One of the things we’ve been doing in the Northwest for Girls’ Generation and BunnyBots is playing by IRI rules where there are four robots per alliance, not just three. That means you have a built in backup. Championships will run the same way this year. What we do, though, is not allow timeouts at all. That makes it more likely the backup robot will play and keeps things moving.
Can we get confirmed reports of happiness or blar from other events?
It may have been an issue for others, but for us pedestal timing has been pretty good for us.
I know pedestal timing is still being reported as an issue from GKC.
From the few times I could watch today, and in testing last night, at Escanaba there is minimal delay for the pedestals. Sometimes it lights up almost immediately after the ref pushes the end cycle; sometimes it takes 1 or 1.5 seconds.
Groovy. Now we just need to make sure the refs push the end cycle button on time (and not 15 seconds later, after the match ends…).
Pretty sure pedestal delays are still a serious issue. Our team’s second match today looked to have a delay of around 30 seconds. A ref and field reset worker eventually physically gave our human player a different ball. Our ref then told our student that if the student could watch the video we took and tell for sure that there was an issue then he would consider taking action. After the student confirmed the issue, nothing was done.
In the same match there was also some assists that failed to get counted for us, but that is just human error and wouldn’t have made a difference in the match.
Dallas overall went well with very few pedestal issues. Some, but only a couple.
The main issue is not correctly assigning assist points.
I saw 3 matches today that didnt award 3 assists whenever the last shot missed the high goal and rolled all the way back. When a robot drove back to get it and score, they only awarded that high goal shot vs. having the full cycle assist points.
It was corrected once when our alliance questioned it and the announcer even verified it with the head ref.
They also didnt initially call an assist where an inbounder threw it on a robot who spit it out from their intake roller a few seconds later. 
Travis,
I know that you are upset over the pedestal issues, but comments like this make you sound like a 5 year old having a temper tantrum.
Maybe, instead of bashing the volunteers, you might lead the charge and work to get a groundswell of volunteers to help the refs?
hmmm? Maybe that would help … instead of bashing those that are doing their best under difficult circumstances.
Just a thought.
Perhaps for some, their best isn’t good enough?
While I respect in general what volunteers bring to the table at each event, and I know in particular a referee’s job can be difficult; what I do not, can not, and will not respect is repeated demonstrated ineptitude at doing one’s job, especially when it is to the detriment of numerous paying customers in attendance. Mistakes here and there can be accepted; however, repeated infractions that affect single teams are inexcusable. Is it not a natural expectation of PAYING CUSTOMERS to expect referees to learn from their mistakes and make adjustments to their methods such that these mistakes are not repeated on a regular basis?
It is exceedingly silly to me to observe numerous documented cases where goal score entry is delayed by 10 seconds or more such that teams are ABSOLUTELY CRIPPLED IN THEIR ABILITY TO PLAY THE GAME, especially when these oversights occur late in close match situations.
Pardon me for not skipping through the GP daisies and blindly accepting such things repeatedly happening to multiple teams at a competition.
Ref mistakes are one thing. When they are consistently detracting from the playability of the game? Its completely different.
Whole heartedly agreed. The volunteer badge is not a magic talisman against criticism. The only way situations will improve is if problems and issues are brought up and actually addressed. All the good will and wishes in the world won’t fix things if the actual problem is the person doing the job. The only fix is to address things with said person and replace them if they can’t perform the task.
I actually don’t blame the refs, despite that its their mistakes causing the problem.
The game design this year has given the refs a nigh-impossible task, resulting in a high degree of error from the overworked refs.
While I agree that the volunteer badge should not be protection against criticism, I believe just complaining without action is useless diversion. My hope (by my previous post) was to spur action.
I usually try to stay quiet in discussions like this, but I feel the need to address this:
If replacing them is that easy, take on the roll of volunteer coordinator and do it. See how easy it is. Referee roles are the most difficult to fill because of the demands placed on people in that position, this year more than any other. Each year there has always been a shortage of people signed up to referee, typically because not many people volunteering their time want that level of responsibility. It’s very much a thankless job, when every call and action/inaction is subject to the scrutiny of potentially thousands of people.
It usually takes weeks of active searching and solicitation to recruit the base number of refs just to make the event happen. I’m not saying that justifies mistakes being made, but if the alternative is an untrained reallocated field reset person to act as a warm body to fill the role, or at worst, no one at all to hit End Cycle, how is that any better?
To the most critical people, all I can say is step up, volunteer, and prove you can do better.
^This.
I guess when I stop making any mistakes myself…then I will start complaining more about other people’s mistakes. Especially volunteers…
This my new mantra. I have certainly been guilty in the past…
I do think that constructive comments can be valuable but I know that if I were a volunteer referee in a brand new game I would certainly not be able to get everything absolutely correct and I know for certain I would not see everything
I used to work as a paid referee in the past with long established games and I know I made mistakes from time to time. This was after being a player myself for years and the being professionally trained and tested. I also know that the perspective as a player and a referee is quite different. It made me a better player after I was a referee.
Good luck to EVERYONE on the field
There is a huge gap between expecting perfection (I do not) and expecting competence such that mistakes are minimized, learned from, and not repeated (I do).
I am seeing a LOT of repeated, glaring mistakes, with little being done to correct them. Quite a few mistakes are occurring in situations where FMS issues are irrelevant, when the action is occurring less than 10 feet directly in front of an individual.
Does the FMS system make it harder this year for a referee to do their job? Unquestionably.
Are some quality referees making more mistakes as a result of the above? Undoubtedly.
Are there sub-par referees out there who are unqualified for the role, either due to lack of skill or lack of preparation/training, whose mistakes are being magnified exponentially as a result of increased scrutiny upon this game? Undeniably.
I believe event staffs should prioritize “competition-critical” volunteer recruitment and training (and retention) over many other aspects of event planning; however, it seems many are burdened with the need to chase down enough sponsors for the event to even exist. It is unfortunate that anything so critical to the “team and spectator experience” could be an afterthought at any competition. One wonders if Manchester couldn’t invest more to assist events in addressing this glaring need?
Also, for the if you don’t like it, volunteer yourself crowd, I have a simple answer - NO. Volunteers are being stretched to and beyond their limits by a system in need of fundamental change. Dumping more volunteers into that system (especially johnny come lately’s who are likely even more inexperienced and ill-prepared than those who signed up ahead of time) isn’t going to solve anything. If you wish to direct your attention toward the people who could and should help fix the “competition experience” problem, affix your gaze toward Manchester, NH and collectively speak your minds.
This seems to be your primary thesis. How, specifically, do you think it should change? Your very next sentence asserts that adding more volunteers does not solve anything, so you must have some idea in mind for what these fundamental changes should be.
Also, my understanding of the system is that volunteers are assigned to specific roles by local leadership (Regional Directors and the Regional Planning Committee), not by Manchester. Unless your proposal for fixing the perceived volunteer issue is to centralize all detailed Regional-level planning in NH, I am not sure how affixing your gaze towards Manchester will help in this specific instance.
That attitude has nearly erased the sympathy I had for your position.
If you’re going to refuse to put yourself in the position of those you are complaining about, and especially if you don’t propose a solution beyond “they need to do better” and “something must be done,” your complaints become mere noise.