Yellow / Red Cards Assigned in 2019



Team 118 Robonauts got a red card in their first semis because the hatch got stuck in their lifter and when it came loose it got launched.


I can’t wait until one half-champ is decided by a hatch launch.


Yellow card at Haymarket VA for raising above alliance wall during a climb. Red card a few matches later for launching a hatch


It’s only a low level of risk when no one gets hurt. If you trip over the wall, you’re either likely falling head-first towards the HAB or a robot (if you were going onto the field) or the scoring table (if you were going off the field). If you catch yourself before you hit your head, you may still injure yourself and that isn’t good either. I know someone who tripped over an FTC field wall last year (~12 inch height) and seriously injured their leg as a result, and I’ve done it myself, it’s not fun.

Starting last year it became a large point of emphasis with FIRST staff, and by extension the FTAs and other volunteers from there. People are far from perfect, but I just wanted to mention that FIRST is attempting to combat this and asking volunteers to lead by example.


As a student I had that drilled into me (don’t jump the barrier! Wait to use the gates! Look at the color of the lights!). I recently volunteered at an FTC event and felt uncomfortable by the lack of gates and how everyone just stepped over the field walls.


I was trying to say that the first year, people were in the habit of stepping over. Suppose it was your third year as a student member of the drive team. You stepped over for two years and now “all of a sudden” aren’t allowed to. In the excitement, you step over. This is why I think it is reasonable to have some leniency the first year. (I think this of other rules like the clothespin thing last year. As a volunteer, I’d want to warn more softly when something is “new”).

For your example of the first year student, that student had to learn a pile of rules. Not stepping over the gate is just one of them. I see no reason learning that as a new student is harder than “where safety googles” or “stay behind the line” or “don’t run over the volunteer who has opened the gate so you can get in faster when the lights go green” :). In other worse, I think it is easier for a first year student to remember not to step over the gate than a returning student or adult.


some of us were discussing this, and it seems to be an incorrect application of the rule.


whats more dangerous, stepping over a 19" barrier, or traversing bleachers without rails strewn with random junk and crowded with people at the same event? i wouldnt care about the penalty being so ludicrous if first were to apply the same “safety logic” to the entire facility hosting the event.


I think all drive team members should have this on.


Also remember that S3 for the guardrail actually has 2 tiers of application.

The first time you “step” over the guardrail is a verbal warning. The 2nd time is a yellow card. For an “Egregious” violation of that is a Red Card. The blue box clearly states that “Jumping” over the guard rail is considered Egregious. So at least they recognize there is a difference between Stepping and Jumping.


As @Alak pointed out, there are multiple layers of application. From what I’ve heard, the discussion on this particular foul was that the person JUMPED over the rail.

It’s possible to STEP over the rail quite safely, if you’re careful about it and make sure to lift your feet high etc. But if you’re JUMPing over the rail, you’re trying to simultaneously get your feet UP and DOWN (to clear, then to land). While that is possible to do, see also “hurdles” in track, it’s a lot less safe than one foot up and then down, then the other foot up and then down–catch a toe and you’re sprawling all over the carpet with rugburn and hopefully the field isn’t on concrete.

So in this case, an egregious violation is a red card, to emphasize the point that this is for safety. I’ve never personally seen one issued at an official event. 90% of step-overs appear to be warnings in my knowledge, and don’t go beyond that.


You know who didn’t argue the enforcement of this rule at Gibraltar? The team and alliance that received it. It was a clear violation of a well-documented rule that needs to be enforced at all times. Alan, the Head Ref, is fair and equitable and did exactly as he should have.

This was nothing more than a tremendous teachable moment for the team, for everyone at the event, and the entire FRC community. Painful? Yes! But fair and warranted.

The bigger disappointment was NOT winning the resulting tiebreaker match and moving on to the finals. Hats off to the final 6 teams and the event winners. Looking forward to a rematch!


i was referring in this post to the 118 red card in semis. the g6 or something rule seemed to have been applied incorrectly.


Why do you believe it was applied incorrectly?

G6: No throwing HATCH PANELS. ROBOTS may not shoot HATCH PANELS into the air in a way that’s prohibited in R6, kick them across the floor using an active MECHANISM, or eject them across the floor in a forceful way (i.e. HATCH PANEL is caused to move a significant distance). Violation: RED CARD.

R6: A ROBOT may not be designed to shoot a HATCH PANEL such that it travels more than 3 horizontal ft. (~91 cm) beyond its FRAME PERIMETER (reference G6).

It sure looks in the video it was launched more than 3 ft. Nothing is in the rules with respect to intent. The robot likely wasn’t designed to shoot the Hatch Panel more than 3 ft, but it still did.


That’s kind of an odd one.
R6 measurements are made with a stationary robot at maximum distance configuration (as tall as possible). G6 application is made with a moving robot (in some way). If we temporarily ignore the second and third applications of G6 (floor kick and floor eject) and focus on the first, it’s basically “Robots may not violate R6 as inspected during a match”, which makes life interesting because R6 is hard to apply on a moving robot, AND more to the point, it’s theoretically possible for a R6-compliant robot to toss a Hatch Panel a fair distance without any sort of release at all! (And… not just theoretically possible.)


QFT. Especially MCs. Jumping over rails, Jumping over defenses, Jumping over anything that team members will get red or yellow cards for jumping over.

And OBTW, I can’t get a single thread to show me the 118 launch. Can someone provide a more specific point to start watching? – Never mind, I finally saw it, a few seconds into the sandstorm. HT* did that get through inspection?


I can tell you for a fact that FIRST is watching the webcast and if they see a key volunteer step over that rail, said volunteer will hear about it. If you’re not a key volunteer, the FTA will have a chat with you.

It’s been a hard habit for me to break. I only stepped over the rail once last year, but I did it in the absolute worst possible place.


If the other KVs don’t get you first… I use the gate, not worth getting chewed out over.


its somewhat ambiguous in its wording. im sure 118 did not design their robot to do that. without an explicit definition of the rule, to red card an alliance in semis for a robotic malfunction is pretty harsh.


I am sure that 118’s robot is not designed in anyway to pick up a hatch and launch it like that. With that said though since they seem to have put the hatch on the robot in an incorrect manner which cause hatch to be launched in this manner during auto/sandstorm that red card is totally warranted.