I am starting this thread as a quote from Dave Lavery. The question relates to penalties for things such as building outside of build period, bringing prebuilt items to comp, not declaring costs properly, and any other off field or ethical foul.
What do you feel is appropriate and how should this be enforced? Who who do the enforcing and should there be any limits to the penalties.
I don’t feel that any penalties are necessary because I couldn’t imagine that any of the fine teams in this program would even consider such a thing. We don’t need all these penalties because everyone knows these actions would be against “the spirit of the game.” And if these things really do go on in our world then those teams should be ashamed of themselves and the rest of us should be proud that we are not them. And if you say that is is unfair to the honest people maybe so but remember, they are not cheating you, only themselves.
Just to bring everyone up to speed, I am quite interested in any discussion in response to this post
which was posted as part of this YMTC thread. Your thoughtful comments will be most appreciated.
-dave
Just moving it to the right thread:
If the team performing these actions has more regionals or championship to attend on top of the given regional, they should be barred from receiving any awards or taking apart in the final rounds. Their actions do not merit any positive recognition during that competition year or perhaps the next also; however, they should be allowed to at least participate in the qualifying rounds so that the individuals not involved in these violations will not become punished and the students may become inspired by watching the rounds.
I also feel that FIRST should explain in writing to the team that is such an action was to be performed by them again, they would not be able to participate in any FIRST competition in the future.
Personally I think, FIRST is all year around. I like to work with designs and prototypes through out the whole year. The veteran teams always gets the chance to work on something since they all know what the previous games has been. they make prototypes, student comes up with crazy cool stuff, for example, Tkwetzel chopper (very nice work). Every month when i go through the picture galleries on Chiefdelphi, i find bunch of inventor/cad work that are done by mentors, students which is awesome.
I dont think there is anything wrong working with designs and making prototypes, As long as you make new parts and a whole new robot during those 6 weeks of build season.
I look at it this way, A singer always sings to get his/her voice better, a football team always practices to get better, so what is wrong with a FIRST team practicing making new designs and building them. Aren’t the students in FIRST getting inspired and aren’t they all learning something. The past 3 years that i have been in FIRST, i have learned a lot (it does include all the 3 season’s 18 weeks but other than those 6 weeks in each season, i have done other projects to keep myself busy throughout the year.) i just think its wrong, if teams are allowed to use parts at the competition, which they built before the season. How should it be enforeced? well, i am not sure how we can tell, what team has built what before the season, that is where Honesty comes in play.
Edit- (thanks to jaine for pointing this out). If you want to penalize a team for making parts and using them on the robot (which was build before season), Wouldn’t you have to find out what they have built and what they are using? how would you do that? isnt that where the honestly will come in play? and if there was a way to find out what a team has done, and if they have broken the rules, i think they should be penalize for the particular season (not compete).
-Arefin.
At least in the regional (or championship) events, this is the way I see it. Each team is a show, a performance with all the other teams as the audience. It is the implied duty of each show to impress it’s audience (both on and off the field) and that they do because the hosts of the show do not want any tomatoes thrown.
Considering the “rules” get muddy every year when all the lawyers break into full swing, usually because they hadn’t been thought through enough for 1000’s of people to poke holes in. It gets very easy to find yourself somewhere you shouldn’t be. Also with the on the fly Q&A board developing things independent of the original documentation again you find yourself with justifiable circumstances in soooo many Grey’s. I just don’t think FIRST has covered itself well in the past. I’ve been guilty of treading uncertain ground because frankly I didn’t “know” what the rules were. So in that respect I can’t see hanging a whole team because someone goofed, or even made a bad or wrong decision. I would think like Sandrag said, we’re dealing with a good element of folks. The better side of people will prevail in all this, along with a conscience. After you have companies investing some big bucks into this endeavor only to find someone threw wrench in the works and caused the donation to be void. I think that would be a HUGE mistake on FIRST’s part. I do think the rules need teeth, but definitely go light on the team as a whole. I could go along with playing Dave’s favorite albums or something, also making public announcements, like “so and so did this and we informed them of the infraction, please do not make this mistake”. I dunno…
First Offense:
Found during seeding rounds:
Found during eliminations/after the event:
**Probation
**
**Second Offense During Probation
**
I was thinking of a situation. Lets suppose that Team X has a bot and their arm mechanism which weighs a lot goes haywire and keeps breaking on the field. Lets say in match 123 they finally hang successfully and they’re all happy about it. When they try to get their robot off the bar it breaks and falls on one of the kids/referees/someone around and breaks their head. I feel in a situation as such the teams should be allowed to work on their robot in the hotels or so because more than anything else this means safety. We are not at a corporate level thing as yet, and shouldn’t fear penalties for such things. Since we are high school kids I think we should be allowed for situations like above.
However, to level the playing field, I don’t think its ok to work on the robot after the ship date. For a penalty I would suggest not letting them participate in a few rounds rather than just stop them from going to a regional. I say this because maybe not all the kids on the team were for it and the other half of the team were filled with junk heads and evil minds who could only care about winning a competition(If you just wanted to play, enjoy and learn then I am sure you wouldn’t go crazy and build past the 6 weeks). And then, I think the embarrassment that they’ve violated a rule is by itself a punishment. I also think they should be punished or such only if the rules state so clearly.
If you have the resources, then its good to practice and experiment making new parts. And if its something good, you can use it on the robot(of course re-make it at the competition, but now since you have it drawn and stuff and you know how to make it it should not be a hard to make it). By making new parts and experimenting with parts kids on the team learn more and in turn inspires them more, which is the goal of FIRST.
I must say that I agree with Meli. I don’t think these teams should be able to receive any acknowledgment from FIRST and competition sponsors. I must also like to add that I think the teams should be put on “probation.” This probation includes consequences like limiting the number of competitions they may attends, and prohibiting them from attending nationals. In order to have this probation lifted, these teams must submit an “application,” which is basically a formal apology and insurance against future illegal actions.
I have a few problems with my own thoughts though:
If a team builds their robot in an prohibited location, or keeps working on robot parts after the robot ship date, or engages in just plain unsportsmanlike conduct in the stadium stands, or builds the robot with an illegal part and intentionally disguises it so that it won’t be found by inspectors, what should happen to the team?
First, I think it is really up to FIRST to decide what the punishments should be for an infraction upon the rules. Nonetheless, I will share my opinions…
I think that the degree of the penalty should correlate to the degree of the infraction. I also think that FIRST should implement a rule system that allows for teams to fix what they have done wrong, depending on the infraction.
I think that teams should be given more than one chance to rectify their behavior. The team might not have known that they were in violation of the rules, and it would be unfair to punish then too severely for something that they might not have even known about. This should be applicable to most infractions.
For example, if a team builds a part that is illegal and uses it in a match, I think they should have the chance to remove the illegal part and receive a minor penalty. However, if they were discovered to be using the illegal part again, then they should receive a larger punishment, such as disqualification.
Giving people a chance to recognize that their actions were unacceptable …and then letting them graciously fix their mistakes… will teach a better lesson than enforcing a more severe punishment. If a team were to be DQed right away after making a mistake, they would walk away feeling frustrated and resentful, and way less open to changing their attitude about the competition.
And an aside on honesty:
Arefin brings up a very good point here:
If you want to penalize a team for making parts and using them on the robot (which was build before season), Wouldn’t you have to find out what they have built and what they are using? how would you do that?
For some infractions of the rules, it may be just plain impossible to tell who broke them, and who didn’t. How do you look at a robot and say… “oh that part was prebuilt. …and that one wasn’t”? As Arefin said, this is where honesty comes into play… unfortunately, I don’t think FIRST will ever be able to come up with a way to accurately decide what was and was not prebuilt… all you can rely on is hearsay.
Hearsay is not acceptable in competition. I think that as long as human nature exists, there will always be dishonesty. I think that FIRST should do the best it can to prevent this, however, there is a limit to exactly how nitpicky FIRST will be. I think it is ludicrous to attempt to mete perfect justice to all competitors. However, it is important that we try our best.
– Jaine
I’ve been stewing on this for a while, so first I figure some questions should be asked. I came up with a few parameters for these solutions…
Then come the questions, and how to handle them:
For robot problems (costs, time, locations):
a) Can the team redo or reassemble it at the competition (thus making it legal)? If so, fix it. If not, go on.
b) Can anything be changed to bring the robot into compliance? If so, do it. Otherwise, move on.
c) If there is no way that the robot can be brought into compliance, is the robot otherwise legal to compete? If so (and nobody objects), let it onto the field, but disqualify it each match, and bar it from the finals. (This avoids giving the other alliance member(s) that team would compete with the short end of the stick, and it allows the team to at least have some measure of the experience). Otherwise, move on.
d) If the robot isn’t otherwise legal, bring it into compliance. And if that still gets you nowhere…
e) Start building from scratch. 1396’s One-Day Wonder took ten hours.
**For people problems (bad sportsmanship, sabotage, etc.):
**a) Is it one or more people acting independently of the team, or the team?
For non-team units:
b) Prevent the person(s) from doing more harm.
c) Contact a teacher or other leader of the team, and make sure they know about it. Teams have handbooks, districts have behavior codes. I believe that 99% of the time, one will deal with the person(s). Assuming that everyone concerned is satisfied, move on.
d) If this person happens to be in that 1%, sit them in the stands and have a responsible adult keep an eye on them. They stay there except for food, bathroom, and going home/to the hotel.
For teams:
b) Can the problem be rectified? Fix it, with apologies.
c) Will allowing the team to continue to compete, even while disqualified, cause further harm to teams or other individuals? If not, let them keep going. If it will, read on.
d) If nothing can be done but bar the entire team from continuing, then bar them. Recruit teams to compete as placebos.
Note that I’m not going to comment on awards. These judges are smart people; they can tell whether a team is deserving or not of an award for whatever reason. I’ll defer to them.
Since I started the thread I guess that I should contribute. Mike has some good ideas. What I would like to see is a form signed before each competition that states that the team has conformed to all of the build rules and the spirit of FIRST. The form should also state that the team will continue to follow the rules through out the competition weekend. If the team is found to be in violation of the rules that the lead mentor (the one that signs the form) must meet with the competition organizers and address the violation. At that time the organizers can follow Mikes suggestions or another result could be that the lead mentor can be given a 1 week - 3 year expulsion from FIRST.
Why would I do that to the lead mentor? He/She is to be in control of their team. They should also make sure that the members and the mentors follow the rules. The person at the top is responsible for the actions of their team. It may seem harsh but as has been said, Why should the whole team suffer.
A penalty of this kind is very hard to make and it would probably have to be one of the harshest penalties in FIRST.
If you bar a team from a years worth of competition, this would be the exact opposite some of the principles of FIRST. The team might lose their sponsorship, and the kids would leave the team since they would not be inspired of the FIRST competition.
An appropriate penalty would be disqualifying the team from that particular event. This would only be blocking the team’s robot from competing from the event and they could still be inspired by the action of the competition. They would be ranked at that competition as dead last with a record of no rounds completed at all. Though the awards that do not relate to how the robot competes, i.e. the website and animation awards, should be allowed to compete for an award. This would still give the team some pride in what they have accomplished and keeping them inspired in FIRST. This team should then be allowed to attend any other competitions if they want to. During these competitions they should be kept under close watch so they do not break the rule again. If they do so, then they should be banned for the rest of the season and receiving absolutely no awards for that competition. They then would be given a “Homework Assignment” of reflecting on what they did wrong and what they should not do next year.
I would really hate to see this happen to any team, even knowing what they did wrong. FIRST should also focus on prevention of this happening by making a stricter inspection at the robot check in and FIRST officials sealing the pits off at the end of the day so only people can get out without any robot parts with them.
I was under the impression that FIRST acts in response to situations wherein rules not related to gameplay are violated at its sole discretion. However, my perspective may be erroneous as the team involved in my experience with such matters was not being deceptive and given every opportunity to make necessary corrections. FIRST’s action was to their benefit, ultimately.
I can think more about a specific system for dealing with rule transgressions, but I can’t help but wonder if this is really a problem worth worrying over. If it is, I think that such behavior is probably a symptom of a larger problem in the organization than the root problem itself.
For years, I’ve been hearing the story of a team who showed up to inspection with a hollowed out battery. Does anyone know what happened to this team? I’d be interested to see what sort of precedent was set.
This is the type of act that need a severe type of punishment. If a team is only given a slap on the wrist for this type of action, it only serves to insult all the teams who were honest and rule abiding. It becomes very frustrating to see other teams get away with major infractions, especially if they walk away with trophies. It creates the attitude among some of the “good” teams of “well if they did it and got away with it, why shouldn’t we”. Now most “good” teams will respond by saying “cheaters never prosper”. Unfortunately as some cheaters gain short term success (because in the long run, these cheaters do lose), others may join them. It’s easy to fall into the trap of jumping at short term rewards.
Types of punishment? I still need to think that over. There are a lot of factors to mull. We don’t want a punishment too harsh, that it forces teams out of FIRST. (Remember, chances are the whole team wouldn’t be in on the cheating) On the other hand, the punishment needs to be severe enough teams who are considering breaking the rules think twice.
There are two different threads here discussing very similar topics. I’m going to (attempt to) answer the question in this thread, which was essentially - “Or is something more concrete required?” - and use the hypothetical situation presented in the original thread - about Bluateam - to address this question.
The way I understand it (correct me if I’m wrong) is that in this thread we’re already assuming that said team has DEFINATELY, without question, violated the rules. Before we determine what penalties should be given, I suppose it’s important to first look at why Bluateam broke the rules and took robot parts out of the pit to work on in the first place. Suppose Bluateam has always obeyed the rules before. Suppose they did eveything by the book. They didn’t build anything until after kickoff, they did everything legally, and after the ship date, they stopped working on everything. When they get to their first competition, they just can’t get something to work, no matter how hard they try. If it doesn’t work, their team won’t be able to compete at all. Just imagine what the team’s mentors must be thinking “we didn’t spend thousands of dollars and six weeks of our lives building a robot and traveling to a competition only to arrive and not be able to compete.” The team’s mentors are in a tough situation - they don’t want to let their students, team, sponsors, or themselves down. So for the first time ever, they break a rule, out of sheer desperation. They take the faulty part back to their hotel, work on it through the night, and finally get it to work properly. Now they can finally compete. They don’t have to suffer the humiliation/shame of telling their students, school, team parents and sponsors that they are unable to compete.
Now suppose Bluateam is caught. Everyone sees that they are sneeking robot parts back into the competition. They admit it, and acknowledge they have broken the rules - they plead no contest. Now here’s the hard part. There were a dozen other teams at the competition who probably would have had to do the same thing, but they didn’t. Why? These teams fabricated parts before the build season began. By the time kickoff arrived, they were already weeks ahead. Sure they cheated, but nobody can EVER prove it. Now here’s Bluateam, about to face consequences breaking a single rule - the only rule they have ever broken.
Now the original question was about what consequences would be appropriate for Bluateam. My answer: it doesn’t matter what consequences they decide to impose on Bluateam. That’s right, it doesn’t matter. No matter what penalties you impose, you haven’t taught Bluateam the intended lesson. All you’ve taught Bluateam is to be more sneaky when they do cheat. Here’s a team that did everything by the book, in the spirit of gracious professionalism, and out of the virtues of integrity and honesty. Now they’ve been penalized for the only rule they’ve ever broken. They know (and everyone knows, but nobody can prove it) that a dozen other teams at the competition cheated MUCH more than Bluateam. They built parts - including their entire drive train - before the build season even began. Now Bluateam asks themselves why they have been so gracious, honest and rule-abiding the entire time. What has it gotten them? Absolutely nothing. Now they’re bitter. They haven’t gotten justice. The system has failed them, and the entire FIRST community. Now they have no incentive to follow the rules ever again. Sure, next year they won’t sneak parts out of the pits. They’ll just have a running drive train build before the season begins to save themselves the trouble. After all, what has following the rules ever gotten them? You can issue Bluateam any penalty you want, but you haven’t solved the problem, you’ve only made it worse. Now one of the league’s most virtuous teams is turning away from the values (GP, honesty, integrity) it used to hold. A good team has become a bad one. The problem multiplies. The good are punished as the guilty walk free. Now teams ask themselves, why be good? Teams will now be reluctant to put themselves in a situation like Bluateam was in (they know they would probably do the same thing.) Now they’ll cheat before the season begins. No one will ever be able to prove a thing.
Think this situation is too hypothetical? Think again. This kind of cheating happens *all the time * in FIRST.
The way I see it there are a few ways FIRST can go from here…
At kickoff, FIRST will issue a list of all the rules as well as a list of penalties for violating each rule. Since every team has been forewarned of the risks of cheating, everybody’s on a level field. The previously determined penalties will be given indiscriminately to any team caught cheating. They will be issued by a majority vote of a committee of referees. This still doesn’t address some of the fundamental problems:
A) There are some kinds of cheating, such as building before the season begins. That are impossible to prove.
B) I quote here, “The strictest justice is sometimes the greatest injustice.” Refer to the above example. You can give penalties, but they don’t teach the intended lesson. It often makes the problem worse.
Rely on the gracious professionalism of every team to obey the rules. As FIRST grows, and becomes less of a tight knit community, I’m sad to say that this will be close to impossible to achieve. People inevitably will try to get that head start, or that unfair advantage. Nobody wants to break rules, but people also want to win. It’s human nature to convince yourself that the ends justify the means. It happens. It has happened. It will always happen.
Deregulate. Depending on how much is deregulated, many of these problems will disappear. Although we will inevitably see the rise of new problems we don’t expect today.
Try some combination of the above three. Do the best you can. People will cheat. People will complain. It may be impossible to stop. But hopefully we can minimize it to the point where we can all enjoy the FIRST experience. I don’t expect FIRST to be perfect. If you think FIRST (or any human institution) can be perfect, you’re in for a let down.
After that long response, you may have noticed I didn’t really answer the question:
what should happen to the team? Is it enough for all the other teams to stand around and express their disapproval and say that they didn’t behave with gracious professionalism? Or is something more concrete required? …Is there an appropirate consequence that is not a meaningless slap on the wrist, but also not so draconian that it drives a team away from the competition
Searching for what is truly just? Good luck. There’s no good answer here. The search for justice is older than civilization itself, and it will not be resolved in this thread. Like I said, FIRST should do the best they can (whatever that means). Focus primarily on making the entire FIRST experience the best it can be. We can have a good FIRST experience even if there is unresolved cheating out there.
i think it’s wrong to have a concrete penalty for each type of illegal action. there are undeniably situations in which a rule is broken, but little or no penalty should be given, and some in which action should be taken. there are different degrees of breaking rules, and some situations which technically break rules, but clearly should be considered exceptions. even when action is taken, like dave said, this is a learning experience, we don’t want a stupid penalty to hinder that. if a problem is fixed, i don’t see the reason for serious action, unless there is a constant problem with a particular team.
as far as bringing pre-assembled parts to the competition, anyone can see that there is a wide range of how this can happen. a team would simply be bringing in a pre-assembled, slightly altered gearbox to replace an old one, or a team could bring in half a robot with totally different function. sometimes a needed custom part cannot be made with the equipment at a competition, and must be made on very heavy mechinery. i know many of our metal parts are custom-machined, and while we always have a few extra, i’m sure some teams make the mistake of not doing so.
as for illegal parts or functions, nobody should pretend this is a rarity. i have seen many robots in the past who used illegal techniques. some of these are unintentional and detected, and some are clearly intentional but excused. i have seen robots with parts specifically made to penetrate the ramp mesh (2003). i have seen wedge designs, clearly made for getting under other bots, but excused to the judges as ball/box plows. now on the other hand, i have seen several teams put zipties on their worn-down tires - an obvious rule-breaking to the veteran rule-knowers, but a common mistake among rookies. if this went by unnoticed a few times, and then an issue was brought up, should the team be disqualified? all their hard work for naught? absolutely not! the degree also needs to count in the severity of the penalty - there is a big difference between a hidden fuse and a hidden nuclear fission reactor.
these issues should clearly be judged by two factors: whether or not the break was intentional, and how much trouble the thing actually caused or potentially could cause. i have seen things that don’t break any rules but are far more trouble than things that do. far too many teams have loose batteries that are exposed to impact. i have even seen batteries pulled out of robots, and i have even seen a couple just plain FALL out of robots. thats not good. FIRST spends too much time banning things that have a 0.01% chance of causing problems, when they are allowing things that have a 10% chance.
with that, i say that before we worry about how we should punish illegal things, we should worry about examining what we consider “illegal”.
You’d be very surprised at how often such violations, and other similar ones occur.
Ignorance of the law does not make you exempt from it.
If I were FIRST, I’d announce to all teams that Team xxx has been caught breaking rules off the field to give their team an advantage. Everyone is going to find out anyways, you can just magically say “hey quess what guys, team xxx can’t be picked for the finals, but we’re not telling you why. Don’t go around thinking that they did something wrong though, because that’s not very nice”
Yes, this may not sound like much of a punishment, but Im guessing it’s likely that no other teams are going to want to be associated with this team in any way, so they probably won’t get picked for the finals (Now if they’re in the top 8, you’ve got a problem. They shouldn’t be in the finals, so here’s where a ban on that comes in).
You’ve now got to deal with the other 30+ teams at the event all knowing you cheated. That’s gotta suck, and I imagine the embarrassment and shame you would feel by knowing that everyone is looking down on you would be pretty effective at deterring you (and anyone else) from doing it again.
I agree that teams should not receieve any awards related to the offending action. But if Team xxx takes their drivetrain home and works on it, they shouldnt be banned from receiving an animation award. However, Engineering Inspiration, and Chairman’s, which aren’t directly related to the offending action, should not be attainable for such a team, as what they did goes against everything these awards stand for.
In addition, FIRST should write some sort of admonishing letter to the teachers, mentors, and sponsors of the team telling them what they did wrong, why it was wrong, and what will happen if they do it again. I think this is particularly effective because what company is going to want to be affiliated with a known cheater? Odds are they’ll be dropped on the spot, or told to clean up their act immediately so it never happens again. Either way, the same effect is achieved.
The problem with all this is that the majority of any given team probably had nothing to do with the offending action, or possibly did not even know of it’s occurrence. Most teams have a small group of members that act as the pit crew. These are probably the ones that would say, remove a part and work on it. Yes, the entire team is accountable, but a way needs to be found that adequately gets the message across that cheating will not be tolerated in FIRST, punishes the offending team, but does not ruin the FIRST experience for all those that had absolutely nothing to do with the occurance.
Is it possible to find such a median? probably not. Not to mention the fact that probably 99% of all cheating goes unnoticed, and there is a good percent (manufacturing before the 6 weeks begin) that just can’t be detected.
That by itself is enough to make the team hate FIRST and go around making bad comments about everything. Announcing things just makes it worse. As I pointed out in my earlier post, who knows if the whole team was for it. What if half the team was totally against it, those kids would probably feel like killing themselves the moment they hear something like that announced. I know this because its happen to me many times in other sports. Putting down teams verbally is not the way to go, it just causes more problems, especially at a competition. Yes, eventually it’ll become “the talk” in the whole of FIRST if a team was caught violating a rule, and its not good. And then as Mike Ciance and Phil 33 pointed out, we need to know the degree of the violation more than anything else. And also made clear what is a violating and whats not.
If we’re talking about leveling the playing field, maybe taking a part to the hotel and working on it is fine(maybe FIRST decides to say its ok). You’re still leveling the playing field if every team is allowed to take one or two parts to the hotel and working on them because all teams get about the same time to work in hotels. It has its own problems though.