This year we need instant replay

[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

[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.

[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.

[Collmandoman]

I think many overestimate how much equipment you would need for instant replay. One camera would suffice mounted over the playing field. How formal would this have to be... not very(someone could run up grab the camera and move to the spot of the match). Video proof is proof - if there isn't 'indisputable' evidence then you move on. If there is - then do something about it. For people saying that it would be UN GP to have instant replay, I can only say send me directions to your utopia - I'd love to live there. Regardless it's not even an issue about GP.

Ok, so I'm working at Delphi designing whatnot, and I screw up pretty big. In this real world they don't say.. well you tried your hardest, and your intentions were right - here's a pat on the back. You can lose your job. People saying it's UN-GP to second guess a ruling are using GP as a control in a pretty ridiculous way. Many of you GP as some absurd defense mechanism- just think... are you sending the right message to the participants in FIRST?

Alot of teams come to regionals with a gameplan, that's the product of months of planning, strategizing, hardwork, cooperation and whatnot. (I know FIRST isn't just about winning a regional - so save me the time with that response) To have several months of dedication be eraced in one facet of the competition because of a bad call is kind of silly. There should be a safeguard against this, and unfortunatly it might make a day longer by about 20 minutes at a FIRST event. Ok, the brains behind FIRST are pretty smart-- they could plan this out and hand a videocam to every regional. Heck - ppl could even let FIRST borrow on for the weekend *shock*. I dunno many of you seem to think it would ruin FIRST or something. Had the technology been around 100 years ago in college football - you'd prob here about this year as the 100th anniversary of instant replay. So lets put the T in FIRST and actually consider this.
So lets say ... people actually do consider this...... FIRST tries to make an event that suits spectators. This could add to the excitement of a first event with proper planning and structuring. Imagine the final match being contested and the proper team wins the event. OMG EXCITEMENT OMG
If you want to scream GP, scream it if the system was implemented and complete harda**es keep asking for matches to be reviewed. That would be a lack of GP. I think as a FIRST community -- ppl would be mature and noble enough to contest rulings when it's absolutly appropriate.
So there you go- get instant replay-- only because most of you are so ridiculously-mindlessly against it(ad it would be pretty neat).

[Cory]

Originally Posted by Collmandoman

I think many overestimate how much equipment you would need for instant replay. One camera would suffice mounted over the playing field. How formal would this have to be... not very(someone could run up grab the camera and move to the spot of the match). Video proof is proof - if there isn't 'indisputable' evidence then you move on. If there is - then do something about it. For people saying that it would be UN GP to have instant replay, I can only say send me directions to your utopia - I'd love to live there. Regardless it's not even an issue about GP.

Ok, so I'm working at Delphi designing whatnot, and I screw up pretty big. In this real world they don't say.. well you tried your hardest, and your intentions were right - here's a pat on the back. You can lose your job. People saying it's UN-GP to second guess a ruling are using GP as a control in a pretty ridiculous way. Many of you GP as some absurd defense mechanism- just think... are you sending the right message to the participants in FIRST?

Alot of teams come to regionals with a gameplan, that's the product of months of planning, strategizing, hardwork, cooperation and whatnot. (I know FIRST isn't just about winning a regional - so save me the time with that response) To have several months of dedication be eraced in one facet of the competition because of a bad call is kind of silly. There should be a safeguard against this, and unfortunatly it might make a day longer by about 20 minutes at a FIRST event. Ok, the brains behind FIRST are pretty smart-- they could plan this out and hand a videocam to every regional. Heck - ppl could even let FIRST borrow on for the weekend *shock*. I dunno many of you seem to think it would ruin FIRST or something. Had the technology been around 100 years ago in college football - you'd prob here about this year as the 100th anniversary of instant replay. So lets put the T in FIRST and actually consider this.
So lets say ... people actually do consider this...... FIRST tries to make an event that suits spectators. This could add to the excitement of a first event with proper planning and structuring. Imagine the final match being contested and the proper team wins the event. OMG EXCITEMENT OMG
If you want to scream GP, scream it if the system was implemented and complete harda**es keep asking for matches to be reviewed. That would be a lack of GP. I think as a FIRST community -- ppl would be mature and noble enough to contest rulings when it's absolutly appropriate.
So there you go- get instant replay-- only because most of you are so ridiculously-mindlessly against it(ad it would be pretty neat).

One camera is not enough. You can't tell anything from one camera mounted directly above the playing field. About all you'll see is boxes moving around.

Let's put it this way--if a ref standing less than two feet away, looking directly at a robot say, can't tell if it is or isn't in the loading zone, how on earth do you figure a camcorder mounted twenty feet above the field will?

Last I checked, someone working at Delphi was there to provide a service in return for monetary compensation. Provide an inadequate service, you don't get paid. Refs in FIRST are volunteers, completely different situation.

I don't like how "GP" is tossed around every 5 seconds, but it surely isn't appropriate for people to boo and crap on people who give up time out of their busy lives to come referee, when the majority of the time, the person doing the criticizing couldn't have done a better job themselves. You're right--we aren't sending the right message out to people. Far too many think this kind of behavior is OK. The objective of FIRST isn't to teach kids to be sore losers.

If one bad call ruins your entire weekend, you're probably not getting much out of this program. It would probably be wise to re-evaluate the reasons you participate.

How can you compare to college football? College football has clear cut, tangible results. It results in schools either making or losing large sums of money, in addition to increased alumni donations when teams are winning. Getting "screwed" out of a win in a college football game is a MUCH bigger deal than losing one utterly insignificant FIRST match. In addition, the refs get paid.

Since you're into making comparisons to college sports, tell me when the last time was that you saw a instant replay setup that included only one camera to watch all the action? You need a whole bunch of cameras, to cover as many angles as possible.

How would instant replay make the game more spectator friendly? All it will do is slow the gameplay, thus making it harder to sit there and keep from getting bored.

Let's stop beating this dead horse.

[Collmandoman]

Originally Posted by Cory

One camera is not enough. You can't tell anything from one camera mounted directly above the playing field. About all you'll see is boxes moving around.

Let's put it this way--if a ref standing less than two feet away, looking directly at a robot say, can't tell if it is or isn't in the loading zone, how on earth do you figure a camcorder mounted twenty feet above the field will?

Last I checked, someone working at Delphi was there to provide a service in return for monetary compensation. Provide an inadequate service, you don't get paid. Refs in FIRST are volunteers, completely different situation.

I don't like how "GP" is tossed around every 5 seconds, but it surely isn't appropriate for people to boo and crap on people who give up time out of their busy lives to come referee, when the majority of the time, the person doing the criticizing couldn't have done a better job themselves. You're right--we aren't sending the right message out to people. Far too many think this kind of behavior is OK. The objective of FIRST isn't to teach kids to be sore losers.

If one bad call ruins your entire weekend, you're probably not getting much out of this program. It would probably be wise to re-evaluate the reasons you participate.

How can you compare to college football? College football has clear cut, tangible results. It results in schools either making or losing large sums of money, in addition to increased alumni donations when teams are winning. Getting "screwed" out of a win in a college football game is a MUCH bigger deal than losing one utterly insignificant FIRST match. In addition, the refs get paid.

Since you're into making comparisons to college sports, tell me when the last time was that you saw a instant replay setup that included only one camera to watch all the action? You need a whole bunch of cameras, to cover as many angles as possible.

How would instant replay make the game more spectator friendly? All it will do is slow the gameplay, thus making it harder to sit there and keep from getting bored.

Let's stop beating this dead horse.

yes one video camera over the playing field actually turns the robots into unrecognizable boxes that blur the video site - infact a view from above would confuse most watchers, as they have never seen a robot from above? I guess I just dont understand you

I dont believe it's the calls the refs are 2 feet away from ppl are having problems with. It's the ones when they are looking the other way, or distracted by somethign else.

Ok hey, I volunteer at the redcross 20 hours a week, but that doesn't make it right for me to make mistakes. And I'm not saying they are purposefulyl making mistakes - if I could have a system in place where I could quickly fix somethign I did wrong.. even i was volunteering I would opt for it... pretty simple

I don't believe anyone is booing or crapping on the refs.. and I certaintly am not. If they could be aided to correct something they didn't see... I don't think they would mind. and if they did... um.. well that complex should keep them from volunteering in first

for the record, I've never been the result of a bad call.. so I'm not arguing for some past anger.. it just makes sense to atleast consider this

um, I was simply making a comparison to another organization with replay, and might I add - bc of it - things are nearly perfect --
think of this strange situation.... Some sponsor drops you because they dont' get enough recognition bc you lost the regional! (I know that's complame) BUT OMG what if?! I guess they aren't in FIRST for the right reasons then!! right?! but that doesn't matter, you dont' have money now-- boohoo

I think this is the cool thing, one camera can cover the entire field, with a pretty good view, and sense a camera taking footage over a field doesn't have any angle blindness it would most likely work very well. Think about it before you refuse it so quickly.

Teams could take a penalty for incorrectly challenging a call, or possibly gain everything by challenging. Fans like to see things disputed, especially ones without any team bias. Drama sells! If you disagree, turn on your tv and look for this pretty new "reality" tv thing sweeping into yours and my livingrooms'!

I think a thread is dead if it's locked - this horse is very alive.

[Steve W]

OK, I get sucked into another one. Again I will say, it takes more than 1 camera to make a difference. Take the NHL for example. There are usually 3 cameras trained on 1 goal. Even after looking at slow motion they still can't tell the difference. 3 cameras per goal and you believe that you could see a whole field from 1 camera placed above the field? I will also challenge the bad call argument. The ref would only go to replay if they were not sure AND the play results in a goal/non-goal. The argument that you are really making is missed calls. I believe that last year there were between 8 and 10 refs per match. That is a lot more eyes than 1 camera. I have seen calls go both ways. I have watched a play, consulted with the ref after and we both had different views of what happened. We were standing next to each other.

If you want to make the game better then get the designers, builders, drivers and human players to stop making mistakes and design perfect robots, use perfect strategy and perfect control. If this was done then we can start questioning the refs and the system for minor, questionable points of view.

[Andy Baker]

For those who wish to implement instant replay in FIRST, I suggest you do 1 of 3 things:

1. Volunteer as a referee. VIMS is up and running. Sign up for a regional, help out, and learn from an experienced head ref. Your opinions about instant replay will become more credible if you are an experienced FIRST ref.

2. Create an off-season competition and implement tweaks to FIRST's rules as you wish. If you want to add instant replay to the game, go right ahead. Just make sure the teams know of this adjustment when they sign up for your event.

3. Convince someone else who runs an off-season event to implement instant replay. Offer to run this system for them, by providing the plan, equipment, and implementation details. Don't just say "you need to do this", but rather offer a solution and provide the resources to get it done. Also, don't assume that if you offer a complete package that this will be accepted by the people hosting this event. (the people who put on these off-season events have enough to worry about without this as an additional thing)

Reffing a FIRST event is unlike being an ump or a ref at any other event. Where else is a game invented each year and over 1000 teams play this game within 3 months of its birth? Game interpretations and rules are not always black and white. Instant replay will not solve disagreements with calls, it is as simple as that. If you do not understand this, please look to doing items 1 or 2 above.

Andy B.

[petek]

Originally Posted by Andy Baker

For those who wish to implement instant replay in FIRST, I suggest you do 1 of 3 things:

1. Volunteer as a referee. VIMS is up and running. Sign up for a regional, help out, and learn from an experienced head ref. Your opinions about instant replay will become more credible if you are an experienced FIRST ref.

2. Create an off-season competition and implement tweaks to FIRST's rules as you wish. If you want to add instant replay to the game, go right ahead. Just make sure the teams know of this adjustment when they sign up for your event.

3. Convince someone else who runs an off-season event to implement instant replay. Offer to run this system for them, by providing the plan, equipment, and implementation details. Don't just say "you need to do this", but rather offer a solution and provide the resources to get it done. Also, don't assume that if you offer a complete package that this will be accepted by the people hosting this event. (the people who put on these off-season events have enough to worry about without this as an additional thing)

Reffing a FIRST event is unlike being an ump or a ref at any other event. Where else is a game invented each year and over 1000 teams play this game within 3 months of its birth? Game interpretations and rules are not always black and white. Instant replay will not solve disagreements with calls, it is as simple as that. If you do not understand this, please look to doing items 1 or 2 above.

Andy B.

Amen, Brother!

In 2005 I volunteered at the NJ and Philly regionals (field reset & robot insp respectively), and after finding myself second-guessing the refs, decided I should walk in their shoes a bit - so I reffed at PARC and Ramp Riot. After that experience I decided that Triple Play was designed primarily to challenge the refs and scorekeepers! That is one tough game to ref fairly, not made any easier during the early season by constant rules "clarifications".

Even if instant replay could be instituted without adding 5 minutes per match I am certain that there would be fewer volunteers, more rather than less contention and a whole lot less fun had by all. If people really want to see "better" refereeing, they should see what they can do to help FIRST make better (more clear-cut) rules and get the bugs out before competition begins.

Proving my inability to learn from experience, this year I'm on VIMS for three regionals where I requested to ref, and am head ref for the DE FVC event. I'm curious to know what those who want instant replay are doing this year?

[Tristan Lall]

Originally Posted by petek

Proving my inability to learn from experience, this year I'm on VIMS for three regionals where I requested to ref, and am head ref for the DE FVC event. I'm curious to know what those who want instant replay are doing this year?

Once again, let me clarify that I'm not specifically in favour of instant replay for a given game, though I think that it's worth looking into, provided that reasonable limits are specified for its use.

Now with that said, I'm not unaware of what it takes to be an official. I've twice been a ref at the Wonderland invitational, I was both an inspector and assistant scorekeeper at the last GTR, and assistant scorekeeper and head inspector at Waterloo. I'll probably be doing the same this year, and maybe also at one other event. (Actually, I've also umpired baseball, and refereed at the Toronto Kickoff Challenges.)

[Collmandoman]

can you see another robot hit another with one camera over a field.. in fact several things can be seen-- but this is not the main thing.. for instance I have seen several mathes that have just not been socred correctly - some resulting in another team losing -
EXAMPLE - Lets take the 2005 game- Some teams would descore tetras while trying to cap their own-[but we all know the decapped team owns that goal] but that was just never taken into account.. and it compl confused the scoring -- and even with all the refs looking at the field... the right calls were not made.. is this the refs fault? sorta, but mostly not- the limit or accuracy of a volunteering ref is less than if they were paid -- couple that with several rules that don't come up often .. and you can get yourself into a mess.. VIDEO REPLAY would be to aid them -- it would also be for the other rare cirumstances when the rules of the game are ridiculously not upheld, bc of refs looking the wrong way or what not... and a team wanting to challenge the call...
so listen... you don't need 39 cameras strategically placed to hit every angle.. if it can't be solved with one camera above the playing field -- then it makes sense the ref missed it... you smell what I'm stepping in!?

[Andy Baker]

Originally Posted by Collmandoman

so listen... you don't need 39 cameras strategically placed to hit every angle.. if it can't be solved with one camera above the playing field -- then it makes sense the ref missed it... you smell what I'm stepping in!?

You've restated your point. Since you are passionate about this, I suggest you create a detailed plan including logistics, equipment, costs, and implementation factors. Get into the details. For instance, how many "challenges" does each team get per competition (similar to NFL coaches getting 2 challenges per gam)?

Once you do your homework, put your findings into a white paper and post it so more FIRSTers can see your work. If feasible, the plan will get better with more input. More detailed feedback will be received this way, and we all could be convinced if this is even a possibility. Sell it to the rest of us. Be productive as opposed to simply suggesting that this must happen.

Andy B.

[Stu Bloom]

Originally Posted by Collmandoman

... you smell what I'm stepping in!?

Yeah, well you're definitely stepping in something !

It sure is easy to sling all of this smelly stuff when you hide behind a screen name on some forum, with NO identifying information in your profile.

AND ... I was going to reply personally and directly to you ... but since you don't accept any messages or emails thru this site I have no choice but to respond publicly:

Originally Posted by Stu Bloom

Did you intend for that to be negative feedback? If so, while I respect your right to your opinion of my opinion, I value
Dave Lavery's opinion MUCH more.

BTW ... how many matches have you refereed?

And one more thing ... PLEASE re-read Andy's posts above and see if you can't take his advice. We might all be better off for your efforts.

[EricH]

I see three sides to this. One is the team who loses on what they see as a bad call and asks for a replay. Another is the refs' side. The third is the team who has the replay go against them. For the team who asks, instant replay would solve the problem of losing (maybe). For the refs, each individual replay is a new piece of hassle, more teams mad at them, and they still have many more matches to go.

But what about the team that loses due to replay? No one has brought them up yet. How would they feel? They would most likely feel bummed that they lost, probably angry at the refs, and possibly annoyed enough to quit FIRST. Then where does the inspiration go for that school?

I have only reffed at an FLL scrimmage between two teams from the same school. That was hard enough. Having to note when to remove scoring objects and dealing with field damage that could affect points was annoying enough. I didn't have teams coming to me and complaining and asking for instant replay. I know this is FLL, but I think that just from that, I am not sure I want to even attempt reffing a FRC event. I am amazed that the refs even volunteer for these tough calls. Why make their job harder by using instant replay?

If instant replay would make things easier on everyone, I personally would probably say go for it, but it will make things harder on at least one group of the three covered above, and it will disappoint one of the other groups.

[Collmandoman]

ok then

pls don't use my name - for reasons that are very personal - and I'm not going to explain to you or anyone, and I hope you honor that

also don't post peoples rep messages - I believe that is a forum rule

thank you,
me

You may reach me on aim at stealingshrimp