This was brought up in a pre- regional scrimmage that was held in our area, and we were wondering if we could get everyone’s oppinion on this issue:
Team A’s robot has a rather “useful” arm that can be used in a variaty of ways. While driving for a goal Team A happens to collide with Team B, an opposing team. Team B, because of thier height collides directly into Team A’s arm and subsequently proceeds to topple over, ending up in a useless pile of rubble sprawled out on the playing field.
Now, here is the question, what ruling do the judges make in such a situation? It was clearly not a malicious act, but Team B was flipped over nonetheless. Any thoughts?
The wording of your question definitly slants it in one direction. I voted for having to see it to make a decision. I think that’s the way its going to be with a lot of things this year, especially entanglement rulings.
~Tom Fairchild~, who’s excited about competitions coming up anyways.
The rules specifically address this issue.
DQ3. Strategies aimed solely at the destruction, damage, tipping over or entanglement of robots are not in the spirit of the FIRST Robotics Competition and are not allowed. Accidental tipping over of a robot is not considered damaging and may be allowed at the discretion of the referees. Intentional stabbing, cutting, etc., is illegal. If a breach of this rule occurs, the alliance will be disqualified for that match.
What was the ruling on the field?
“happens to collide” sounds a little vauge. If team B was moving somewhere on the field, they should have watched out for A. Not Team A’s fault. If B tried to block A, then they should have know they would tip. Not Team A’s Fault. If Team B was disabled, ut should be Team A’s fault. If team A aimed for team B’s robot, then A is clearly to blame. Ramming another robot with a goal is definitely intentional damage. Just my two cents.
in 2000 i think it was, team 31 checked a robot over the side rail and onto the judges table, that clip of video was shown many many times. i can still replay it over in my head, and it was declared compleatly legal
I think the judges will make all the diffrence in this. The ones at the first reginaols at VCU and elsewhere will set the standard. We need to wait and see.
Team B was Clearly at fault. Team A’s arm was extended during the match up until the point of the accident. Team B was moving toward Team A as well was Team A moving towards Team B. Team B made no attempt to bring their robot to a hault, therefore resulting in the tipping of Team B’s robot. Team A, a highly sophisticated beast was accused for malicious acts, but they also thought ramming was malicious.
G’Luck with everyones Regionals, we will be dominating at NASA.
It’s your own job to keep your robot on the ground.
I am a pro at that… If anyone attended the RAMP RIOT comp and watched the semis you will know what i mean!! Our alliance got 224 in our home zone twice:) OOPS
Thats Bad Brad for yah
I choose not to respond to this question because after reading it twice I can no longer make a decision. It sounds like both teams are at fault according to you.
Did B drive into A or did A swing arm into B? There’s the difference, if you drive into something and get clothes-lined, it’s your fault. If the other team swung the arm into B, it’s pretty hard to claim by this point in your life that you don’t realize hitting things in such manner tip them over, so DQ