Drive-over penalties still being called

[jamie_1930]

Originally Posted by alicen

"tell them to do their job" is a rude thing to say. all of these refs are volunteers. i know a lot of people get caught up in the heat of things, but these refs have lives outside of FIRST.

per say, my mom's a head ref. while at our regional i was talking with another team and they started bashing the refs. after telling them one was my mother they all felt horrible.

it really shouldn't matter though, the refs can't be expected to be absolutely perfect, and the best way to get things fixed is to approach in a kind and forgiving manner.

i'm not trying to say that the refs are right, i'm just saying show some GP. that's what we're really here to do

I still see nothing wrong with what I stated and feel it is fully in line with FIRST's policy of Gracious Professionalism. I understand that to others, especially someone within your situation, may find this a rude way of putting it, but in all honesty it is more blunt than rude. I thank all of the volunteers for all of their work on those days because it makes what we do possible, but on the other side of things, what about us. We students have worked tirelessly and obsessively for the past 6 weeks, and for many of us we have read the rule book over several times and have kept up with the updates on a daily basis. So when competition day comes and a ref makes an inaccurate call it undermines the work of all those students and makes the game unfair to those teams. I feel it is more than fair for those of us in FIRST who continue to follow the virtues of Gracious Professionalism to ask the same of our volunteers, and part of being Graciously Professional is knowing what your job is and how to perform the duties of it accurately.

[alicen]

Originally Posted by jamie_1930

I still see nothing wrong with what I stated and feel it is fully in line with FIRST's policy of Gracious Professionalism. I understand that to others, especially someone within your situation, may find this a rude way of putting it, but in all honesty it is more blunt than rude. I thank all of the volunteers for all of their work on those days because it makes what we do possible, but on the other side of things, what about us. We students have worked tirelessly and obsessively for the past 6 weeks, and for many of us we have read the rule book over several times and have kept up with the updates on a daily basis. So when competition day comes and a ref makes an inaccurate call it undermines the work of all those students and makes the game unfair to those teams. I feel it is more than fair for those of us in FIRST who continue to follow the virtues of Gracious Professionalism to ask the same of our volunteers, and part of being Graciously Professional is knowing what your job is and how to perform the duties of it accurately.

i'm a student too, and i know what students go through, so i'm not trying to speak from a totally clueless position here.
but, what i don't believe you see is that the refs also spend a difficult six weeks refining the rules, discussing how to call them and arguing over FAQ questions. i can't tell you how many times my mom (head ref) or my dad (scorekeeper) would say, "we've gotta hurry up with dinner i have a ref/scorekeepers conference call at 8"
so despite what you might think about them not "doing their job" there's a lot that you are not aware of. the refs also read the rule book over and over, some even make tests for their non head refs to take so that they know all the rules!

anyway, i'm just saying you shouldn't throw something in somebody's face, no matter who they are or what they do, just because you're a little angry they had a lapse in judgment.

and a last point to make; if you really think the refs aren't doing a good enough job, then maybe try out what they're doing and see how difficult it is to watch 6 separate robots and get every call spot on

[BJC]

Originally Posted by alicen

anyway, i'm just saying you shouldn't throw something in somebody's face, no matter who they are or what they do, just because you're a little angry they had a lapse in judgment.

and a last point to make; if you really think the refs aren't doing a good enough job, then maybe try out what they're doing and see how difficult it is to watch 6 separate robots and get every call spot on

Agreed.

I would sugest getting togeather some other teams and aproching the head ref in a professional manner in the morning. That way he will be able to correct the error before the matches begin and it will be fairer for everyone. Besides, if you tell him after the matches begin, he will be reluctant to change simply because it would mean that some of the matches were played by different rules putting the teams with earlier matches at a disadvantage (especially when this year penalties make such a difference).

my 2 cents.

[golddragon24]

I talked with Mike, one of the referees late Thursday night. (I think. It could have been early this morning.) He said that a question had been raised concerning the interpretation of a word in the new rules. He was unsure of what the exact word was, but I believe it was the word "incidental." Specifically, their question was whether an situation where a team, for example, drives over a ball while trying to control it, is incidental, or if that counts as the teams fault. If a team could have reasonably avoided the penalty, is it incidental?

I definitely agree that there are a lot of penalties being called that are definitely incidental, and are completely random chance. It is nice to know the refs point of view though.

[jspatz1]

Originally Posted by golddragon24

I talked with Mike, one of the referees late Thursday night. (I think. It could have been early this morning.) He said that a question had been raised concerning the interpretation of a word in the new rules. He was unsure of what the exact word was, but I believe it was the word "incidental." Specifically, their question was whether an situation where a team, for example, drives over a ball while trying to control it, is incidental, or if that counts as the teams fault. If a team could have reasonably avoided the penalty, is it incidental?

I definitely agree that there are a lot of penalties being called that are definitely incidental, and are completely random chance. It is nice to know the refs point of view though.

The rule update doesn't say anything about who's "fault" it is or if it might have been avoided. It says it is only a penalty if it is intentional, or if the driver does not clear the ball before proceeding with game play. It is pretty clear to any reasonable reader that the GDC's intent was to eliminate drive-over calls unless they were clearly intentional or were used as a tactic in playing the game. Splitting hairs about the meaning of the word "incidental" is just lawyering the update, as we are often told not to do. Referees should be looking for the obvious spirit of the rule, just as the students are asked to do.

[Raul]

First thing I want to say is: I miss Lunacy where penalties were rare and matches were not decided by the refs. G46 reminds me of the cross the line in reverse penalty in 2008.

Secondly, when was the last time there were 15 occasions of DQ's in the first day of a regional and some much higher number (not sure how many) of yellow cards? Does that tell you something?

I agree that refs deserve some love. It is a tough job, especially when the GDC makes a game like this that has the potential for so many penalties. However, it is the ref's responsibility as a volunteer to know the rules well. Just because they are volunteering, does not mean they should be allowed to be negligent in their duties.

Hey folks, keep in mind, we are not disputing a judgement call here. We are talking about the interpretation of update 16.

I am hopeful that the head ref met with FIRST officials tonight and got clarification.

For those of you out there who are just saying - don't run over a ball. Have you played yet? Do you know how difficult it is to not ride up on a ball when it goes against the bump and you do not even know it is there and you give full throttle to get over the bump? Try it. Unless your robot has no opening at all to let the ball in for kicking, it is very difficult.

[Dr Theta]

One thing I did not like about this most recent update is some of the amendments to the 3" incursion rule. While it outwardly appears to alleviate a lot of the problems of putting a match in the hands of the refs I fear that it has also potentially removed a rule that should have been an important part of teams design decisions. I can understand how this change is intended to remove cases such as team 111's misfortunes in which case the incursion is resultant of an truly 'incidental' occurrence and not indicative of a design flaw. But when teams are having the ball beneath their robot 2 or more times a match consistently there is a problem. Occasional occurrences like 111's are fine but consistent and repeated problems with this rule with numerous incursions without extenuating circumstances demonstrate a design flaw that does not truly fit in with the way this game was intended to be played.

So where do the refs draw the line as to what is truly incidental and caused by circumstance, and what constitutes a penalty where the incursion was not "incidental"? I think it is still a judgement call and one that will have to be made by the refs. I think it is up to the refs to define "incidental" in this case and they need to stick with that decision once it's been made. It is in their hands for this wording of the rule as much as it was for the original. It is their definition that decides whether there are zero penalties for "non-incidental" incursions or many. I would rather see this rule enforced and have a few casualties than see it made ineffectual by having no calls, as this was supposed to be a major part of the design process that many overlooked, but so long as the judgement is consistent throughout the regional I feel they are doing their job.

Just my $.02

[Dr Theta]

I would like to say that I do recognize that my perspective is one of a mentor for a team attending only one regional, and that I only has to worry about operating within the parameters set for that particular regional. I do not have the experience to determine the effects of differences in calls between to different regionals, and may overlook that.

[Rich Kressly]

Originally Posted by Raul

For those of you out there who are just saying - don't run over a ball. Have you played yet? Do you know how difficult it is to not ride up on a ball when it goes against the bump and you do not even know it is there and you give full throttle to get over the bump? Try it. Unless your robot has no opening at all to let the ball in for kicking, it is very difficult.

Amen. In week one we saw the exact same scenario as did many other teams - regardless of some major design differences. Here's to hoping this gets ironed out. I appreciate the way 111 is handling a tough situation, but I'm wondering if the refs shouldn't get an opportunity to drive robots on practice day and play the game (alright, this'll never happen, but I think it might be a real eye opener to some). :-)