The Notes on your own line are also Staged.
If you’re going to call techs for moving Staged Notes, then you need to call it on ALL the Staged Notes!
If you desire to disrupt your opponents’ auto, moving center line notes is arguably “pushing a note…in a preferred direction”, whereas it’s hard to argue that moving notes on your own side of the field is doing the same.
Finally got around to watch some of these matches. Those foul calls are just silly. Hope this gets addressed before the rest of week 1 plays, though I doubt it.
8 Likes
If you don’t desire to disrupt your opponent’s auto, there goes that theory. Maybe you’re trying to reload after a failed shot. (Also: apparently own note nudging WAS being called but not entered. This is possibly also an issue.)
We can argue hypotheticals all day. Point is, there’s some possible arguments on both sides, and this should be cleared up ASAP by HQ.
2 Likes
Not really. Because the tech foul is given if you move the note in a strategic manner. Moving a note of your own is not strategic. But moving a note from the middle is strategic because it denies an intake for the opposing alliance.
Just to be clear here, I do not support this rule. I would love the option to move a note from the middle while having one already in the robot. And I would like FIRST to change it as sooner as possible, maybe even till our next district (in less than a week). I’m only giving the answer the head ref at the event told me when I went to the question box to ask this exact question
HAH!
Right as I read that I can think of two scenarios that it can be strategic. One involves a partner, one involves your own robot. Admittedly slightly more than a bump but there’s two reasons right there the ruling is inconsistent.
The rule does not use the word strategic, and in this case it may be leading to some of the confusion that started this thread. If the HR was making rulings based on “strategic” instead of the text and supporting sentences of G403.B, that would be the root of the issue, not the rule as written.
Again, I agree with you. Unfortunately the HR at the event did not
1 Like
Yes, you obviously can move them in a strategic manner. But again, I’m referring to what actually happened at the event. Nobody moved any note from the close 3 in the ways you described
2 Likes
Anecdotally, it seems like this is being called different today than it was at ISR. Seems to be totally fine to hold a note and bump a second in auto.
(If I’m being really picky, changes in how things are going to be called should be addressed in a blog post or rules update)
3 Likes
Another casualty of this rule, was a lost match by the blue alliance in a minnesota regional:
1 Like
Yeah, that was an extremely bad call. FRC has to figure out a way to make the refereeing more consistent. It is not ok to just let each head ref figure it out. Teams will not know what to get from one competition to the next.
1 Like
Yep, agreed per the letter of the law, but isn’t this thread talking about the ridiculousness of the rule. There is no ‘intent’ to control 2 notes here, the auto is simply executing and the team running it doesn’t have machine learning to detect a random note in front of them.
1 Like
Why wasn’t it also a foul when they did the same thing several times in teleop?
A-stop exists. If your auto doesn’t function properly it is your responsibility to stop it before it breaks a rule.
3 Likes
Sure, again this thread is talking about the consequences of that rule. The site lines from the alliance station may not provide a good view of notes that got bounced out of the speaker.
Was it for less than momentary? That’s one of the differences between G403 and G409.
2 Likes
We have an even bigger problem. We haven’t played our first match yet, but I don’t know how we’re going to fix this or if we need to.
We have an under-bumper intake. We also have a fixed-angle shooter.
Our preferred autonomous path starts in the center. Our fixed angle shooter HAS to back up to shoot. As it does, the intake usually ends up over the second note. It spins the shooter motor, and as it feeds the pre-loaded note into the shooter, the intake (which is connected to the feeder with a belt and a single motor) it also picks up the second note off the floor and shoots that one, resulting in a rapid bang-bang shot. But it doesn’t ALWAYS do that. The actual autonomous routine is drive+shoot/drive+intake/drive+shoot, and sometimes it still needs to back up a little bit to get the second note. It’s that close.
If that’s legal, great. But do we need to actually try to AVOID the bang-bang shot in order to avoid a penalty?
Auton (Rule G403) does not have an exception for less than momentary control of 2 notes. If the refs see your bang-bang shot as controlling 2 notes at the same time, you’ll incur a tech foul.
1 Like
At SVR lots of Notes being pushed at the center line while bots carried another Note. I don’t remember seeing a foul called in those cases.