

This whole year has been weird, and I must say that I'm glad its over.

I agree as well.

The tube should have counted since once the arm broke off it is considered part of the field. I use a 50 question test on rules before a 121 driver can touch joysticks. From the 4 competitions I've seen this year, the rules need to simpler and enforced.

[Steve W]

I can see that this thread is quickly going down hill. I am closing the thread till tomorrow morning so that cooler heads will prevail. When re opened please think about what and how you are saying it.

[Steve W]

I have re opened by request. Please remember that we are here to discuss facts, not to slam teams or refs. They are volunteers.

[Kate00]

I was on the field for that match, and would like to offer my perspective.

1114's arm was clearly bending back, as you can see in the video, and speaking as a defensive driver, when you are pinning someone against the rack, you can generally clearly see their arm and whether or not it is flexing/at the point of breaking. Regardless of whether or not they saw the arm flexing, it was still an excessive use of force. Excessive force is a DQ. There was no DQ.

What I found most despicable was the celebration of 48 after 1114's arm snapped off. You can't see it in the video, but it was clearly seen by several eyewitnesses, myself included. This is entirely against everything that I've ever been taught in the years that I have been in first. I know, I know, compete on the field and cooperate off the field, but celebrating when your opponents arm comes off - clearly using excessive force - that goes beyond "competing" and into "willful destruction," which was not a part of the gracious professionalism that I was taught.

Myself and several other people witnessed 48 trying to break 1114's arm off in Toronto. They then went through the pits bragging about their defense on 1114. They also played defense on 1114 during practice matches both at GTR and Championships, which was clearly witnessed.

As to the "design flaw," in the video, you can clearly see 1114's arm moving the 330 pound + friction rack. In all of the events I was at this year (Waterloo, GTR and Championships), I never saw anyone else move the rack. (Edit: never saw anyone else's arm spin the rack in a circle while attached to a spider leg). Ever. Their arm spun the rack before snapping off. I have not seen the design myself, however, this is in my mind irrefutable proof of the solid design I know that 1114 would produce.

[Alex Cormier]

Originally Posted by Kate771

They also played defense on 1114 during practice matches both at GTR and Championships, which was clearly witnessed.

Why should Defensive based bots not be able to practice what they are designed for? Yes i agree to some extent, but the intent of practice is just that, practice. They have just as much of a right to play as their robot is made to do as any other robot.

I will agree with you on some what of a front that excessive D shouldn't be played in practice matches. I see that there are two matches for practice, in one match play D on any team as possible, as much as possible. Maybe match two plays less D and roam around the other end of the field and test new ideas?

In the end, i don't care if you have a purely Offense robot or purely Defense robot; they both have the right to practice what their robot's capabilities are.

[meaubry]

Thanks Steve W. for keeping an eye on this thread - much apprciated.

Everyone - keep this one civil and relavent to the thread topic.
Discuss what happened in an appropriate manner.

I didn't witness it, as I was over at Archimedes at the time.

Carry on

[Karthik]

Originally Posted by Alex Cormier

In the end, i don't care if you have a purely Offense robot or purely Defense robot; they both have the right to practice what their robot's capabilities are.

There's another thread to discuss defense in practice matches. Let's leave this thread to talk about the direct issues and facts surrounding SF1.3. Thanks.

http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...e #post608676

[Karthik1]

I will not state my opinion on that (Curie Semifinal 1 - 3) particular match. but in regards to defense in a practice match: I think its is a good practice for teams to inform and request the other teams that they will be defending prior to a practice match. I know that my team 1504 did just that when we played defense in a practice match at nationals.