"Heading" balls?

[dodar]

POSSESSION: Controlling the position and movement of a BALL. A BALL shall be considered in POSSESSION if, as the ROBOT moves or changes orientation (e.g. backs up or spins in place), the BALL remains in approximately the same position relative to the ROBOT

like i said you are not in possession of the ball becuase even if the ball is not touching the ground the ball can be moving while you are stationary so it is in a different position relative to the robots position(i.e. the ball does not remain in approximately the same position relative to the ROBOT)

[zaphodp.jensen]

I sense a movement to the Q&A section. . .

[dodar]

2010 Q&A isnt open yet

[Captain Fink]

Can you funnel balls that land on your robot?

[Kevin Sevcik]

If the ball stays on top of your robot while you're moving around, you're almost certainly going to be called for carrying. It probably won't be instantly the first time it happens, but the more often it happens to your robot, the quicker it's going to be called. Especially if it just happens to benefit you every time it happens.

[Captain Fink]

well lets say you block another robots shot and you have it roll of the front of you robot, there is nothing holding it there and at no point do you "really" have control of the ball, you are just getting it off your robot so you dont get a penalty. why not have it facilitated

[Passion]

Originally Posted by Captain Fink

well lets say you block another robots shot and you have it roll of the front of you robot, there is nothing holding it there and at no point do you "really" have control of the ball, you are just getting it off your robot so you dont get a penalty. why not have it facilitated

If I were a judge, I wouldn't call it carrying, because it is not done intentionally like a robot purposely purposely lift/carry a soccer ball off the ground.

So in conclusion, regarding to the rules the ONLY way to travel with the ball, is to push the ball with you to wherever you want, with the ball touching the ground... The rules are very similar the rules of a real soccer game; you can't move from point A to point B without letting the ball touching the ground.

[Captain Fink]

ya exactly, i see it as in soccer when you collect a ball that was in the air by "chesting" it and dropping it to you feet for a shot. i want to make sure this is legal before we start building it into our robot

[EricH]

Originally Posted by Captain Fink

well lets say you block another robots shot and you have it roll of the front of you robot, there is nothing holding it there and at no point do you "really" have control of the ball, you are just getting it off your robot so you dont get a penalty. why not have it facilitated

Because you're controlling the direction. That's why you can't funnel them.

Let's first define these terms according to the manual:

CARRYING: POSSESSING a BALL that is not in contact with the FIELD.

POSSESSION: Controlling the position and movement of a BALL. A BALL shall be considered in POSSESSION if, as the ROBOT moves or changes orientation (e.g. backs up or spins in place), the BALL remains in approximately the same position relative to the ROBOT.

So, let us say that you have a funnel on the top of your robot. By some chance, a ball lands in it and starts rolling. If you are moving, the refs are almost certain to give a penalty, especially if you do it often. If you are stationary, it's an open question--I'd give it a 50-50 of your getting called, depending on the exact ref crew and how often you do it.

Reason: You are controlling the movement of a ball that is on top of you. That isn't quite enough to get the penalty, in and of itself. However, if you're moving, the ball is moving with you (penalty) and if you're stationary, it depends whether the refs think you're also controlling the position. If you simply had a dome or a slope, you'd probably be OK. (Note: Not an official opinion. Use of this opinion to get out of a penalty will do absolutely nothing. Other uses of this opinion may or may not do anything either.)

On the topic of "heading" a ball, I think that there are probably legal ways to do it. I also think that they will be hard to find and have declared officially legal.

[Captain Fink]

well the ball is always moving relative to the robot so that one isnt in effect and i dont see the difference between having a pyramid on the bot or having an open channel that the ball rolls down

[Passion]

So if the ball somehow got into the robot, and as the robot moves around, the ball moves around. According to that particular rule, this is not controlling the ball, therefore it is not possessing. So even though the ball is off the ground, but the robot is not controlling it, it won't be called carrying.

[EricH]

The difference is that you're controlling the movement, especially in direction.

Tell you what: Don't commit to a design that has channels on the top just yet. Wait until about Wednesday, when Q&A usually opens up. Then ask them if having a channel on top to direct a ball coming down would count as carrying. If they say yes, then it's time for plan B. If they say no, plan A (having a channel) works just fine.

[EricH]

Originally Posted by Passion

So if the ball somehow got into the robot, and as the robot moves around, the ball moves around. According to that particular rule, this is not controlling the ball, therefore it is not possessing. So even though the ball is off the ground, but the robot is not controlling it, it won't be called carrying.

So, if a soccer player is bouncing a ball on his head, and moving around with it, he isn't controlling it?

Also note the use of the word "approximately". This gives a range that could easily include the ball staying on the robot as the robot moves around. You could also say that the ball is staying in the same position relative to the robot--on top of it--and still get a penalty.

[Captain Fink]

well in a soccer game that is legal, and he doesnt really have control of it but i guess it counts as possession because someone always has to have control of the ball in the game.
well with this idea i'm not moving with it like in your metaphore, its just going right down to the players feet after he settles it with his head

[EricH]

Originally Posted by Captain Fink

well with this idea i'm not moving with it like in your metaphore, its just going right down to the players feet after he settles it with his head

Right. I think this needs clarification from Q&A.

This is what happens when you get a 10 vs 100,000 situation: the 10 need to clear up the chinks that they thought would be clear to the 100,000, because the 10, smart as they are, can never completely think like 100,000 "smart enough to be dangerous" people, and some things just aren't clear on intent.