We was robbed!!!

[Lil' Lavery]

It's quite possible that they didn't stop the match immediately because at the time they thought it was the team's fault, but under further investigation they found that it actually was a field malfunction. In such a scenario it is more than acceptable to replay the match. You were not "robbed" of anything.

[AndyB]

I completely agree with Sean. If your score was affected by a scoring malfunction, then I'm sure you would feel as if a redo was in order.

[GaryVoshol]

Most likely it was the FTA and the IFI guy who initiated the replay. The head ref doesn't have the ability to determine field failures (unless it's something spectacular like the wall falling down).

[KTorak]

They did the same thing at GLR and waited to the last 5 seconds to decide to re run the match. We didn't see anything to believe there was a field fault, but there were robots that got tangled and what not.

[Tom Line]

Originally Posted by KTorak

They did the same thing at GLR and waited to the last 5 seconds to decide to re run the match. We didn't see anything to believe there was a field fault, but there were robots that got tangled and what not.

We were one of the alliances in the match. We were tied 1 game to 1. With 5 seconds remaining and us up by close to 30 points, they stopped the match because a piece of lexan had fallen off in one corner of the field. We were understandably upset when they said the match would be replayed, but those are the rules and we live by them. We ended up losing and 33's alliance went on. Disappointing, but there's always next year.

[dtengineering]

You are either suggesting that the refs and field officials were incorrect in their diagnosis of a field problem, or that they were intentionally altering the outcome of a match. You provide no evidence of either.

If you accept that there was a field error in one of the matches, then it is strange to think that you would want your team to advance in the elimination rounds while your opponents abilities are reduced due to a field malfunction.

While I can appreciate that you might be disappointed after having honestly believed that you won the match, I don't see what alternative you propose... would you really consider it "winning" to beat an alliance whose competitive abilities are reduced due to an error beyond their control? How would you feel if a field error caused your robot to compete at less than its full capabilities?

Jason

[vivek16]

Calm down. Winning is not everything. If your alliance truly was superior, you would have won the second match as well.

-Vivek

[Nawaid Ladak]

it ws definatly a field error. if there waa proof of some movement by any of the robots on the red alliance during the hybrid period match 2, then i would say it's a diffrent story.

My team was on this alliance for the quarterfinals.

i don't think we got robbbed, even though some may se it that way. It showed 1279's inncossistancy, of their grippers. it was still a fun regional to watch (I had classes so i couldn't go)

our alliance would have had some major problems in the second round any ways

[Dad1279]

Originally Posted by Nawaid Ladak

......
i don't think we got robbbed, even though some may se it that way. It showed 1279's inncossistancy, of their grippers. .....

Unfortunately the replay was the first time our shooter failed (jammed due to battle scars, easily fixed) during either regional, and the first time that day our hybrid failed (trying to turn on the 1/2" plate)

Does anyone remember the score of the match that was replayed? We were told it was the 70-0 match, in which case hybrid or not, it would not have made a difference in the outcome.

And speaking for the entire team, as can be seen in the Bayou thread, 1279 does not feel robbed. A little disappointed perhaps, but thankful for the new friends and alliances we met at the Bayou regional. We hope to make it back to Bayou next year.

[coldfusion1279]

Originally Posted by Nawaid Ladak

i don't think we got robbbed, even though some may se it that way. It showed 1279's inncossistancy, of their grippers.

Can I ask that we not point fingers? Even if that it wasn't the intention of the statement. We tried our best that is our team cares about.

Also, we (the losing alliance of that match) are fighting an uphill battle in this argument. The only responses you will receive from that post are about how FIRST isnt about winning and the FIRST refs are all volunteers. This is all 100% true.

Something similar happened in our favor in NJ in 2005, and we wound up winning the regional, so we understand. Take a step back, take a deep breath, and congratulate the winning alliances, you can't say they haven't earned it.

Sure it was a tough break, but roll with the punches eh?

[Zyik]

There will always be problems with the field. Even if there was a "foolproof" method of scoring, not only are the refs human, so are we. We're always finding scapegoats to blame things on. The field is one of many that we use to explain why we lost the match.

Also, the thread title implies that something physical, like a laptop or a tool, was taken from you. It also implies that your English teacher should give you some more grammar homework, but I digress.

[Akash Rastogi]

Originally Posted by vivek16

Calm down. Winning is not everything. If your alliance truly was superior, you would have won the second match as well.

-Vivek

Yeah, don't blame refs and the other alliance for that. Clearly, they could have beaten you before, and clearly, you could have beaten them again to prove your alliance was "superior." Just chill out..nothing is a load of bull in that situation because there are plenty of times that other teams have wished they could replay a match and didn't get the opportunity to do so. And the teams that want to rematch may lose either way but they want to go out fighting.

[Pavan Dave]

People are human and they make mistakes. At that, Mr. Sparks already explained what happened in the Lone Star thread.

Originally Posted by vivek16

Calm down. Winning is not everything. If your alliance truly was superior, you would have won the second match as well.

-Vivek

NO! I disagree completely. We both agree with the first part of your statement, but as for the second you are completely wrong. Call me crazy, but I believe in the butterfly effect. I believe that every insignificant move I make has some effect upon something else, etc, etc. That being said, it doesn't matter whether you had a superior alliance or not, it is the fact that you won THAT match in that point in time and that should have let you go on. Similar to the SVR controversy, it doesn't mean that they had the superior/inferior alliance, it just means that they lost.

As Murphy as my witness, things happen and will continue to happen. Even if team 0000 beat team 9999 in two matches consecutively it doesn't mean they are a 'superior' alliance. It just means they won two matches. ... Back to the butterfly effect. What if they won that match and went on the become regional champions? You can't say "if you were superior then you should have won" because stuff happens.

Pavan


.