Most Foul Points?

After seeing 200 foul points dished out in Quals 66 at East Kentwood, I’m really curious to see if any match has had more foul points given out (or at least close to it) and why.

At our first qual match at Hudson Valley Regional a couple weeks ago we had 250 racked up against our alliance. We had a dead robot on our alliance right in the beginning. It didn’t help that they were right next to the other alliance feeder station.

The other alliance saw this and pushed the dead robot in and continued to hit the dead robot over and over for the next 2:15 tele

I did hear that if our alliance partner disabled their robot then the foul points would not have counted. I have not confirmed this info, so if any one might have an understanding on that, it would be greatly appreciated.

The most foul points is Quals 1 of the NC District UNC Asheville event, with 375 foul points benefiting the blue alliance.

EDIT: The next runner up is 280 points benefiting the red alliance in Quals 24 at NYC Tech Valley Regional

Sorry, robots that are disabled are subject to the same rules as those operable. Recommendation is not to become disabled in a dangerous position.

If memory serves me right, once you press the disable button on located in the driver station (big red button), it makes you exempt from any further fouls, unless you intentionally disable it in a certain place for gaining an advantage on the other team. if you brake down in a unsavory position and cannot move you may use the button to avoid further penalties.

There is no such rule in FRC. (I’d quote a rule for it, but it’s hard to quote rules that aren’t there.) There may be such rules in other robotics competitions, but not FRC. Disabled robots can score points, cause fouls, be pinned (!), and even pin other robots (!!). In all ways they are not treated differently by the rules than any other robot.

At the 10,000 Lakes Regional we were on the blue alliance and the red alliance had a robot bypassed which sat in the retrieval zone. Every time we went to grab a gear, we tapped the bypassed robot in the retrieval zone and after the 3rd tech foul called on the red team there was one called on our team. The head ref came and talked to us and said he could see it was intentional so he stopped calling the fouls and we got one. Is there a rule against this? Also at this regional we shot a few balls outside the arena by accident while lining up with the boiler and we were told it is a foul for each ball shot out. Has anyone had this called on them as well?

There have definitely been similar rules in past years. See 2010 G27. So to say there are no such rule in FRC would be incorrect. I don’t know that there are any similar rules in this years game. I would have to skim through the manual again.

I believe the foul that you are looking for is C08. At the very least that’s the one that I have heard quoted most often when it comes to this situation. C08 is the rule that deals with strategies soley aimed at forcing your opponent to commit a penalty.

Based on this account, the other team should have received a penalty for a C08 violation.

The account is clearly coming from a team that didn’t benefit from this.

There’s two reasonable interpretations of the actions and it’s hard to say from the account here.

  1. Contact with the disabled robot was outside of the expected path to reach the feeder.

  2. Contact with the disabled robot was within the expected path to reach the feeder.

If it’s the first, going out of your way to push the bot into the retrieval zone specifically to rack up the tech fouls is a violation of C08 and should have been penalized as such.

If it’s the second, teams aren’t expected to work around the disabled bot to reach the feeders. If that contact pushes the disabled bot further into the retrieval zone and results in it being in the way of teams coming to grab gears, it’s unfortunately a tech foul for each contact.

I can’t speak to other years. In this year, there’s nothing in the rules excepting a disabled bot from penalties regardless of whether or not they’re sporting the unpleasant orange light or not.

As a side note, calling fouls on a disabled robot is probably the most frustrating part of being a ref. You know there’s nothing the team can do to avoid the calls. But, you can’t make up rules to avoid making the calls.

This is the thing that bothers me the most. Teams are getting penalized for committing fouls that they have no control over, and have no intent to commit. If they weren’t disabled then they couldn’t have been pushed into the zone as easily/without putting up a fight.

In my opinion calling this a foul is a violation of the spirit of the game. The point is for students to go out and compete and learn about engineering and STEM in the process. I speak from experience here when I say that one of the hardest things I ever had to do as both a student and a mentor was to remain gracious in the face of losing 2 different regionals, that we probably could have won, because of fouls.

So where I agree that ideally teams shouldn’t have to go out of their way to avoid disabled robots, in reality and in practice I think that robots that are disabled unintentionally shouldn’t be penalized for committing fouls that they have no control over. The other alliance still has the advantage of being active and still has the ability to move around the disabled robot where as the disabled bot as no choice but to stay exactly where it is.

As to the expected path issue. I believe that if their is a disabled robot on the field that changes the expected bath to the station to avoid the new obstacle. It becomes the same thing as if their was another stationary field element their. It takes longer to push the robot out of they way or continue to push it, than it is to go around it.

*Top 20 foul score weeks 1 thru 6

  Match         Blue    Red     =IF(K1>AS1,K1,AS1)
2017ncash_qm1	375	25	375
2017nytr_qm24	0	280	280
2017txlu_qf1m2	10	250	250
2017nyli_qm16	0	250	250
2017mdbet_qm31	0	250	250
2017nysu_qm5	225	10	225
2017pahat_qm44	225	0	225
2017nyny_qm3	225	0	225
2017mxto_qm35	225	25	225
2017txlu_qm21	205	0	205
2017ncash_qm16	100	205	205
2017miket_qm64	0	205	205
2017nytr_qm8	200	0	200
2017miken_qm66	200	0	200
2017onlon_qm26	0	200	200
2017waell_qm2	5	180	180
2017melew_qm17	0	175	175
2017ilch_qm78	0	175	175
2017nysu_qm46	0	175	175
2017ilch_qm4	0	175	175
*Top **combined** foul score weeks 1 thru 6

  Match         Blue    Red     =K+AS
2017ncash_qm1	375	25	400
2017ncash_qm16	100	205	305
2017nytr_qm24	0	280	280
2017txlu_qf1m2	10	250	260
2017nyli_qm16	0	250	250
2017mdbet_qm31	0	250	250
2017mxto_qm35	225	25	250
2017nysu_qm5	225	10	235
2017pahat_qm44	225	0	225
2017nyny_qm3	225	0	225
2017cave_qm26	150	75	225
2017txlu_qm21	205	0	205
2017miket_qm64	0	205	205
2017nytr_qm8	200	0	200
2017miken_qm66	200	0	200
2017onlon_qm26	0	200	200
2017mokc_qm48	50	150	200
2017waell_qm2	5	180	185
2017onnob_qf4m2	150	30	180
2017nyli_qm25	80	100	180

If disabled robots couldn’t collect foul points then disabling a robot while blocking both feeder stations would be a strategy that some team would use. If I was a head ref, intentionally pushing a disabled robot into the loading zone would generally be egregious C08 with yellow card and no foul points to the disabled robot per C08. Clearly I am not a head ref. :] Realizing that in real time telling intentional acts to draw penalties from standard game play is a difficult judgement call

Do you mean E-stopping intentionally in that spot? If so, I’m sure that’d fall under the C08 foul as well and the team that E-stopped would be given a yellow card under C08.

This is why I suggested, can’t remember if it was here or on another thread, that referees have the ability to use video replay, to be used at their discretion, so that if such an incident occurs that could look at the replay and come to a consensus on what the correct call should be. Whether that be no call because the team was pushed into the zone with not intent on their part to block the zone or intent from the other alliance to force them to commit a penalty. Whether the team was intentionally in the zone and therefore deserving of a penalty. Or if it was the purposeful intent of the alliance to push the robot into the zone (i.e. pushing a disabled robot into the retrieval zone).

Nothing in C08 would prevent this. But continuing to collect technical fouls while robots are trying to get to the feeder station would make it a bad strategy under current rules. ::rtm:: :] Logomotion year had really odd permutations of this kind of rule and resulting strategies.

Section 10.6 specifically prohibits reviewing videos, pictures, ETC. Some off season events will do that, but they are allowed to modify the rules…

I understand that 10.6 prohibits this, which is why I suggested that it needs to be a change, not that the capability was there and referees are just choosing not to do so. I won’t go into the reasons that I think this could be a plausible option and my opinion on implementation.

I’m pretty sure intentionally hitting e stop in a specific spot to draw fouls would fit perfectly in C08. I might just not be following the conversation correctly and talking about a different thing so I apologize if I am.