Varying levels of enforcement...

Alright, I’m getting sick of this. I’ve only personally been to VCU, but I’ve been hearing stories of all the regionals and their varying rules and enforcement.

For example, entanglement. At VCU they didn’t DQ anyone by default, just because of the robot design, but they were usually very strict about it. MOE and Sparky 3.0 got disqualified once or twice each for going under the goals with their arms, any tethers that broke the vertical plane of the goal’s platforms were DQed, and any treads or special wheels that were on the verge of ripping up carpet got a warning.

Now I’m hearing that some regionals didn’t have any DQs at all, even if there were plenty of reasons for it. Robots that got stuck for entire matches and didn’t have the offending 'bots DQed, tethers going under the goals, etc. What’s up with that??

Also, this battery thing. At VCU there were 5 different announcements about battery chargers. On Thursday, it was mostly “All teams, please note, the 4-amp battery chargers from last year will NOT be allowed, and the two batteries in the 2002 kit of parts are the ONLY batteries allowed on your robot.” On Friday it had a different tune during the day, “All teams please note that the 4-amp chargers WILL be allowed in the pits, please note that the chargers WILL be allowed.” Then it proceeds on Saturday to teams scrambling to borrow other teams’ batteries during finals because they couldn’t get theirs fully charged.

Is there anyone at FIRST we can email or notify about the weirdness going on in the game this year? I’d really like to send them an informative message right about now…

I think that, since VCU was the first weekend of competition, FIRST was still figuring out the game themselves. All of the battery and charger stuff was worked out by the next week, and it seems like they’ve settled on a level of enforcement for the entanglement issue.

As for under-the-goal-ism, I haven’t heard much about it - I didn’t see any matches at LSR where that should have been called, and I haven’t heard of anyone not being DQ’d for being under the goal when they should have.

My team, MOE, as DQed becuae our chassis was under the goal. Even though it was unintentional and it did not help left the goal or anythign, we were DQed. It happens that the design og two bots at Drexel allowed their chassis to ride up under the goal and sometimes it worked to their advantage in a pusing match. However, the ruling was that they would be allowed to compete, announced by Woody himself. So i aggree that VCU was a regional that FIRST was going to use as a test. They realized that it was wrong to DQ a team foran unintentional part going unde the goal. I completely aggree with their desicions in that respect.

tether rulings seem to vary from regional to regional and i guess that all of us will just have to deal with any of the rulings made y the officials.

something pretty confusing happened at the NYC regional as well

there was duct tape clearly used in an illegal fashion and the ref even admitted it was not legal… but still allowed the team to compete

i dont really know how to react to this… i mean it is a pretty insignificant thing, but at the same time, they should have followed the rules

tie-wraps = engineer’s duct tape :slight_smile:

Also at NYC: Apparently the 10 second, 3 ft pinning rule does not apply to some people! We were holding onto two goals and the other alliance pinned those to the wall. Granted we were not being pushed against ourselves but… The way we release goals is by bumping them out of our way and spinning out of the way. These two robots had us pinned in between the two goals like books in a pair of bookends for at least 30 seconds. I have it all on tape but as the rules state, No referees will review any videos of matches and all refs decisions are final! That had us all angry for a while but hey, what are you going to do right? It’s all just water under the bridge.

Note: I probably would not be acting this cool if it happend in the finals and that was the action that made us lose. There would have been a lot more noise made by us if that were the case!

Also at NYC: Apparently the 10 second, 3 ft pinning rule does not apply to some people! We were holding onto two goals and the other alliance pinned those to the wall. Granted we were not being pushed against ourselves but… The way we release goals is by bumping them out of our way and spinning out of the way. These two robots had us pinned in between the two goals like books in a pair of bookends for at least 30 seconds.

There is nothing wrong with this as long as they were pushing up on the goal and not you. they could pin you for 2 min. if they wanted to.

*Originally posted by Mike Norton *
**

There is nothing wrong with this as long as they were pushing up on the goal and not you. they could pin you for 2 min. if they wanted to. **

Yeah well…I guess that’s just another one of the many gray areas this year.

I was wondering…has FIRST released and official statement on enforcement at Nationals? I mean, i think that going in to Nationals, teams should know if FIRST is going to allow all tethers(like at VCU) or not DQ robots who chassis’ mistakenly go under the goal(Phiily). I hav heard of other exceptions to the rule but these are the only two that I personally saw/heard.

I talked with Deb today about some of the ‘gray’ areas on what is legal and what isn’t. She cleared alot up for me on send-home devices and hopefully on some of the other things that I saw that upset me at GLR.

The things that I asked FIRST to clarify either on this board or through an E-mail blast:

What is the current rulings regarding entanglement, she made it clear that tpae measures are now legal and that pretty much unless a send home device actually gets entangled its good. Somewhere along the way I missed some discussion or rulings on this my bad.

What will be the rulings regarding carpet damage, I saw a bunch at GLR and I don’t think anyone was called.

Pinning, I watched a Delphi team 902 or some number like that get pinned the entire match in a corner and it never got called, if I was them I would be upset.

Blocking of Send Home devices, what is legal, what is not. I told her that we had been warned about blocking such devices even though no damage occured. What will be the rulings if teams steal a mouse with a ball grabber since we can see this happening?

They know about some of the differences in rulings between reigonals take my word for it.