In one of the final matches at this year’s Beantown Blitz, Team 40 was given a yellow card for egregious robot behavior. They then amended the referee’s call and gave them a 2nd yellow card for harassing a referee, and a red card disqualifying them.
Can anyone clarify the offending behaviors that occurred?
Also, at what point does gracious professionalism turn into cut throat competition?
As far as I know, the issuing of the red card was simply a joke, as they had mentioned earlier in the day how team 40 was the only team to get a red card at championships. I can’t speak for team 40, at all, but I think it was more for amusement than violation of gracious professionalism.
I have no comment on the yellow cards, as I wasn’t there or watching, but the red would not have had any offending behavior–Second yellow card=red card.
Jacob, if the ref gives a red card as a joke, and doesn’t label it as one, then I think the ref needs to do some hard thinking about his sense of humor. “Boy who cried wolf” and all that.[/edit]
As for the other question… I think that happens when you remove “Gracious”. Professionalism is about getting the job done (within the rules, of course), regardless of what happens along the way. Or rather, it can be seen that way. Now, when the “job” is inspiring (the “I” in FIRST), cutthroat competition probably won’t result. But when the “job” is winning, or winning is seen as “the way to inspire”, then you can expect to have a fierce battle if you are “in the way”.
The point at which GP turns into cutthroat competition is the point at which we forget what GP is and what the real job is.
It was a post season event, and it was a joke, plain and simple.
And as soon as it was announced, Team 40 (and a large number of other people at the event) knew it was an inside joke and could not stop laughing. Trust me, I was hanging out with a bunch of people from 40 at the time.
I can see how announcing a joke red card at an official event would probably be a bad idea, but c’mon anyone who thinks it wasn’t funny at an off-season event - especially considering the back story behind the inside joke - needs to lighten up a bit and have some fun.
I can tell you for a fact that the “red card” at BTB was a complete joke (as in, it was meant to be amusing). The referees all know people on team 40 and the red card (i.e. “second” yellow card), in fact was never actually given, it was simply a joke.
Apparently, the fact that it was a joke was not made clear. That’s the problem. If it’s not clear that it was a joke, even at an offseason, then someone is going to take it seriously. Then you get questions like the original question in this thread. Seeing as it is a joke, I think that the second question in the thread is a very good one, and one that should be answered.
As the Head Referee who issued the card, it was most assuredly a joke. I would have thought the staged ceremony where I handed the card to 40’s driver was enough to sell it, but I guess it wasn’t clear enough. So, let me make is abundantly clear:
It was a JOKE. It was merely the referees having fun with some friends from Team 40, nothing more. They were disappointed when they got “just a yellow card”, so we came up with a funny way for them to “earn” a red card. It had no bearing on the outcome of the match, or anything else - just the amusement of the teams and audience.
This can occur any time when one party is willing to do what may not be gracious or even professional for the victory or a specific goal.
This transformation to “cut throat” can occur before, during and after a match and can be influenced / caused by many internal and external forces. External ones range from: drive teams comments and actions, drive coaches own or otherwise, actions of referees and even the crowd cheering at an UnGP action resulting in a toppling of a robot.
Many things cause it, mostly from the heat of the moment, some however are caused by a team upbringing. For some teams a loss doesn’t just mean a lack of a shiny new trophee, but also placing their sponsorship in jeopardy. That doesn’t justify their actions, but it should be taken into consideration.
As a member of a drive team I know what it is like when the competition turns sour, I have gotten upset about the outcome of a match, have gone into a match angry about what opposing drive teams have said or done, along with many events where I have been on the recieving as well as the giving end. I’m not proud of it, but I recognize it happens, to everyone.
There is also a major difference in playing ones best and being in it just to win.
FIRST at its base is a competition and while its intention isn’t to create winners and losers, that is an end effect. At the end of the day, there is a set of teams that won but a much larger set of teams that did not.
I know that this is totally out of place, but I’d just like to commend Jeff and his team on their awesome reffing at Beantown. It was some of the best reffing that I’ve seen all season. Jeff, especially, kept his cool, even when hot-heads like me approached him with questions about matches :o
Not being near the field, those of us in the stands thought it was serious at first. Then we realized the joke. If nothing else, it woke us all up, wondering what 40 had done to deserve a red card! (Not that anyone sleeps at a FIRST event, of course!)
The OP was not the only person on my team who took the red card joke seriously. Personally, I thought the judges couldn’t resist another joke about team 40 being given the red card at the competition. It was just too good to pass by.