I was watching this match and I noticed that team 358 on the red alliance kept hitting 145 in the blue alliance’s null territory. The ref did not call 358 on this. 358 kept it very subtle yet he was still hitting him in the null territory. Did the ref not call it because it was not very obvious or am I missing something?
145’s null territory is only the white box nearside. I did not see any (obvious) violations. In fact it looks like 145 got called for a null territory violation on the far side. Look out where you get pushed.
This is the second thread where this video has been posted looking for confirmation of the same violation. I see two very brief (<0.5 seconds) where the blue robot’s bumper is in the null zone while in contact with 358. However, it was only the corner of the blue bumper and this would have been difficult for the ref to see this from his angle. 358 did a masterful job of goading the blue robot to try to initiate contact while in the zone (therefore keeping him from doing something useful, like placing cubes in the switch).
358 also got away with herding a total of 3 cubes. I believe this was deliberate because after he did so, he went to the effort of separating them for easier handling.
I watched the match once and it appeared to me some referees were calling G16 by using the last year’s definition in G13.
This was G13 last year:
G13. Don’t mess with a ROBOT in their RETRIEVAL ZONE. A ROBOT with any part inside its opponent’s RETRIEVAL ZONE may not contact an opposing ROBOT, regardless of who initiates the contact.
This is G16 this year:
G16. The NULL TERRITORY is safe. A ROBOT whose BUMPERS are breaking the plane of its NULL TERRITORY and not breaking the plane of the opponent’s PLATFORM ZONE may not be contacted by an opposing ROBOT, regardless of who initiates the contact.
The definition of the safe zone this year is backwards from last year.
I would call 358’s movement of the cubes early on as bulldozing (no G22 call).
At 1:36 there is definite bumper breaking neutral of 145 as they were pushed into that situation by 358… so touch occurred as the neutral plane got broken . I can see why that was not called as the touch occurred already prior to breaking that plane.
I would agree with you, had the robot not spent time individually spreading them apart afterward. Without that, it would seem accidental bulldozing.
Watch the turn they take its a sharp right to stay near the cubes to me that shows intent and seeing them do the same move on the other switch with obvious intent solidifies my opinion it was herding and part of an initial designed opening moves strategy. Plus the obvious gain in having those cubes closer to their scale was strategic.
Had they not taken such an aggressive hard right, then those cubes would have stayed put, instead they moved down the line . Their ultimate path took them down field so a hard right made no sense unless to contact cubes IMO.
It was a good driver so I’m fairly certain they knew they were close to the back wall of their switch and those cubes.