Goals clamping down on change up balls


Trying to adjust my change up goals (mainly the ones that are not in corners) and they seem to lean forward and clamp down on the balls, making them hard to put in / remove, ive tried to adjust them but with no luck.

Anyone else having this issue?

1 Like

read the manual update, this was fixed and discussed a while ago

I believe the manual update discusses only fixing the problem of wedging the ball behind the goal.

But back to the question - the clearance on the corner and side goals are narrower (6.13") than the width of the ball (6.3"), so you are expected to have to put additional force to insert or remove balls compared to the center goal (6.5").

Follow the field assembly instructions carefully.


the manual update made the tolerances better so the effort needed to take the balls out is substantially less. it’s still there, and that’s how it’s intended to be, but it’s less random between various goals.

1 Like

the goals are supposed to be like this. only on the center goal should you be able to remove the ball with no scraping against the top ring. but like ethan said, check to make sure your spacing is proper because the manual update says no goals are allowed to be any amount under the proper height, which means no goals should be tighter than the default.

1 Like

The corned goals have proper clearance, and have the little bit of resistance. But the wall goals are nearly impossible.

this is probably normal, as the corner goals get more support from the field in the way that they’re mounted. I don’t have a full field though so I can’t say for sure.

Do you make sure you set them up right. I’m not saying you didn’t but you might have missed something.

1 Like

The minimum clearance value is the same for both the wall goals and corner goals. I suggest that you ensure your wall goals are up to spec if it is nearly impossible to remove balls from them.


I looked through the update log (VRC Change Up Game Manual Updates), there is nothing about changing the tolerances afaik, are you sure that the goal is no longer 6.13"?

the goal is still 6.13". they didn’t change the proper spacing, there is no longer any tolerance for goals that are tighter than 6.13" though, so all goals have to be at the very tightest, 6.13".

Field dimensions and tolerances can be found in Appendix A, Field Specifications. The tolerance was updated in the May update to be -0" +0.5" in response to this Q&A. The GDC just forgot to include the change in the update log.


That’s a shame, it takes away the challenge of the side goals, teams can just exploit these tolerances and raise the side goal rims to 6.63" as opposed to 6.13" and the ball will just slide out like the middle towers- they should make the tolerances a lot smaller, it’s not that hard to align a goal piece with a cardboard sizing tool.

Note that for qualifying competitions, it is the EP who is responsible for assuring fields are properly setup, not teams.


Take a look at the actual field perimeter. If your field walls are leaning in, then this will affect the goals.


Well my walls are good, but my side goals (not the corner ones) seem to be leaning forward

Like the bottom part of the goal is on the ground flat, but the rest is leaning forward. I know they are supposed to have a little bit of resistance but this is a lot

this brings up an interesting question:

is the minimum tolerance of 6.13" referring to the space between the rings at the back or front of the goals? because the front might be a lot tighter due to the sagging of the goals, in which case, would the gap next to the posts legally have to be widened to greater than 6.13"?


Our wall goals seem to have the same issue as well. Because of the added bracket the corner goals receive for mounting, they sag considerably less compared to the wall goals which “clamp” down on the balls harder.

I feel this could easily be solved by putting one of those brackets the corners goals have on the side goals, they already have holes. @DRow could you give us your wisdom?

idk what DRow is supposed to do about it, it might be better to ask in the Q&A if sagging goals are in violation of the minimum tolerances.