RULES OF ENGAGEMENT
The 2008 FIRST OVERDRIVE rules will be used for this competition with a few additions/modifications. These changes/modifications have been reviewed and fully endorsed by MARC’s Head Referee and therefore will be implemented into this years MARC Competition.
There have been a few situations where the scoring came into question because of some allegedly missed hurdles/laps, and due to the fluid scoring process. Since the infrared system was a complete failure from the get-go, the only solution would be to use a video review. Though I’d like to experiment with this idea, I don’t want to turn the competition into a mockery or a circus. I also don’t want to waste time with this if we have a lot of matches to get through. If things are anything like Detroit this year or MARC last year, I’m not worried and in fact video review might help if it’s needed. With this being an off-season competition, not all of the referees will be experienced. I don’t have a problem with inexperienced referees, but this may also be incentive to have a review system.
What I was thinking of regarding a video review system would be somewhat simple. A stationary camera would be placed at a spot in the arena where the finish line and overpass are visible. It could be above the player’s station at either end, or somewhere in the arena, just as long as there’s a clear view of the finish line/overpass. It would only be used to review robot and ball scoring in only the most extraordinary circumstances. On the other end of the camera, you’d have a small screen and a video playback (VCR, TIVO, other recording method) that would specifically be used for the video review. Included in this year’s “RULES OF ENGAGEMENT” is the additional modification to <T03> to go through with video review.
We have also made a few changes to help promote scoring while reducing penalization.
For Distribution
The following changes will be made to promote scoring:
HURDLE: When a TRACKBALL CROSSES a FINISH LINE while passing above the OVERPASS. (OMIT “and then contacts either the floor or another ROBOT before re-contacting the originating ROBOT.”)
<G10>Each TRACKBALL that has CROSSED its own FINISH LINE will earn 2 points. (OMIT “while not in contact with a
ROBOT of the same ALLIANCE”)
Note: A trackball must still not be in contact with a robot in order to score the 12 pt bonus
Additionally, the following change will be made to reduce penalization:
<G22>Direction Of Traffic – ROBOTS must proceed around the TRACK in a counter-clockwise direction. Once a ROBOT has CROSSED a LANE MARKER or FINISH LINE, it shall not overtly break the plane of the line by moving in the clockwise direction. A PENALTY will be assigned for each infraction.
At the referee’s discretion, if it is determined that the driver could not have reasonably anticipated or avoided violating this penalty, it will not be called.
Recognizing the need for scoring verification during this high-paced competition, the following experimental process will be implemented:
<T03> The Head Referee has the ultimate authority on the field during the competition. THE HEAD REFEREE RULINGS ARE FINAL! The Head Referee will review recorded replays only under the following circumstances.
Video Replay Rules:
Only robot and trackball scoring are reviewable <G03-G14>. Penalties are not reviewable.
Scoring dispute must affect the outcome of the Match Qualifying Point distribution.
Match Score must be challenged before the Ball Randomization of the next match and must comply with <T04>.
Video Replay will be conducted on an independent video recording system by the Head Referee and/or his surrogate only. No personal videos will be considered.
A challenge must be initiated by the robot who’s scoring is in question.
Teams get 1 challenge during Qualifying Matches.
Alliances get 1 challenge during Elimination Matches, provided that they have a TIME-OUT remaining.
A lost challenge during Qualifying Matches will result in a yellow card to the challenging team.
A lost challenge during Elimination Matches will result in a yellow card to all three alliance teams and the loss of the alliance’s TIME-OUT.
If upon review a scoring discrepancy is found either related or unrelated to the original challenge, the score shall be corrected.
<T05-T11> still apply in relation to this rule.
The Head Referee reserves the right to deny Video Replay under his own discretion.
Regarding video review - You’ve eliminated two things that video review might not be able to see - the ball falling onto a robot following a hurdle, or the robot being in contact with a trackball during a crossing. But a video review will not answer the question as to whether a ball was scoreable or not. Remember that the ball must pass over the opposite finish line before it can be scored again.
I question issuing yellow cards to the alliance in the finals for a challenge that does not stand up. Losing the time out would be enough penalty in my mind. But it’s your game and your rules.
I like the option of referee judgement on <G22>. Did you consider extending that to <G42> as well - that if a hurdle is made despite any interference, the penalty shouldn’t be assessed?
I think they got it right. A team will have to be really sure before they use a challenge. Like the idea of catching your own hurdle too, but does that mean a claw bot could just stick the ball past the hurdle and then back-up,lower down and go around, never losing possesion?
No. There’s another rule that says that once a trackball has scored, it has to cross the opponent’s finish line before scoring again. The rule is <G13>. It hasn’t been changed that I can see.
Does a basketball score if you never let go of it? That’s a bit of “lawyering the rules” You must hurdle the trackball but you may contact it post-hurdle.
Back to the basketball analogy, a foul is still a foul even if a player scores. A robot, like a player, may be in a very vulnerable position while hurdling and we don’t want robots to get hurt. Keep in mind that incidental contact still is permitted.
a) <G22> still applies in hybrid, as the hybrid coach is responsible for the robot’s movement.
b) It is not a referees job to judge
c) The rule changes should make a referee’s job simpler and free up the scoring refs to focus on counting and free up the quadrant refs to focus on G37/G40/G42
d) The referees for this competition will have to pass the Michigan Referee Certification Test before the competition. Anybody desiring to referee should contact either Steve or myself.
Isn’t the Yellow Card for a failed challenge a bit harsh? If you only get one challenge in the first place (and in the case of the finals, you can loose a time out) isn’t that enough to deter people from overusing the system?
I think the likelihood of even having a situation where a ref missed a point, the team notices it, the missed point makes a difference in the match, AND the team is confident enough to challenge it are extremely unlikely, whats the point of having a system in place if it only gets used in maybe 1 match?
Like GaryVoshol said though, it is your game and your rules.
Regardless, this is sure to be a very exciting event!
