Ball Bouncing Out of Bounds?

[Racer26]

1114 Launched the ball directly AT the judges area at Waterloo this weekend, and didn't get any penalties.

Also, the way that <S01> is worded they should have disabled you. Did they?

[petek]

Originally Posted by 1075guy

1114 Launched the ball directly AT the judges area at Waterloo this weekend, and didn't get any penalties.

Seeing the awards 1114 received, I guess Judges must be fair game.

[Diriye]

Originally Posted by 1075guy

1114 Launched the ball directly AT the judges area at Waterloo this weekend, and didn't get any penalties.

Also, the way that <S01> is worded they should have disabled you. Did they?

If you mean the area where the judges were sitting, it took a bounce then went their direction. Anyways, the judges were only sitting there for a couple of minutes; they weren't there for the entire time.

Originally Posted by <S01>

An example of unsafe operation would be uncontrolled motion that cannot be stopped by the drivers.

If any drivers had full control over their robot, they were 1114's drivers.

[MasonMM]

Originally Posted by 1075guy

Also, the way that <S01> is worded they should have disabled you. Did they?

We were not disabled for bouncing the ball out of bounds, only penalized. It was unfortunate that while we were continuing to tweak our robot to fit within this criteria that was not available prior to the regional we still had points taken away. And by no means do we want to operate unsafely; we just want a consistent and available interpretation of the rules for tournaments all across the country.

[Rick TYler]

Originally Posted by MasonMM

It was unfortunate that while we were continuing to tweak our robot to fit within this criteria that was not available prior to the regional we still had points taken away. And by no means do we want to operate unsafely; we just want a consistent and available interpretation of the rules for tournaments all across the country.

If regularly throwing (or even bouncing) trackballs completely out of the arena isn't a clear violation of <S1>, I don't know what is. Did you want the referees to keep ignoring your unsafe behavior while you "tweaked" your robot? It sounds to me like they were generous with you.

As a scorekeeper at Seattle (where the table was maybe three feet from the edge of the arena) and trainee scorekeeper at Portland, I am EXTREMELY grateful for the teams and referees that think my safety is important. While I appreciate that your intent was to modify your robot to become safer, while it was still throwing balls out of the arena the referees should have penalized and/or disabled your robot. Good intentions are necessary but not sufficient for safety.

[Richard Wallace]

As a volunteer I appreciate referees' erring on the side of caution, by taking steps to discourage gameplay that might result in someone (or some critical equipment) being hit by a flying trackball. I do agree those steps should be the same at all events.

As a mentor whose team built a catapult robot this year, I appreciated referees at both of our events who clarified the way they would be calling this during Thursday practice rounds. We were warned about potential <S1> penalties the first time that our poor aim sent a trackball over the side in St. Louis. Two weeks later during Thursday practice at Boilermaker, we were advised that a trackball clearing the overpass between the uprights, but landing out of bounds, would not be scored as a hurdle. This advice was confirmed by an official Q&A response a few days later, but the timely warning we got kept us from repeating the mistake on Friday or Saturday.

Looking at it from either perspective, the referees I've seen have made the right call when balls left the track.

[Dan Richardson]

LoL while announcing on Friday at Florida Team 103 launched a ball out of bounds and hit me in the head then almost knocked over a few thousand dollars worth of production equipment. No penalty was given it was completely accidental and really kind of an awkward bounce. Its really the only time I can remember it FLYING out of bounds, One almost did hit some drivers but it stayed in.

Let the boys play is my motto, no blood no foul, they had to assume balls would be ejected from the field, otherwise they wouldn't have put in the ball replacement rules. If a team does it consistently sure, warning/penalty based on S01 ( Tho I'm not sure how its supposed to be a 10 pt penalty, I thought it was just a yellow card ) but 1 or 2 times.. ehh give me a break lol.

[Brandon Holley]

Repeated violations of sending the ball out of bounds is a no no...

But lets face the facts, the ball is going to end up out of the playing field at some point in time. If your around the field area just keep an eye on whats going on and if a ball comes sailing your way (or towards another person for that matter) get out of the way or let the person know the are about to be stuck with a 10 pound projectile.

Balls launched from our catapult go quite high into the air : http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...hlight=mad+ups
However we were still able to keep the ball in bounds on every shot. While I dont konw if a 10 point penalty is per the rule book, it seems they gave you a fair shot to dial it down.

[jgannon]

Originally Posted by MasonMM

this criteria that was not available prior to the regional

Keep in mind that in 2005, you got disabled if you broke the plane of the driver station wall with a tetra, even if you didn't let go. Even without that experience, it shouldn't surprise anyone that actually launching a game piece of comparable weight over the wall would be considered a safety issue, particularly if done repeatedly. First be grateful that nobody got hurt, and then that your team didn't have to bear the full brunt of <S01> and <T04>. Best of luck getting your robot to operate safely before Bayou... 10 point penalties hurt, but not as much as getting hit in the face with a trackball.

[waialua359]

This is a gray area that is not specifically written in the rule book.
As long as fair warning has been given to allow a team to try and correct/modify a design function for the purpose of safety, its fair.
However, I dont think off the bat, a team should receive a penalty for it. Not that it happened already or if it occurs in the future.
Unlike in '06 when teams had to control shooter's ball speeds, there were no detailed guidelines about ball trajectories, speed, etc.

[Nawaid Ladak]

Originally Posted by 1075guy

1114 Launched the ball directly AT the judges area at Waterloo this weekend, and didn't get any penalties.

Also, the way that <S01> is worded they should have disabled you. Did they?

that was really funny after the comment paul made while announcing that

I also think were going to see more of these if teams are going to keep on trying the RUSHshot. (thats my name for the last second hurdle by team 27 at detroit...)

i also saw one of the shooters in one of the webcasts launch the ball almost over the drivers station for the oposing alliance, one of the people behind the lexan knocked back onto the field.

[Qbranch]

Originally Posted by 1075guy

1114 Launched the ball directly AT the judges area at Waterloo this weekend, and didn't get any penalties.

We closelined the head ref and three other refs when our gripper was holding the ball and a robot ran into ours, causing us to hold the ball outside the field and hit the had ref in the face with the trackball. When I was recovering from the hit and getting us going around the track again, I swung left, which whapped three other refs (including Stu! ) in the face.

Moral of the story? Refs don't make good walls.

If anyone wants to find it, it was at a match at BMR, although I have no idea which match it was. I feel that there shouldn't be any penalty for stuff like this since if FIRST was really concerned about extra-field-ular interactions they would have put solid lexan clad high walls all the way down the field, or put tape lines around the field over which no one can cross when a match is in play.

-q

[The Lucas]

One bot at FLR always shoots after it is disabled. During FLR, it shot at both of the refs volunteering from our team on separate occasions. Fortunately, there were no injuries, so we can have a few laughs at them dodging trackballs.

[David Brinza]

Originally Posted by The Lucas

One bot at FLR always shoots after it is disabled. During FLR, it shot at both of the refs volunteering from our team on separate occasions. Fortunately, there were no injuries, so we can have a few laughs at them dodging trackballs.

That 'bot is not complying with the safety-driven guidelines published in Team Update 5:

• Design the mechanism so that it does not make any sudden movements
  when the Robot is powered on or off, or when the pneumatic system (if used)
  is charged or discharged.

• Design the mechanism so that any stored energy is released in a slow,
  controlled manner (over several seconds) when the Match concludes and the
  Robot is powered off.

The team should have been required to modify the robot design so it would not launch at the end of the match or if otherwise disabled.

[Uberbots]

I think the penalty you got was the refs actually being lenient on you. Those balls can do a fair bit of hurt to someone (often referenced as being able to break your neck if it hits you right), and firing with enough force to actually clear the opponent's driving station (even with a bounce) requires a fair bit of energy. According to rule SO1, you probably should have been DQ'd or yellow flagged for that play, but you weren't, so be grateful.

Im not trying to suggest that you purposely tried to launch it like that, but the fact that your robot could probably set it on the ref's 'to watch' list.