Help and answer quick

During 45 seconds into the match, our teammate descored a cone from the opposing robot(not match affecting)Whilst descoring, the opposing robot dropped their cone that they were holding with their rollers into their chassis, resulting in them unable to score(unknown if match affecting or illegal) We got disqualified and we are challenging the disqualification. Since common sense is applied, I am asking you if this is a legitimate dq.

Personally, I would say that your teammate is responsible for the infraction, so they should get DQed if the descoring could have potentially been match affecting. However, unless this was quals, your team shouldn’t have been DQed, only your teammate.

(Unless you conspired to do that, in which case, G1 takes priority ig)

However, I don’t know the circumstances, so that is my analysis. based on the knowledge given.

This was unintentional

2-3 seconds after the descore, they dropped the cone from their rollers into their robot, resulting in them unable to score for the last 40-45 seconds. This was the reason we got disqualified, because they were unable to score for the last 45 seconds.

The score they have gotten was 59, while we scored 139(if not disqualified) There was an 80 point difference. Do you believe one robot can score 80 points in 45 seconds if they were functional?

…That’s when the refs have to assume what the robot is capable of doing, based on the earlier minute of gameplay, and potentially previous matches. It is possible to score 80 points in 45 seconds (All mogos + quick loader), but it’s really difficult.

The rules are clear that de-scoring an opponents cone can lead to DQ even if by accident: I won’t comment on the referee’s decision in that regard, or what happened in your particular match. Regarding “match affecting” however, from a referee’s standpoint: first, understand that DQ’ing a team is not something a referee ever wants to do, especially in the case of an accident like a tall robot falls over and becomes in violation of size rules, or if a cone is accidentally knocked off an opponents stack. Secondly, the referee is not called on to predict the future, or to estimate if an opponent could have scored a certain number of points. The “test” usually applied to determine “match affecting” is if the team to be DQ’d would lose the match anyway, then they would be warned, but not DQ’d.

The video can be found here:
Actually, as what I can tell there was no illegal action when reviewing it

Consider at least this. Knocking over that stack immediately removed about a dozen points, and that could have led to a highest stack potentially. So at least 12 points of the difference in scores might have been right there, potentially 22 one them. Then consider that that robot had to waste time to get rid of the barely stacked mobile goal to try to deal with the stuck cone, which included moving away from being well positioned. From the look of it, they may well have had to deal with their robot not knowing the stack size any longer as well.

Additionally, consider that this means your alliance was only competing against one robot to grab cones instead of against two robots, which means it was easier for you to pick up points over the remaining time than it would have been otherwise.

Finally, there were more than 45 seconds of match time remaining. When I check the time, there is almost exactly 1 minute remaining from the hit at 1:31.

Making a statement about it not being match affecting because they were unlikely to score 80 points in 45 seconds is ridiculous. It ignores the points that were removed. It ignores that this caused the team to have to waste time to rectify the damage. It ignores that you no longer had to compete for many of the cones you grabbed. It drastically distorts the remaining time.

And it has been pointed out to you that de-scoring opponents’ stacks, even if by accident, is against the rules and can be cause for a DQ, and you follow that post with a statement about “no illegal action”? That robot was sitting still. It didn’t move into you to knock that whole stack over.

Well @[TVA]Connor didn’t make the hit…
His partner hits cones that hits the opponents’ robot while match loading trying to 1) push him away from the match loader and 2) get that next mogo.
If you look, the reason that the stack falls is the driver of the stacking bot continues to lower his lift, pushing the stack sideways. He keeps trying to stack as his bot is being pushed. If he had paused for literally 2 seconds, they would have been fine. Honestly, it’s kinda like they were wanting a DQ.

That was exactly the point. If someone pushes me while I am holding a mobile goal with cones on it, and I lowered my lift causing the stack to tip, I believe that i would be at fault because i was the one who actually tipped my own stack, regardless if there was or wasnt sway. Robots should be able to be built to compensate the sway, as well as they should be built to deflect cones from entering the chasis.

If this situation resulted in the defending robot getting disqualified, this would be the easiest exploit in the history of exploits some amount of teams can do

I think the DQ for the 1:30 point in the match is 100% warranted. The robot doing driver loads was just moving its lift in order to actually do the driver loads. When you pushed them, their stack tilted, and they couldn’t really do much about it. Sure, maybe it’s possible to claim that they should have reacted faster and stopped their lift to save their stack, but it’s hard to make the refs accept something like that, and IMO it should still be a DQ.


Seriously??? Look at the timing of the hit carefully. Try to go frame-by-frame. You’ll see the cone was already a the top and it looks like just starting to descend before the hit. So, while in the middle of stacking, the team that got hit could

  1. Suddenly notice in the fraction of a second they have to react (remember that human reaction time to even spot something you’re looking for and press a button is about 0.2 s), change their action, and hope the momentum they already threw into it isn’t too much;
  2. Go and reprogram their robot because it had been set to lower to a certain height automatically, load the program in their robot, and restart it all in that fraction of a second without touching the robot or going on the field.

So, let’s say you’re in a car and stopped at a stoplight and the driver behind you isn’t paying attention, ramming you forward so that you hit the car in front of you and dent their bumper. Totally your fault because you should have pressed harder on the brakes? Really?

None of us are going somewhere with this conversation, since neither of us would change our minds, so I think we should end it here

I think this is a manner where the referees were correct that this could’ve leaned both directions, so I think I should stop arguing my own case myself and we can end it here.
Thank you all so much :smiley: