|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
#31
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: NJ Elim Yellow Card Oddity
Quote:
|
|
#32
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: NJ Elim Yellow Card Oddity
Quote:
I know exactly where you're coming from with that statement though, and felt the same way when some calls were missed or made against us and didn't affect the match. When it does affect you that's really when you start to care though. It was wrong, and I am glad Kevin caught this. When things are caught in week one then that leads to updates changing the game from week to week... This is (kind of) inevitable, but also a gray area as well due to an unfair advantage/disadvantage seen by some earlier competing teams when rules change/get more clear. Bottom line, a bad call that doesn't effect you per-say is still a bad call, and the teams watching the competitions with a fine tooth comb on the rules, and trying to get a feel of how the game will be played (especially in a week one regional setting) are confused when they are made no matter how it affects the outcome of the game, or even just your one match it just happens to take place in. Last edited by Elgin Clock : 02-03-2008 at 20:57. |
|
#33
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: NJ Elim Yellow Card Oddity
Just some additional clarification on the situation. There was some comment on test prior to loading new code. If we can remember 2006 was infamous for changing code on the fly to block good shooters. This was extremely effective a lot of the time. There is some risk with using this approach and this is what can happen. 816 added in some last minute changes so we didn't collide in autonomous and some unexpected results happened.
What frustrated me most was the FIRST's IR receiver implementation and the unexpected results when using in a match. I think alot of the hard crashes were robocoach's signals not being received due to range/interference. Like anything, this is an engineering issue to be looked at during design of the robot, but this is a topic for another time. But again I see FIRST has sent something to the teams to implement that has not been proven (IR receivers in 2005, Camera in 2006, etc.) |
|
#34
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: NJ Elim Yellow Card Oddity
Quote:
|
|
#35
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: NJ Elim Yellow Card Oddity
That is very strange but I can see why a full speed ram would justify a penalty and possibly it is up to the refs. These issues will definitely be clarified.
|
|
#36
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: NJ Elim Yellow Card Oddity
Quote:
There is no rule that says that the "slate" is wiped clean for eliminations, only that cards do not carry over into eliminations. Unofficial warnings are given to prevent egregious behavior throughout the entire competition, and aren't official rulings on the field. The head ref might've thought that the team was performing programmed egregious behavior the first time, but gave the chance to correct the programmed behavior. Since the behavior was apparently not rectified to the satisfaction of the referee, and the behavior was not severe enough to deserve a DQ, a yellow card was given. <T11> allows for red cards to be given to the entire alliance, but gives no procedure for yellow cards in elimination rounds. I'm not saying that this ref's interpretation was correct or incorrect, but giving the most likely reasoning. My interpretation up to this point was that a yellow card was given to an individual team on the alliance, but two yellow cards accrued by an alliance results in a DQ for the entire alliance in elims. This may be an incorrect interpretation of the rules. The correct interpretation will no doubt be resolved by the Head Refs this week before the next round of regionals. At any rate, in general, yellow cards are really no big deal. If you get one you should take it seriously, but since there is no real consequence of a yellow card, save temporary embarrassment, there shouldn't be this much outrage over yellow cards. They're not attached to your "permanent record" and nobody cares about them after the tournament is finished. As defined in T05, a yellow card is an Official Warning, and nothing more. |
|
#37
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: NJ Elim Yellow Card Oddity
A Ha! Teams are prohibited from destroying the field or field elements. (That doesn't explain the group yellow card, though.)
|
|
#38
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: NJ Elim Yellow Card Oddity
Quote:
|
|
#39
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: NJ Elim Yellow Card Oddity
Also, the GDC came back with an answer and basically said "Not standard, but if the refs felt a multiple card was appropriate...."
Which seems a bit of a cop out. I can understand that they don't have all the details, etc. But some sort of statement saying the refs could if they felt the card was deserved for some action or collusion on the part of the whole alliance.... But based on even the vague answer provided and the fact that the announcer said it was for the autonomous driving of the one team... I'd say the refs missed the call with the group yellow card. |
|
#40
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: NJ Elim Yellow Card Oddity
I actually felt pretty bad after I wasn't able to stop the bot in time. So I walked over and asked them if everything was ok and if I could do anything to help.
|
|
#41
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: NJ Elim Yellow Card Oddity
I saw this same thing at the Oregon regional. A teams hybrid mode hit the other wall at high speeds and it tossed a teams controller to the ground. There were no yellow cards given and the refs just said that teams needed to secure their controllers. We used 3 long strips of Velcro and that worked fine.
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| another compiler bug/oddity? | Rickertsen2 | Programming | 8 | 21-02-2006 14:45 |
| Printf Oddity : Programming Challange | DarkAlex | Programming | 7 | 21-03-2005 08:12 |
| Yellow card / Red card usage at 2004 IRI | Andy Baker | Rules/Strategy | 53 | 02-08-2004 00:35 |
| Oddity at Kickoff | Wetzel | Chit-Chat | 10 | 06-01-2003 11:38 |
| Elim Rounds | Andy144 | Rules/Strategy | 2 | 05-01-2003 11:42 |