08 Colorado Controversy

[hillale]

Originally Posted by LightWaves1636

Well, it's not the judges job to really know the rules, the judges just judge each team based on the rubric they are given...

I'm sure that she meant Referee in place of Judge. This is a common terminology error that can easily be made if one is in haste.

[PrincessJae]

Originally Posted by hillale

I'm sure that she meant Referee in place of Judge. This is a common terminology error that can easily be made if one is in haste.

Hahaha, thank you =] yes i meant referee

[Lil' Lavery]

If you wish create a solution to the refereeing problems exhibited at this and other regional events, please do so in the (multiple) existing threads about that subject.
http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...ad.php?t=65340
http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...d.php?p=718870
And others.
Don't create another thread about the same subject.
As for the original discussion about whether or not the red side of the field somehow had an advantage, the qualification results clearly show, as already stated, it did not. The Blue Alliance actually won more qualification matches than the red. The eliminations matches are not going to be a 50/50 chance at each alliance winning, and as such, it's entirely possible that the red alliance could go undefeated.

[PrincessJae]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

If you wish create a solution to the refereeing problems exhibited at this and other regional events, please do so in the (multiple) existing threads about that subject.
http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...ad.php?t=65340
http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...d.php?p=718870
And others.
Don't create another thread about the same subject.
As for the original discussion about whether or not the red side of the field somehow had an advantage, the qualification results clearly show, as already stated, it did not. The Blue Alliance actually won more qualification matches than the red. The eliminations matches are not going to be a 50/50 chance at each alliance winning, and as such, it's entirely possible that the red alliance could go undefeated.

Excuse me mr. ruler of the forums, but I expect this thread to grow as soon as we get the videos up to see the finals matches and determine whether their was a miscount or not. I dont need anyone telling me what I can or cannot post that is related to the topic.

[Guy Davidson]

Regardless of whether or not there was a miscount, it really doesn't matter by now. I think many people have problems with the scoring system for this year's game, and that is well documented in the the threads Sean linked to (as the scorekeeping as the referee's job). On the other hand, FIRST does not review video of anything at any time in order to rule. It's in the rule book. There have been many of cases when a team believed there was a miscount. If the team approached the referees imeediatley after the match, from my experience, they discussed it, and tried to make the best ruling they could.

Stirring up controversy would do no good for anyone. There is no advantage to the red side of the field. The qualification matches (which, by their nature, are far more even in the power distribution between the red and blue alliances) show an advantage for the blue alliance rather than the red. On the other hand, once in the eliminations, the higher seeded alliance is always the red one. In most cases, especially in shallower regionals, the higher seeded alliance is stronger, and as such, would have a higher chance of winning than the lower seeeded alliance. As such, I am not surprised that there was a regional in which the red alliance won all elimination matches.

[Tom Line]

Originally Posted by PrincessJae

Excuse me mr. ruler of the forums, but I expect this thread to grow as soon as we get the videos up to see the finals matches and determine whether their was a miscount or not. I dont need anyone telling me what I can or cannot post that is related to the topic.

Your sarcasm and hostility are unwarranted and uncalled for. Mr. Lavery was pointing out, as I will as well, that if you want to suggest solutions to ref issues, there are multiple other already expressed avenues to do so.

There are poor calls made in every match, on both sides. Criticizing the volunteer refs for doing their best is extremely counterproductive. Instead, why don't you guys move in a constructive direction (on one of the already mentioned threads).

Your original point was already addressed. The better teams are put on red, and statistics states that it is likely that two regionals a year may have a result like yours.

Perhaps you should review First's guiding principals and the forum rules. Here are the appropriate quotations from the forum rules:

Please remember, you are representing not only yourself, but your team and its sponsors, as well as what FIRST stands for. Please try to practice gracious professionalism at all times.

[Mike Schroeder]

Okay

I have read this thread and its dissolved into fighting and rude behavior not within the rules of the forum. I doubt anymore useful information can come from this, It is the past and maybe we should move on.

Continue all Discussion in PMs please if there is anymore useful information contact me or one of the other moderators and ask that the thread be reopened.

[meaubry]

Big Mike -
Thanks for closing the thread last night.
I re-opened this thread and hope cooler heads will prevail, now that everyone has had a little time to think about it.

Please remember that this is a public forum and your posts represent not only you, but your entire team.

As Mike Martus posted yesterday -
This thread will be watched... if it gets out of hand it will be moved to moderated or closed.

Please report this thread if it starts going south.

Mike Aubry
Chief Delphi - Team 47