This year we need instant replay

[pyroslev]

Instant Replay would be a good thing to have for those plays that seem fishy (whatever term you prefer). It would also make for some good video in the off time, during lunch. Imagine watching the play of the day in slow motion. True, it could be abused for every penalty but if it's setup right so it's not abused, I say let's setup the instant replay.

[Greg Perkins]

DISCLAIMER <i didnt take the time to read the last 4 pages of this thread, just the first and this page>

But it hurts me to see the people are still upset that refs miss or blow a call once in a while...

heres my proposition for you, being a ref and all i have every right to say, go ref a competition and see how hard it is (Especially this year with 6 robots) to have 8 people watching 6 robots + 4 loading zones and the players stations that right there in a perfect world would be 12 refs, usually a regional will have 8 refs + 1 head ref. SO I beleive that being undermanned the refs do a pretty darn good job....
Even if you think you got fouled, you can always go to the head ref before the next match and we can huddle over it and possibly with enough votes from the refs discussion the penalty might be given.

So in retrospect i think video would be good to give another set of eyes, HOWEVER i also see it as a waste of time, regionals allready run too long as it is....

[JVN]

Originally Posted by Greg Perkins

Even if you think you got fouled, you can always go to the head ref before the next match and we can huddle over it and possibly with enough votes from the refs discussion the penalty might be given.

Are you crazy??

Do you really think the way events should run, is for every team who feels they were penalized to go "ask" the refs for a call? Either the refs saw it, or they didn't. Either they make the call on their own, based on their own impressions of the match, based on their own opinions, or they don't.

On 229, we sent our kids up after the call was made, to get a clarificiation on what happened. This is a preventive measure; we don't want to make the same mistake twice.

"Tattle-tale" complaints to refs are silly, and I hope they are smart enough to ignore them. They saw it, or they didn't. No one should be telling the refs what happened, and expecting them to vote on it.

JV

[Greg Perkins]

john the way i worded it was incorrect, you hit the nail on the head with how you said it, thats what i was striving for. sorry about that

[AmyPrib]

If everyone spent half as much time reading and understanding the rules as they do complaining, arguing, and disagreeing about rules, we might not even be having this discussion.

If you are on the drive-team, if you're a coach, if you're a strategy person, heck if you're just on a team, or if you plan to ref, you darn well better study those rules. Many teams have a game test. It becomes very apparent who has not even glanced at the rules. If you're a spectator that's going to complain about a "bad" call, you darn well better know for a FACT that the call was "bad". You better have read those rules from start to finish, asked "good" questions on Q/A, read all the updates, and re-read them 10+ more times. You might even be able to recite the rule number off the top of your head..

Sometimes there are definitely very blatant incorrect calls or "made-up rules" (especially in early weeks and many rule revisions). And, I knew the rules inside and out to be able to say that. But, most of the time what I see, is the misunderstanding or misinterpretation of a rule that gets argued about. I cannot even begin to count the number of unncessary questions on the Q/A forum. Questions are good - but when the answer is literally written in black and white in the rules - you didn't read them thoroughly. It's frustrating.

I have complained about calls at events, and I will probably continue to (not on the field though). So..... I reffed a tough IRI this past summer to see what refs go through. I'm hooked - I loved reffing - even though I did get yelled at by spectators. But, in reality, our calls were "right". The spectators did not seem to know the rules and that we clearly made the right call. I made the time to review the rules many times (since it had been several months since events) and to ask for clarifications on how things would be called so as to be consistent.

The point is - there are many improvements to be made on every side - ref training, game design committee reducing number of possible penalties, clarifying rules in their definitions, and everything else mentioned previously. But the fact remains, rules will always be there, and if you do not make the time or effort to get a solid understanding of them, there will always be unnecessary ranting and raving, arguing with refs, asking for replays, and so on. This is not always the case - but it is a large portion of the cases. The root cause is not always "the ref made a bad call".

I like 229's method (and many others') - that is how it should be. Ask for clarification or explanation from the head ref in a calm, professional manner, then accept it. How would you feel if someone got in your face telling you about what you did wrong? Right. So, don't expect a ref to respond very well to that.

If you think they made a truly incorrect call or are doing something blatantly against what a rule says, then ask if you can show them. They can say no, but if you're cool about it, they might listen to improve their reffing. There might be times where refs missed an update (should never happen, but has), so it might be helpful to point something out, in a calm manner. Just don't expect your match outcome to change.

Oh by the way, I say NO to replays. It would be cool for highlights, but shouldn't be used for deciding calls. That's not what FIRST is about.

[DonRotolo]

Rather than instant replay, which many have pointed out is a severe logistic challenge (and which I think is overkill), one change to match scoring I would like to see is greater transparency in the scoring. Specifically, the score components for each alliance (but not each team necessarily) should be posted along with the total scores.
For example,
xx points for tetras placed,
xx bonus for x triple plays, and
minus xx points for a (name it) penalty equals total score

That data is certainly available on the judges scoring sheets, the only downside I can see is the time to type in that data for spectators to see.

Don

[Wayne C.]

I can't believe that this thread keeps going on-

do the results of any given match really matter?

if you lose the match do you lose your budget? your hand or your life?

The games are supposed to be fun.

I'd like to see less rules and more competition. I am sure the game guys know this and are moving towards repairing the shortcomings of this season's game.

But ask yourself- did you have ANY fun this season? Did you do something you can be proud of?

If you managed to build a machine and get to a competition I am sure you could answer "yes"
If you come up with "NO" then you probably should reexamine why you are in FIRST.

My guys had a great season, one of our best ever- and didn't win a regional. We live with it. And we don't need a replay to somehow prove we were cheated.

WC

[phrontist]

Every competition I've ever seen video of or been to has had fairly low hanging lighting scaffolds. Would it really break the bank to put a camera on these? Simply dedicate one referee to watching the top down view, and give them a jog wheel so they can zip back. When a match is over, ref's huddle and the replay ref weighs in...

Even if you can't go for top down view, just set up a camera on the sideline. Even if it prevents one bad call it's worth it. Sure, it won't catch all of them, but it's better than nothing.

Everyone seems to paint these events as logistical nightmares, but those I've seen seem to be pretty mellow "backstage". The solution to all of these problems in automated scoring and "intelligent" feild elements, eliminating the need for calls at all. If you can't enforce a rule, like agressive play, just scrap it. It's not worth the subjectiveness of having people make calls.

[Cory]

Originally Posted by Don Rotolo

Rather than instant replay, which many have pointed out is a severe logistic challenge (and which I think is overkill), one change to match scoring I would like to see is greater transparency in the scoring. Specifically, the score components for each alliance (but not each team necessarily) should be posted along with the total scores.
For example,
xx points for tetras placed,
xx bonus for x triple plays, and
minus xx points for a (name it) penalty equals total score

That data is certainly available on the judges scoring sheets, the only downside I can see is the time to type in that data for spectators to see.

Don

It wouldn't require any extra time, the scorekeeper already has to input all those things.

[KenWittlief]

Originally Posted by phrontist

...The solution to all of these problems in automated scoring and "intelligent" feild elements, eliminating the need for calls at all. If you can't enforce a rule, like agressive play, just scrap it. It's not worth the subjectiveness of having people make calls.

wait, Ive seen this before

it was in a movie.....

ROLLERBALL! (the original)

JOHNATHAN! JOHNATHAN! JOHNATHAN! JOHNATHAN! JOHNATHAN! JOHNATHAN! JOHNATHAN! JOHNATHAN! JOHNATHAN! JOHNATHAN!

[Steve W]

Originally Posted by phrontist

Every competition I've ever seen video of or been to has had fairly low hanging lighting scaffolds. Would it really break the bank to put a camera on these? Simply dedicate one referee to watching the top down view, and give them a jog wheel so they can zip back. When a match is over, ref's huddle and the replay ref weighs in...

Even if you can't go for top down view, just set up a camera on the sideline. Even if it prevents one bad call it's worth it. Sure, it won't catch all of them, but it's better than nothing.

My last post in this thread. It seems that you really don't understand anything that has been said to date. Let me be blunt.
1 - It costs MONEY to put up a camera(s)
2 - More than a camera is involved, remote pan equipment, monitor, computer,etc
3 - Time is a factor at these events
4 - Regionals are having a tough time as it is raising money
5 - Refs are doing a good job
6 - FIRST is not about winning a match
7 - Refs are doing a good job
8 - Even you have said that replay would not catch everything
9 - Nothing is fair
and most importantly
10 - Refs are doing a good job

[eiii]

Originally Posted by Bill Moore

Instant Replay??? AAAAAAUUUUUGGGGGHHHHHH!!!
When are people going to understand that the competitions are not the "end" that FIRST is trying to achieve? If they were, FIRST would be a "for profit" corporation and run them like a business, just like any other sports league.

That's true, but it doesn't feel good to be cheated out of anything, no matter how small.

Originally Posted by Steve W

1 - It costs MONEY to put up a camera(s)

Everything costs money.

2 - More than a camera is involved, remote pan equipment, monitor, computer,etc

As people have said before, just hanging a camera above the feild so you could see generally what's going on would be good.

6 - FIRST is not about winning a match

But as I said above, it's not fun to be cheated out of anything.

8 - Even you have said that replay would not catch everything

You don't have to catch everything; just the general movement of the robots.

9 - Nothing is fair

That's no reason not to try to make it fair.

[Madison]

Originally Posted by phrontist

Everyone seems to paint these events as logistical nightmares, but those I've seen seem to be pretty mellow "backstage".

If all you've seen of an event is the three days of the competition, you've missed 99% of the work that made it happen.

[artdutra04]

Originally Posted by eiii

That's true, but it doesn't feel good to be cheated out of anything, no matter how small.

Everything costs money.
As people have said before, just hanging a camera above the feild so you could see generally what's going on would be good.

But as I said above, it's not fun to be cheated out of anything.
You don't have to catch everything; just the general movement of the robots.
That's no reason not to try to make it fair.

This topic has recently been debated ad nausem, with the general concensus being that instant reply doesn't really have any place at FIRST competitions. Steve hit the nail on the head for all the points. Yes, I know how sometimes you feel cheated by a call, and you might lose a match or two. But just as often, you may actually benefit from a bad call. The refs are just volunteers. FIRST is not about robots or end results. FIRST is about the process, about inspiring teens to careers in science, technology, and engineering. Who wins or loses will not really matter in twenty years. But the inspiration of the students to become engineers will. As it has been said plenty of time before,

It's just a game.

[Billfred]

Originally Posted by artdutra04

It's just a game.

Repeated for emphasis.

Back when I raced remote-controlled cars, there were times when people would gripe and complain about bad calls/turn marshalling/etc. Someone came up with the reminder that we were "racing toys for bowling trophies." And whenever I'd get annoyed about something during a race, I'd remember that line.

Without putting down the hard work we put into our robots, we are still on the field competing for bowling trophies. If getting that piece of shiny acrylic is your main goal, you may want to pause and examine why you're competing.

Have fun, play hard, get inspired, and if you get one of those aforementioned bowling trophies, all the better.

(Side note: Yes, FIRST's trophies are nicer than bowling trophies. You know what I mean.)