|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Curie Semifinal 1 - 3, what happened?
Alright ill give my two sense. I am the operator for 1523. AS the other team started pinning 1114 we were screaming 1 2 3 4 5 all the way until 13 or 14 of them pinning 1114. The arm did eventually snap and no penalty was given except one 10pt for pinning. At the beggining of the round in Auton i am almost positive more then 50% of the ringer was on the spyder leg. Yet the judge "elboed it off". Stuff happened that match that is in the past and it was a fun experience. Improvements can be made though.
|
|
#2
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Curie Semifinal 1 - 3, what happened?
In order to be HANGING, the ring must be fully supported by the spider leg, not by the spider foot and/or robot. The referee (not judge!) was 100% correct in removing the keeper. READ THE RULES!!!
|
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Curie Semifinal 1 - 3, what happened?
You dont need to get mad about it "READ THE RULES" trust me ive read them more then once. You were not in the position that all of us were in. We should of had a re-match yet we could not. Yet when 330 played in the finals and their arm broke off they got a re-match. That is what disapoints us most!!!
|
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Curie Semifinal 1 - 3, what happened?
Like i said overall the oposing alliance was an excellent alliance
|
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Curie Semifinal 1 - 3, what happened?
Quote:
As far as the re-match in the finals, 330's arm did not get broken off in that match, there was a "field fault", perhaps related to scoring (I've not heard a clear explanation). Having a robot's arm break off is not a reason for a re-match, it may be a reason to expect a DQ, but that is a referee's judgment call. The head ref has to decide that the action was strategically aimed solely at causing damage to the robot. Without any knowledge of a "history" between Teams 48 and 1114, the head ref may not be looking for this sort of behavior (which I believe is what Tom Line is saying in his post). |
|
#6
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Curie Semifinal 1 - 3, what happened?
A lot has been said about the refereeing here.
I'd like to say a few things because I do not believe this thread has been very fair to the refs. Refereeing is a very difficult and thankless job. No matter what you call, there will be those that disagree with your call (sometimes vehemently). Referees are human, and sometimes miss a call or make a call in error, this is a fact of life and we (as players, people, and teams) have to accept those calls (just consider it another lesson learned from FIRST). In many of the calls, the referee has to make a judgement call as to the intent of the action (did they mean to break the arm? was that ram intentional? etc). This is especially difficult in the heat of competition. I truely believe that the referees do a great job in FIRST, and if they make the wrong call once in a while ... well, it just proves that they are human. There will always be bad calls. There will always be different interpretations of the rules. There will always be the human factor. And I'll challange anyone who believes they can do a better job of refereeing to volunteer next year. |
|
#7
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Curie Semifinal 1 - 3, what happened?
Quote:
I usually do not like posting these things because CD doesnt take criticism too well. However, I hope next year is a better year. |
|
#8
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Curie Semifinal 1 - 3, what happened?
Quote:
We should not 'Bash' the refs for any bad calls, but instead talk to them (calmly amd politely) when the match is over, letting them know our point of view. Bashing them here on CD is poor form. To relate this to professional baseball, Different umpires will call different strike zones. A pitcher has to adjust his game to the different strike zone even though the rules are explicit as to what a strike zone is. Lets not play the 'blame' game. Lets congratulate the referees for all the calls that they got correct, because it is that difficult to be a referee. |
|
#9
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Curie Semifinal 1 - 3, what happened?
Quote:
NFL referees are paid professionals. They have rules that don't change from year to year. Many of them are veterans with decades of experience. They have the wonderful benefit of instant replay. And yet, despite all of this, there's still almost always atleast one bad call in a game. From someone's point of view. I believe that most of the FRC refs do take their jobs seriously, do take responsibility for their calls, and do come as close as humanly possible to being as perfect as some people seem to think they should be. Mostly, I think people should step back and consider whether they really should be expecting MORE bad calls than there are. |
|
#10
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Curie Semifinal 1 - 3, what happened?
Quote:
We live in a world where distrust has made life more difficult than it needs to be. Hence the need for so many laws, so many pages in a contract and so many people needed to protect our interests (lawyers, judges, police, etc.). I'd like to think that within the FIRST community, a higher level of trust exists than in the rest of the world. For the most part, that's been my experience and that's why I believe in FIRST. |
|
#11
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Curie Semifinal 1 - 3, what happened?
First of all congratulations to team 1114 for another great year, and all the teams on both the alliances. Let us keep the discussion down to facts without our own perceptions and emotions involved.
I was not at the Championships but I have personally seen 1114's bot at GTR and it was one of the best and most robust bots there. This has been their tradition since they started FIRST, as 1219 is not far from them in the pits. Therefore, it would not be appropriate to doubt their engineering or robustness. I think the biggest question in this situation is not about whether the calls should have been different or whether the pinning was illegal. These things are too objective to debate about; they are in the past now. As teams in FIRST we realize that things happen and the show must go on. However, reading this thread I have read 3-4 reports of a single person or a group of people witnessing celebration from the team in question (48) after this unfortunate event. As a historian if you were to write about this event, those eyewitnesses will weigh heavily in your decision. I personally think that this hurts team 1114 greatly because such a matter should not be celebrated upon and it shatters the great image of FIRST held in our hearts. I am not going to make a judgment as to if the celebration was because of the arm and I would assume and hope that there is a better explanation. But I would definitely want to hear this explanation. |
|
#12
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Curie Semifinal 1 - 3, what happened?
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|
#13
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Curie Semifinal 1 - 3, what happened?
Quote:
How many mistakes before THE question can be raised? |
|
#14
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Curie Semifinal 1 - 3, what happened?
I already posted once regarding why I think the refs did a good job. If they had DQ'd 48, I'm sure we'd be arguing in the other direction. We've already had several discussions regarding lack of DQ's or DQ's without warning. A bit pointless, really.
Let's move on to how this can be prevented in the future. Clarify and simplify the rules. I think everyone would agree that this year had far to much rules-lawyering and unhappy folks as a direct result of the rulebook growing to the point where it's become VERY difficult to be proficient at it. When people in this post who are claiming to "know" the rules are disagreeing, the point is pretty much proven. Simplify the rules. For instance you could disallow pinning entirely. You may push, you may not pin. You may block, you may not pin. You may not hold someone stationary against ANY object. Period. End of story. NO more counting, no more guessing. While your at it, take a good hard look at the wiring rules, and every other ruleset in the game, and SIMPLIFY it to get us out of this whole rules-lawyer game so many people are falling in to. The quality of the refereeing of the matches is DIRECTLY proportional to the complexity of the rules. |
|
#15
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Curie Semifinal 1 - 3, what happened?
Quote:
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| What Happened to Class? | Beth Sweet | General Forum | 19 | 26-01-2006 23:52 |
| What Happened to Broadcast | sanddrag | Championship Event | 4 | 17-04-2004 16:24 |
| What happened at IRI? | Jeff Rodriguez | Off-Season Events | 38 | 24-07-2002 18:39 |
| What Ever Happened... | archiver | 2001 | 0 | 24-06-2002 03:35 |
| What Happened to SOAP? | Tom Schindler | General Forum | 3 | 14-06-2001 21:25 |