21-03-2013 19:49

class1234567

Re: pic: Who should have gotten the foul? part 1

It really doesnt matter because if there wouldnt have been any fouls the end result would have still been the same. But in my view the call should have not been called.

For those wanting to see the video of the "foul" here is the link
http://www.thebluealliance.com/match/2013mosl_f1m2

21-03-2013 19:52

faust1706

Re: pic: Who should have gotten the foul? part 1

G18-1
Strategies aimed solely at forcing the opposing ALLIANCE to violate a rule are not in the spirit of FRC and are not allowed. Rule violations forced in this manner will not result in assessment of a penalty on the target ALLIANCE .

Violation: TECHNICAL FOUL

this is the foul we were penalized with.

Take note of the frisbee about to land in the 3 point goal.

21-03-2013 19:55

class1234567

Re: pic: Who should have gotten the foul? part 1

But one can also think that you alliance was trying to block 3284 from getting in postion to score. Also the judges could have thought you were trying to make 3284 hit you while you were shooting in your protected zone

21-03-2013 20:00

rsisk

Re: pic: Who should have gotten the foul? part 1

Referee, not judge.

Do you have a time code on the video when this happened? and where on the field.

21-03-2013 20:00

Tem1514 Mentor

Re: pic: Who should have gotten the foul? part 1

I would have to watch again, but didn't the blue bot push the red bot for more then 5 seconds? That would be a blocking/pinning type foul I think.

21-03-2013 20:03

class1234567

Re: pic: Who should have gotten the foul? part 1

my fault, i was typing to quickly , it is pretty much the whole match by the red alliance feeding station

21-03-2013 20:47

John Sabath

Re: pic: Who should have gotten the foul? part 1

I was surprised to see the technical called as well.

But while we're on the topic of bad calls at St. Louis, I present the missed pinning call that cost us QF1M2:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZzERE7CDvg

21-03-2013 20:57

faust1706

Re: pic: Who should have gotten the foul? part 1

I do have an HD video of this match from a camera a few inches to the right of the kinect. And 3284 had zero frisbees in it's possession.

21-03-2013 21:46

Zakreon

Re: pic: Who should have gotten the foul? part 1

I'm sure almost all of our team would agree that 1288's intent was not to force us to foul, and it was quite clear that 1288 was just trying to increase the window of opportunity for you to get shots off.

Also worth noting is that it isn't a pin if the robot can go in the opposite direction, which 1444 and 1288 could of done for most of the match. We weren't pressing them against anything that would completely stop movement.

21-03-2013 22:42

Iaquinto.Joe

Re: pic: Who should have gotten the foul? part 1

A bit off topic but how does 3284 actuate their blocker? Is there a picture?

21-03-2013 22:48

Zakreon

Re: pic: Who should have gotten the foul? part 1

We use 2 cylinders on either side of the support struts



You can see one of them in that picture

22-03-2013 00:59

Lil' Lavery

Re: pic: Who should have gotten the foul? part 1

Who are you benefiting by posting these pictures? I understand venting frustration at a bad call, but the event is over and this matter has already been discussed elsewhere. It seems like you're just trying to drum up controversy.

The Blue alliance won the match by 60 points. Even if the refs hadn't called G18-1 on the red alliance AND had instead called G22 on the blue alliance, it would have been a 89-52 win for blue. The bigger issue in my mind is why the red alliance didn't realize their strategy wasn't working, and adapt partway through the match. Despite trailing coming out of autonomous, they only had one robot even attempting to score, and it was getting shut down. Continuously launching into a blocking device is just a waste of discs and time.

22-03-2013 01:30

coalhot

Re: pic: Who should have gotten the foul? part 1

This. And to those that propose instant replay for FIRST matches, this is one of the issues that comes with it.

On another note, seems like a more than normal amount of teams/people/students complaining when their season is over. Must be the weather around these parts...

22-03-2013 11:10

ToddF

Re: pic: Who should have gotten the foul? part 1

No matter who won or lost, or whether the foul in question would have made a difference to the final outcome of the match, all teams that play the game should have the right to be fairly refereed. From what I've seen, the "question box" isn't treated as a way to appeal a ruling, it is treated as a way to inform the teams of the referees final ruling, with no chance of that decision being reviewed or reversed. In the absence of a legitimate appeals process, those teams who feel they have been wronged have little other recourse than to post their evidence on CD, let the community decide, and provide the referee community with an example of how they got it wrong or right, as the case may be.

I have no bias in this particular match, but I'm glad to give my analysis, just as an intellectual exercise. I will say up front that in judgement calls, I'm going to favor the non-aggressor. This is often how professional sports refs make judgement calls, according to books I've read by professional sports referees.

First I'll say that in this particular case, just presenting pictures as evidence is not going to cut it. Without video, the evidence is inconclusive to make a ruling. The video available isn't super clear, as it is from rather far away. Links to closer video might change my analysis. But here goes:

The first thing I noticed was that at least two refs were waving the flags almost constantly. Until I read at least two threads, I couldn't even figure out what the penalty was that was in dispute. I finally decided to ignore the refs and observe the robots. I first looked for pinning penalties. I could find no instances of pinning for over 5 seconds, as all of the robots could have escaped by simply backing off from the pushing contest. What I saw was the blue robot attempting to hold position to block the tall shooter (legal action) and two red robots trying to push the blue robot out of blocking position (legal action). At :42, the blue robot pushes a red defender into the red shooter (not illegal). At 1:04, the red robots work together to push the blue robot out of blocking position (legal action). That the blue robot is no longer blocking is evidenced by a 3 point shot at 1:06. At 1:08, the red robots, still working together, force the blue robot to commit a "too tall" penalty, by pushing the blue robot over the auto line. Now comes the point where a judgement must be made. I see the blue robot continuously attempting to return to the auto zone, and finally succeeding at 1:19. At 1:06, the blue robot ceased being a blocker, and became the victim of the red robots forcing it commit a penalty. So no penalty called on the blue robot. The blue robot continuously attempts to return to the autozone for over 10 seconds. The red robots prevent blue from doing so. So I see a technical foul by red. At 2:00 the blue robot voluntarily drives out of the auto zone before lowering their net, which is a penalty.

So, in short, pushing and shoving is fine. When blue is blocking the red shooter, red's actions are double defensive (defense against a defender). When blue is no longer blocking the shooter, red forcing blue to commit a penalty (pushing the robot out of the auto and preventing blue from returning) has no justification. When blue drives over the line voluntarily with the net up, blue commits a penalty.

From all the flag waving by the referees, I have no idea what penalties were actually called. I also give them the benefit of the doubt, as I had to watch the video numerous times to really see what was going on. Honestly, this just makes me want to volunteer to be a referee. If I did, though, my wife would kill me. Going to two regionals as a participant already eats away enough of my vacation days.

22-03-2013 11:24

savage

Re: pic: Who should have gotten the foul? part 1

If a bot has at least one way of egress from a possible pin, like in this match that your complaint is about then there should be no pin called or blockading. As 3284 sole role in the match was to block the shooter. Now my .02 i think the GDC needs to change the max height rule for when you are on one side of the field or the other. They have done it in the past I just cant remember at this time.

And for the last time NO Instant REPLAY EVER!!!!!!!!!! Most events run late as it is, and this is why we have 5-6 REFS on the Field at one time, to cover all the zones. Yes they miss calls but so does the NFL and they have replay.

But Back to the match on hand, the Red Alliance should have seen this coming and changed their game plan. They got Tunnel Vision and missed the other two bots scoring undefended, which was a huge mistake and cost them the match.

22-03-2013 12:24

Zakreon

Re: pic: Who should have gotten the foul? part 1

You're pretty well spot on there Todd. Red received a technical foul for blocking our team from returning to the autonomous zone, and we received a regular foul for moving out of the zone before our net could lower. There were also 2 separate fouls on red for contacting the blue pyramid.

1288 also had a great shooter, but it was broken in this match, they couldn't shoot. 1706 was their only viable offensive bot, it actually does make sense that both 1288 and 1444 would be trying to push us out of the way to let 1706 score.

22-03-2013 13:08

ToddF

Re: pic: Who should have gotten the foul? part 1

I saw two touches of the pyramid, one at 1:30 and one at 1:35. I reviewed the rule for pyramid touches:

G27
ROBOTS may not contact or otherwise interfere with their opponents’ PYRAMID. Inconsequential contact will not be penalized.

For the first touch, the only robot touching the blue pyramid was the red robot, so the contact was inconsequential. For the second touch, a blue robot lined up on an opposite corner to shoot while the red robot was still touching. I ruled this as also inconsequential.

At 2:02, at first it looked like red might have touched while blue was hanging, but I could see a white disk on the ground between the red robot and the pyramid, so no touch.

22-03-2013 13:33

Zakreon

Re: pic: Who should have gotten the foul? part 1

Those may have been unwarranted, but I do believe that they received fouls for the contact.

22-03-2013 14:57

Shane 2429

Re: pic: Who should have gotten the foul? part 1

I agree that it was a bad call because you can clearly see that the defender could have dropped their net and in all reality the driver of the robot should have seen that in a 2v1 push match he was going to loose and in all reality those two robots were just trying to protect their shooter

I also seen the possible pinning call that could have been made though in all reality somebody messed up in the scouting for that match cause whoever was originally defending was way too underpowered to be trying to defend against that robot.

Also there is a point in match when you need to switch strategy cause there's was no reason why those other two robots on blue should have had free reign in their shooting ally .

22-03-2013 15:09

Zakreon

Re: pic: Who should have gotten the foul? part 1

Actually we aren't able to lower the net unless we can quickly jerk the bot around, its a problem with how the brackets connecting to the net are designed. We are making new brackets for our next regional to correct this problem.

23-03-2013 08:59

ericbanker

Re: pic: Who should have gotten the foul? part 1

1288's shooter was broken? So that's why they were forced to play defense. Does anyone know when and how that happened? 1288 had a really great robot, their shooter was a bit better than ours, and what I believe was a sideways turned holonomic/mecanum drive was really innovative.

Edit: I just rewatched the matches and they were shooting fine in the 1st finals match. They must have gotten damaged from the impacts by defenders in that match...but then they score a buzzer beater into the 3 point goal. So I'm still lost on what happened. In match 2, their autonomous fails to launch discs, and you can hear it clicking.

23-03-2013 12:16

bulbajackel

Re: pic: Who should have gotten the foul? part 1

It happened somewhere where the robot just didn't respond to the field i believe. I don't know the specifics, but whatever happened there almost changed things. Didn't they start looking for a replacement?

23-03-2013 13:06

Zakreon

Re: pic: Who should have gotten the foul? part 1

A teammate told me that their cam that raises the shooter broke in some way, so the shooter could not properly move into position to fire