You Make The Call (YMTC) is a series of situations where you can play ref and make a call. YMTC situations are not meant to represent situations that have occurred at competitions.
A special thanks to Ken for this situation. Ken, I hope you don’t mind that I modified it a bit.
With 30 seconds remaining in a qualifying match, Redabot hooks onto the bar and begins pulling itself up. Then a tremendous POOOOWWWW rings throughout the arena; one of the PVC risers on the BLUE stationary goal is broken and balls start falling out … a lot of balls. Redabot had gotten hooked on the pipe and broke it as it pulled itself up. The blue team continues to shoot balls but none of them remain in the goal as a result of the breach. As a ref, you are not sure how many balls fell out but you are sure that Redabot is the cause of the amputated PVC pipe.
YOU MAKE THE CALL! Do you …
(please note that you can choose multiple options with this YMTC)
Please base your ruling on the 2004 rules. If you find a specific rule that addresses this situation, please share it with everyone.
I know this YMTC is a bit of a stretch … I’ll make the next one a little more down-to-earth.
Red Bot gets penalized for de-scoring blue bots balls (if that decision is made). Red bot was well with in its rights but if another field element breaks while attempting to gain the points he should be disabled and told not to score via the chin up bar. Failure to listen should result in a Match DQ
**Edit:// Redabots motive was to grab the chin up bar and somehow the blue goal just broke. A match replay could be considerable. **
**I guess thats why they keep a spare set of field parts on site in case one of the field elements breaks. **
I though i saw though in the original problem that Redabot grabbed the Blue Stationary Goal. I’ll check it later but for now this is my edited decision. After doing some reading I have noticed that its says it had hooked unto the blue goal WHILE it was hoisting itself up. This statement makes it clearly an accident. If it had said Redabot grabbed onto the stationary goal and broke while using it to hoist itself up then i would stick to my previous penaltys
<G20> Robots cannot goaltend either the mobile or stationary goals. If a robot goaltends or de-scores any small ball, the referee will throw a green penalty flagand the opponents final score will be increased by twice the value of that small ball
<G25> If Robots intentionally tip over any mobile goal or damage the poles of a mobile or stationary goal. that teams robot will be disabled and the team may be disqualified.
if redabot intentionally grabbed the goal, then redabot is disabled and penalized for the now descored balls. if not then redabot is only penalized for the descored small balls.
I would have to agree with MTAMAN02 on this one. While red did not intend on breaking the pole, they were reckless about it and descored balls on blue’s side.
I must be reading a different problem. The original problem statement from Lucien said “Redabot hooks onto the bar and begins pulling itself up.” I don’t see anything about Redabot intentionally grabbing the goal anywhere. Based on the problem statement given, and the title of the thread, I have to conclude that there is no INTENTIONAL damage to the field. Therefore, Rule <G25> does not apply.
Rule <G31> MAY apply, if the potential for additional damage exists (<G31> A referee may disable a robot that has damaged the playing field/carpet, barriers or anohter robot, if the referee feels that further damage is likely to occur.), which would cause Redabot to be disabled, and probably not complete the attempted pull-up to the bar.
But now what to do about the spilled 5-point balls (ahh, yes, back to the original problem)? As I see it, there are two options:
Rule <T01> clearly states the referees will not review any recorded matches. So, the referees can instead make an “as close as possible” estimation of the number of balls that fell out of the goal at the time it was broken. Blue gets credit for each of those balls, and Red is penalized 10 points for each ball that fell out and was de-scored (Rule <G20>). Blue gets credit for each ball they threw into the goal after the damage occurred, and then fell out. Red is not penalized for these balls (as at this point they are falling out due to existing field damage, and not due to Red’s current actions). Hopefully, the results of the Blue ball credits and Red penalites will make for a clear winner. If the referees cannot make a reasonable estimation, or if the estimation results in a score that is too close and they are uncomfortable with making a close call based on an estimation, they can go for Option #2:
The referees make the call to replay the match. The field has been damaged to the point that it has interferred with game play, and the game cannot be accurately scored. Field damage/problems are the only allowable cause for replaying a match, and could be used in this case.
I would agree with Dave that the damage was unintentional. Nonetheless, the game has been modified to a point where estimation by the referees would anger one of the teams greatly. I would replay the match. If the same thing happens again, then I’d just DQ Redabot and penalize the alliance for descoring too.
I have to assume that from the description the breaking of the PVC is an accident. It seems to me to be a failure of the field and the match should be replayed. There were two matches replayed this weekend at Peach Tree. One for a ball dump that was delayed 15 seconds and one for a robot that got disabled by the game controller for no appearent reason.
I would have to say that the match should be replayed later. To me it sounds like redabot was not reckless and did not intentionally try to break the pipe. I would treat it as if it were a malfunctioning part of the field (a part of the field that doesnt work for that round, ie; the ball dropper does not drop, or some other situation like that).
I seem to remember one team in the first week of regionals saying they were trying to either get a 2X ball or get up the platform or something during practice
and the arm on their bot snagged one of the PVC pipes on the mobile goal and pulled it out
it remained stuck in the arm and it was flailing around like their bot was in a pool-hall stick fight
so this one is not so far fetched - And I have to agree with the posts that label this a ‘field failure’ (the goals are not suppose to come apart during a match) - I would vote for a rematch.
I originally thought something else (and voted accordingly), but now that I think about it, I would have to call a rematch, especially given the way that the tournament is set up this year. RPs are really important, and if we don’t know what the RPs are going to be with certainty, it’s time for a new match.