Foul mistakes

When head referee tells the red team that “you should’ve moved out of there.” When the blue team pushes you into a foul.

Team update 18

G9. One (1) defender at a time. (there were two RED)

No more than one ROBOT may be positioned such that its BUMPERS break the plane defined by or are completely beyond the opponent’s CARGO SHIP LINE.

The exception to this rule is if an additional ROBOT

A. is forced to cross the opponent’s CARGO SHIP LINE by an opponent ROBOT (e.g. it is pushed over the opponent’s CARGO SHIP LINE by an opponent in a defensive effort to prevent them from scoring a CARGO in a ROCKET), (they were)

and

B. (the additional robot) makes a dedicated effort to cross back over the CARGO SHIP LINE until no more than one ROBOT is positioned such that its BUMPERS break the plane defined by or are completely beyond the opponent’s CARGO SHIP LINE. Violation: FOUL (The “additional robot” did not make a dedicated effort to avoid the foul)

IMO

G9 was NOT violated, it was called such that there was no foul for more than one robot on blue side, but the blue alliance was awarded an extra climb due to the red being pushed into the hab zone and touching a blue robot with time under 30 seconds. We tried contesting and pointing out the new C8 rule, which does not grant a foul to a team which is forced into a position to accrue a foul. Refs weren’t having it and we lost by six. We also tried G19, but the refs didn’t accept that either. Very poor call imo, but it is what it is. Shame season ended on that.

Two red “defenders” on blue side (watch video) even it that was not called it was indeed a potential missed FOUL to replace the other one (if not corrected) so blue additional “defender” got lucky that was not called as well. IMO

The main issue is how easily the blue robot was pushed. There is no “new C8” rule either.

You’re correct, no new C8, my bad. My point still stands. Call a foul for C9, I don’t care, but the added automatic level 3 climb is what is the issue. G19 or C8 should have made that call null, but refs didn’t agree. It sucks but it happened.

In watching it again the pushed additional red seemed to "hang around for 8 seconds " on blue HAB end in the endgame …that was a very bad decision evidently as they were in blue hab zone … thats another issue.

Head ref there decides end of story

It goes back to “any call” if you want to avoid it “make it obvious” your intent visually. You then likely have a better case.

But they did make it obvious, as they were being pushed (sideways) they attempted to move forward but hit the cargo ship, so instead they back up but are blocked by the other robot. Once they are no longer being pushed they turn and back up into the blocking robot, after the blocker moves they turn around and leave. Them “hanging around” isnt a violation and they were already trying to get back. The team did all they could to make it obvious but I guess that’s not enough to stop your opponents from forcing you into a penalty

I agree with you the call could have gone either way,the refs there have the up-close look.

The lesson here I think is avoiding being easily pushed…push back
Also be decisive to show intent

Calls may or may not go your way.

I suspect the HR (the only person who makes that final call at the event in question) told you their own tolerance… that red bot hung around too long in endgame in wrong hab area and seemingly exiting earlier the free climb would have been called off…decisions decisions.

Teams should test how easily the can be pushed and mitigate that in known defense allowed games. There are engineering and strategy ways to avoid being pushed in critical situations and scouts look for robots that can hold their own.

Either way its not slam dunk a “foul mistake” its a HR decision at that event.

They can’t push when they are sideways, they can only try to escape which they did.

Oh and I think I found the “new c8” as clarified in team update 02:

C8 does not apply for strategies consistent with standard gameplay, for example:
a. causing an opponent ROBOT to contact your ROCKET during the last few seconds of a
MATCH while in the process of trying to place a HATCH PANEL.
b. contacting an opponent ROBOT while in your HAB ZONE while trying to retrieve CARGO from
your DEPOT.
C8 requires an intentional act with limited or no opportunity for the TEAM being acted on to avoid
the penalty, such as:
c. placing a HATCH PANEL on/in an opponent who’s already controlling a GAME PIECE such
that they cannot help but violate G4.
d. pushing an opponent ROBOT against your ROCKET during the final twenty (20) seconds of
the MATCH for the sole purpose of making them violate G9 G16.

And while defending is a part of normal gameplay. pushing a robot into your own hab zone, or just generally being and active factor towards getting your opponent a violation, is definitely not the way you play.

Frc has had problems like this before but they dont seem like they want to fix it. It should be competitive but you can compete without following the rules. Please make challenges and reviews a part of elimination rounds

1 Like

The only change in Team Update 2 for C8 was to correct the referenced rule (change from G9 to G16) in point d. in the blue box. There was no clarification on anything; that’s how C8 read from Kickoff.

It was the rule “c8” that we tried to use to appeal the final score.

Reply in response to the edit.

The HR hasn’t said anything to me, I know only what this post says.

The problem with the penalty is not that the HR made a call, it’s that the justification I’ve seen is false. “If they had exited earlier it would’ve been called off”, but I mention this in my previous reply that the team did all you can expect a high school student to do. Even then them being there for long is not a penalty, the problem was that the moment they were touched by a robot fully in their hab zone (violating G13) they were also being pushed and blocked by another robot at the same time. If they are being pinned or blocked into causing a penalty that’s the base level of C8. I don’t want red to win, I want the refs to make calls based on rules not their opinions in the moment. And I still seriously believe that refs reviewing footage and rules should be done always. But this requires people to own up to their mistakes, which they should. If we dont have refs that cant make calls and correct for the sake of the game then the rulebook isn’t important anymore, just the opinion of the HR.

Also a robot not having a good enough drive train is not a reason to give them a penalty. All teams should be on an even playing field and making a robot that is not resistant to defense is not a foul. Rookie teams may not have that engineering experience and punishing them for it is not a good way to be graciously professional.

Just saying that’s probably what they meant by new c8, it also corrected c7 to c8 which was a mistake in the origional rulebook.

Then I just took it into consideration as examples are helpful

For the record, the robot being pushed had an all omni wheel drive train. So this “not being good enough” of a drive train line I’ve seen a couple of times doesn’t make much sense to me. They made a conscious design choice that allowed them greater mobility, which shouldn’t give teams carte blanche to push them across the midline into a protected zone because “they should’ve just built it differently”.

First off there is absolutely no review of video footage. That would delay the game even more than it’s delayed today. so let’s agree that is off the table permanently.

Now with the remainder of your response(s).

it happened that the robot was easily pushed and ended up in the endgame fully in the opposite Hab zone in the endgame.

I think we can all agree wasting eight seconds in that predicament in the opposite hab zone was one of the contributing issues as they showed no aggressive “corrective” exit of that area back to their hab area with time running out.

Since when ? This is a contact sport with bumpers. Plenty of teams can withstand aggressive D why should we reward teams that can’t and are pushed easily? If you can hold up to defense than you should not be playing near the midline in this game at all within inches of a foul (as in this specific example). It was pretty obvious day 1 defense was a thing (and proven effective in over 4 weeks of competition) , its a team decision whether to prepare for it or not. the first clues that this WOULD BE a heavy defensive game was very few protected zones and many choke points . IMO and not like this snuck up on anyone.

1 Like

No thanks. Remind me after the season ends and ill beat that horse again.

This topic was automatically closed 365 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.