Yellow / Red Cards Assigned in 2019



I agree that I doubt they designed it to launch over 3 ft. But the fact of the matter was that they did launch the panel.

It really isn’t much different than if you look at the 30 Inch extension rule. To meet that rule, you can use software/sensors to limit the movement of an extension, but if that software/sensor fails and your extension goes past 30", you will get penalized for it.


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.

And super inspiring. I bet all of those kids on the disqualified alliance left feeling fantastic. /s

This is the kind of stuff that causes kids to quit if we’re being honest. It’s super discouraging, not inspiring at all and points to how FIRST does not put the team experience first at events. These are kids - we should be trying to lift them up and not punish them for making a silly mistake.

I think it should be a yellow card with head ref discretion to go to red if needed. DQ’ing an entire alliance because a kid stepped over the field barrier feels like an over-reaction.


If there is one toxic idea in FRC game and rule design that I wish we could banish from the league forever, it is the idea that red cards should be used as a tool to teach kids valuable lessons about misinterpreting confusing situations in the heat of a moment.

The “red card if the volunteer opens the gate but the field isn’t green” penalty is absurd. Spare me the rhetoric about how this is a vital safety issue - it is a minor safety issue, sure, but the gate is open in that scenario because field reset is everywhere on the field - so how unsafe is it, really. I’ve had field reset personnel mistakenly encourage students to come out with them. I’ve had a ref walk out onto the field while talking to me, not realizing only he was allowed to be on the field, and luckily I just happened to notice the field lights in the middle of a conversation.

Using red cards as the sole mechanism to modify behavior, and ignoring all of the other factors that lead students to make the choices they do, is a recipe for heartbreak and a horrible teaching tool.

If the field isn’t open the gate should be closed. Field reset can step over the barrier - they are already entrusted with safely walking across a “dangerous” field condition, stepping over a wall should be fine too. Make the gate only open when the lights are green, and make it so the gate going down early negates the red card, and then you’ll have actually solved your problem without ruining events for entire alliances over the slightest mistake.


From what I recall, the barrier on that alliances side was never opened, however the head ref did go over to indicate that they could reprep their robot. I wasn’t paying enough attention to see the jump, but given that the wall never went down, it makes sense that it was a jumping call as opposed to being a technicality especially since the head ref himself was the one who told that alliance that they could go on the field.


I’m really confused - the ref instructed the teams to do something that the ref then issued a red card for? What?


I do have a question, if you trip over the wall would that be a red card?


There we go, that seems pretty clear cut. I must have missed the gates dropping during that break.


While the kids were on the field, the far gate got closed but the gate closest to the scoring table remained open. One kid exited correctly through the open gate. The other kid, in the heat of the moment re-exited by jumping over the closed gate on the far side of the field, which is where he had entered on.

This is an even worse situation than I originally thought then. Why are field volunteers closing ANY gates while students are still on the field? They should not be closed until all drive team members have exited.


Yeah, definitely a complex situation. And we would have obviously preferred that a timely match start would have taken place so that the kids would have never needed to re-enter the field in the first place.

No, the match delay did NOT cause the red card. But the delay created a situation where the kids had to go back on and off the field. Again, we did not argue the call, but certainly wish the situation would have been avoided entirely by starting the match when 5 of the 6 bots on the field were ready to go.


Man, sure glad the participants don’t turn over every few years or anything.


Yeah, definitely a complex situation. And we would have obviously preferred that a timely match start would have taken place so that the kids would have never needed to re-enter the field in the first place.

Honestly, it’s something you should at a minimum take up with your local regional planning committee, but I’d also shoot a note to FIRST too. This is something that should not be physically allowed to happen because of a volunteer closing the field up early.

I would have definitely argued the call as well. Sometimes you need to fight for yourself because nobody else is going to during an event. Your alliance should not be disqualified because a field volunteer decided to close half of the field up early.


I believe that 1519 was assigned a yellow card at GSDE when a defender hit their extended mechanism and the defender was contacted inside of their frame perimeter.

No mater clips are up yet.


Just make the walls and gates tall enough so nobody steps over them and everyone is as safe as they can be.


Bringing the nets from 2013 back specifically for this isn’t the worst idea.


Last year there were several bots that tipped over and part of the bot ended up outside the field wall. I saw one even hit a scoring stand. I expect this to happen again this year as well. Maybe a 6 foot wall would prevent wall hopping and tippy bots or launched game pieces from hitting volunteers.


If the nets were brought back they could then reduce panel launching to a yellow card if not egregious, strategic, or repeated.


Or just drop the rule entirely.


It still has to be a rule, otherwise teams might design their robots to launch panels. Lessening it to a yellow card seems fair, but I don’t quite know if FIRST would do that since Week 1 already happened.


He is saying to get rid of the rule for match play. You can still keep the inspection requirement that requires you to demonstrate that your robot can’t launch a panel.


If it’s not a safety issue…