Handicapped or not

[Wayne Doenges]

OK, my turn.

It has been mentioned that the stool could be a trip hazard for other students. That may be, but what are other students doing in our drivers station? The stool will be somewhat under the shelf.
Also, we are playing with soccer balls. What prevents a student stepping on a ball and falling? Or tripping on the Trident?

Unfair advantage? So our 4' student becomes a 5' student. Where is the unfair advantage? It's not like we are asking all the students to drive while kneeling.

Not to rant too much, but consider that if disadvantages are always compensated for, then what is there left to compete with?

Than why is there a wheel chair ramp if not to compensate?

We will bring a step stool, to BMR, and confer with the head ref. If he says no, than we won't use it.

If I have offended anyone, I apologize.

*gets off regualtion soapbox

[Daniel_LaFleur]

Originally Posted by Wayne Doenges

OK, my turn.

It has been mentioned that the stool could be a trip hazard for other students. That may be, but what are other students doing in our drivers station? The stool will be somewhat under the shelf.
Also, we are playing with soccer balls. What prevents a student stepping on a ball and falling? Or tripping on the Trident?

Unfair advantage? So our 4' student becomes a 5' student. Where is the unfair advantage? It's not like we are asking all the students to drive while kneeling.


Than why is there a wheel chair ramp if not to compensate?

We will bring a step stool, to BMR, and confer with the head ref. If he says no, than we won't use it.

If I have offended anyone, I apologize.

*gets off regualtion soapbox

Wayne,

It bothers me that you went to the Official ruling body (GDC) to get a ruling and now that you dislike that ruling you are going to ignore it and try and get a local ruling counter to the official ruling.

I hope that you will bring the GDCs answer to that discussion with the head ref and not leave him/her in the dark as to the official ruling.

While I understand your situation, it is not unique in FIRST. We all have to do whats best for the team, and sometimes that means not putting someone is a position that they cannot physically handle.

[Aren_Hill]

At 2006 IRI we had a new shooter operator (miche as she is known) for some matches, she is rather short and we had asked the IRI organizers if a step stool or box would be allowed and were denied.

Just a past scenario, she was a junior at the time I don not recall her exact height

[Chris_Elston]

Originally Posted by Daniel_LaFleur

Wayne,
It bothers me that you went to the Official ruling body (GDC) to get a ruling and now that you dislike that ruling you are going to ignore it and try and get a local ruling counter to the official ruling.

Wayne was only kidding. The GDC ruling is FINAL. The student will have 4 more years to try out for driving practice, I hope he grows a bit more or we'll decide to train him to look at the camera on the laptop since he can't see over the laptop lid. :-)

Thanks for the input guys. We apprecaite the past experiences etc.

[Wayne Doenges]

I'm sorry I got a little passionate about this subject.
The student, in question, was a very good worker and he was always there to try to help. He took allot of good natured ribbing about his size and always shrugged it off. I just hate to disappoint this student and tell him he can't play the game.

We will definitely have the GDC ruling in hand when we ask the refs.

[dtengineering]

This is an interesting question that resounds well outside the rather narrow parameters of an FRC competition. As a reasonably large person (6'4", 225lbs) I enjoy the benefits of being tall, but also really appreciate it when people make compensation for my size, for example when airlines have moved me to an exit row or bulkhead seat for a long flight without making me pay for it.

We also have rules in several sports requiring "ballasting" to bring competitors up to a certain minimum weight limit. When we ran electrathon races here in BC we used to require ballasting to bring the average weight of a team's drivers up to 135lbs. Heavier drivers were still at a disadvantage, but there was at least some form of compensation to recognize that grade 8's had an inherent mass advantage over grade 12's.

In this case, I doubt anyone would have a problem with the principle of setting a "minimum eye height" for drivers, so that unusually short drivers -- regardless of a diagnosis of a medical condition -- could raise their line of sight to allow them to compete, but I get the sense there may be some challenge in the practice of doing so, particularly around tripping and falling hazards presented by the platforms used to elevate the drivers. This is where the concept of "reasonable accomodation" comes in to play... if it can be done within the contraints of organizing a safe and successful competition, then it should be done. But I suspect that FIRST has already considered this and would have good reasons for not allowing such accomodation.... but would also bet that they would love to have a proposal put forward as to how they could adapt their rules to include shorter drivers in next year's game.

Although it won't help with the line of sight issue, however, I do want to make the suggestion that using handheld (Xbox) controllers rather than joysticks removes the constraint of working from the shelf height, and also allows drivers to move around a bit during the match, resulting in an enhanced ability to view the field. We stopped using joysticks a few years ago.

Jason

P.S. I do have to take some issue with the suggestion that we should not compensate for disadvantages, particularly when the disadvantages are beyond the control of the individual or team in question and unrelated to the goals of the game. In hockey or basketball, well... if you're small you'd better be quick. They are physical games. But in FIRST, I want our team to win by being smart and working hard... not by being taller than our opponents.

[JamesCH95]

Originally Posted by Wayne Doenges

Than why is there a wheel chair ramp if not to compensate?

If I have offended anyone, I apologize.

*gets off regualtion soapbox

There's a wheel chair ramp simply for simple access to the field both for hand-capped people and for carts with robots. They are also there for numerous safety reasons, not the least of which is fire/evacuation safety.

I sure hope no one has taken offense to anything in this thread! It has been remarkably civil given what could have been said.

Best of luck to you and your team.

[EricH]

James, he means the FRC field-side ramp.

Every FRC field has a ramp included, folded up. That ramp is specifically for wheelchair-bound folks, but there is precedent for it being used for someone who is "vertically challenged", IIRC. I seem to recall that it's about a foot tall when unfolded. At a number of events, it goes unused.

[GaryVoshol]

When I was a queuer a few years ago at the old Detroit Regional (WSU) we used the wheelchair ramp for someone in a wheelchair, and for a short student who obviously had a medical/handicap issue. When both teams were playing in the same match we allowed the short student to stand on a toolbox (which was tested for stability).

As I recall the ramp increases the height by about 8 or 9 inches. And the thing was a beast to move - it weighs at least as much as a robot, probably more. I've seen it noted on the truck loading diagram for this year, so it's still available. Ask if it can be used.

[JamesCH95]

I stand corrected. I have never seen one of the wheel-chair ramps in action before.

I would say bring the stool, and if anyone seriously has an issue with it, you can ask them to kindly go re-examine why they're volunteering for FIRST. There's a difference between enforcing the letter of the law on an authority trip and letting the little things slide.

Give the kid the experience of being on the competition field. It's a one of a kind experience, and not one that should be easily discarded for some rule about bringing a stool in.

[Daniel_LaFleur]

Originally Posted by CraigHickman

I would say bring the stool, and if anyone seriously has an issue with it, you can ask them to kindly go re-examine why they're volunteering for FIRST. There's a difference between enforcing the letter of the law on an authority trip and letting the little things slide.

Give the kid the experience of being on the competition field. It's a one of a kind experience, and not one that should be easily discarded for some rule about bringing a stool in.

So it's OK for someone 4'?
How about 4'1"? 4'2"? 5'?

Where do you draw the line. FIRST has decided that noone should have a step stool. It's their competition.

Plus there may be far more issues here than 1 person looking over the wall.

The question was asked. The GDC gave their ruling. If you don't like it then maybe you can run your own tournament and let people ignore your rulings.

**Gets off soapbox**

P.S. I do sympathize, but the question was asked to the proper ruling body and an answer was given. 'nuff said.

[nuggetsyl]

I am hoping that there is a miss understanding with every thing going on here. If this story is true, and first does not allow a student a stool to stand on because there to short to see the field. Then this is a really sad day. Ask yourself these questions.

Is this team gaining an advantage by letting the kid stand on a stool to let him see the field as everyone else can?

Do you really want to win a game, not being able to play a team with there best people?

This to me is not why the rule was written.

shaun

[NorviewsVeteran]

With all these $0.02, we could almost hold another regional

Originally Posted by nuggetsyl

This to me is not why the rule was written.

I agree. The rule states not to give anyone an advantage, where a stool would simply enable this team member to participate. We have been reminded to follow the spirit of the rules, not lawyer them to death.

[ttldomination]

Originally Posted by nuggetsyl

This to me is not why the rule was written.

Agreed.