A little GP for the refs and GDC...

[Jared Russell]

Originally Posted by efoote868

Next thing I'd like to say: Rules can't be about intent. That is, if rules are not black and white, and clear calls, they give the refs too much leeway, and usually end up not getting called. After the fact, the call can't change even if the arguments were... I didn't intend to hit that robot that hard... I didn't intend to back over the line... Of course you didn't, but you did. (question: you didn't intend to lose, did you? )
(YIKES! that was long)

I cannot blame refs for following the rules, that's for sure. I do some reffing in the offseason and I know that between six robots running around and real-time scoring, its hard enough to see IF somebody broke a rule, let alone find the time to ponder why they did it.

I guess my bigger complaint - and I do understand the enormous undertaking these guys go through each year - is with the GDC. In my mind, penalties should exist in FIRST for two reasons and two reasons only.

1. Safety
2. Unfair advantage

For the most part, the GDC nails it. But things like <G22> scratch my head. Does this address a safety concern? No. Does it address a competitive advantage? To some extent, but it could have been re-worded to give teams a buffer (say, ALL the way back across is -10) and eliminate the basically random accidental penalties.

Winning or losing because of something like <G22> makes neither the victor nor the loser feel good about him/herself.

Again - tremendous respect to the GDC. Try thinking up a new game on your own - it's tough! But a lot of kids have a lot riding on the game. A good game gets you hooked So we're allowed to say our $0.02, right?