State Tournament Referee Denies Official Q&A

VEX Robotics Competition Discussion VRC > Tower Takeover (19/20)
1

My state recently had its State Vex Tournament. During the eliminations matches, we were in the following situation: Our tray has 9 cubes ready to stack, as we were stacking an opponent robot hit us from the side where we pushed them away to try to stack, but they ended up going into the goal where they rotated and knocked down the stack. We were told that it was not a violation since we forced them into a violation. This stack was match affecting and we would have won the match if it had stayed up (7/9 were purple cubes and we had 3 purples cubes in the towers).

We showed the head referee the Q&A 449 immediately after the match: Wallbot/Protected Zone Clarifications : Robot Events

More specifically scenario three: All Robots are responsible for their own actions. An offensive Robot who pushes a defensive Robot into any SG3 violation, as the result of offensive maneuvers, should be considered a G13 interaction. Therefore, the offensive Robot should receive the “benefit of the doubt”, and the defensive Robot should receive the appropriate penalty for whichever portion of SG3 was violated (B, D, E, or F).

The head referee then told us that Q&A questions cant be used to make a ruling about the game (which is incorrect), to which we showed him G22:

The Q&A system is an extension of this Game Manual. All Teams must adhere to all VEX Robotics Competition rules as written in this Game Manual and must abide by any stated intents of these rules. Officially registered Teams have the opportunity to ask for official rule interpretations in the VEX Robotics Competition Question & Answer system. All responses in this system should be treated as official rulings from the VEX Robotics Competition Game Design Committee (GDC), and they represent the correct and official interpretation of the VEX Robotics Competition Rules. Previous Definitions, Rules, and Rulings found in documents and Q&A’s from previous seasons do not apply to the current game. If clarification is needed, the question should be asked on the current Q&A. The 2019 - 2020 Q&A is the ONLY official source for rulings besides the Game Manual. If there are any conflicts between the Game Manual and other supplemental materials (e.g. Referee Training videos, VRC Hub app, etc), the most current version of the Game Manual takes precedent. The VRC Q&A system can be found at https://www.robotevents.com/VRC/2019-2020/QA

At this point, we could tell that he probably didn’t know the rules very well; but we persisted. We showed him (SG3), the section that was specifically referenced by the Q&A and showed that making contact with our barriers/goal is a DQ if its match affecting and that causing cubes to no-longer meet the definition of being scored is a required DQ.

He then went on to say that it was his up to his discretion; which I think is false since the rule explicitly states the penalty for the violation and the Q&A describes the exact scenario in which a violation is warranted. He then promptly told us that he made his decision and that it was over. In my opinion, the worst part is that an official REC foundation representitive was present and didn’t say anything when the head judge said things like “the Q&A isn’t a valid source of rules”.

Just to clarify, we aren’t posting this to get this Head Referee or REC representative in trouble and we appreciate the time and effort that they took to volunteer (hence why we aren’t revealing names or locations) , but it’s really frustrating having your entire season end because an official makes an arbitrary decision that is explicitly against the rules. We have worked incredibly hard this season and have been either champions or finalists at all our tournaments prior and I really don’t know what I can do at this point if anything at all.

All help and advice would be appreciated!

note: We weren’t the only team that I saw was affected. Several questionable calls were made regarding the same type of infraction and other types too with some other teams.

7 Likes
2

Speak to your rsm, if the ref won’t listen to you, they’ll probably listen to them. hopefully the ref will then acknowledge the Q&A as an extension of the game manual, as they should.

4 Likes
3

The State RECF RSM was at the event and he just seemed to quietly observe the whole interaction (I believe it’s his first year as the RSM) even when the judge would make a claim that was blatantly wrong. Is there any reason to pursue any further action considering that VRC tends to have a “once the head ref calls it it’s over” policy?

2 Likes
4

perhaps the rsm wasn’t actually aware of the ref’s reasoning. rsm’s tend to not try to interfere with refsunless they are made aware of incorrect rulings. I would have spoken to the rsm, but beyond that not much you can do.

3 Likes
5

RECF RSM is there to observe and, if asked, they will contact hotline to get feedback. Unfortunately, there are a lot of other events ongoing.

The person to work with is the EP - Head Referee can get opinions from EP… EPs should not overrule Head Referee’s calls during a tournament.

1 Like
6

You are implying that the students should approach the EP, which is expressly prohibited by T1d. Head Refs are the final verdict on game play decisions and are the only persons students may address about rulings.

1 Like
7

Every attendee who has an issue with how the event is run should by all means make the EP aware. The EP will not overrule a Head Referee, but can have a conversation about adjusting practices to make adherence to the Game Manual correct.

1 Like
8

You describe a situation where you did everything correctly to advocate for the head ref to revise a ruling, and the referee was not persuaded. There is no other appeal process. It is not the place of the EP (or even a RSM) to intercede in that process without the referee requesting an opinion.

It is possible the referee made the wrong call, which is unfortunate. However, in the bolded excerpt from Q&A449 the referee does have discretion in determining whether the maneuver is offensive or defensive. Possessing cubes in the area near a goal does not mean you are making only offensive maneuvers.

9

I have witnessed this get out of hand and am wary of EPs or RSMs involving themselves in specific ref decisions. I can definitely see the ref asking for advice, but cannot see how any adult advocating for a student with the head ref aligns with T1.

10

to be clear - I am specifically referring to a situation in which a Head Referee does not consider Q&A part of the rule. The Game Manual is clear about the role of Q&A in rules.

EP is responsible for providing the event and the key volunteers - Head Referee and Judge Advisors. Both are required to follow tournament procedures.

1 Like
11

I do agree that the ref not accepting the validity of the Q&A is unacceptable, and that it is the EPs responsibility to be sure the referees are correctly prepared.

This was a messy and unfortunate outcome, but one in which the students did everything correctly, and were probably let down by the volunteers.

Going forward, a team that feels they are well-versed in the rules might ask some probing questions at the driver meeting. In this case asking any question regarding a Q&A ruling on SG3 would do a few things at once. It would clarify if the head ref is familiar with the Q&A, would let the questioner know how the ref will interpret that Q&A, and would let the ref and other teams know the questioner is well informed.

11 Likes
12

I guess, but that is not the issue in question here. Can we also acknowledge something for a quick second. A referee at a worlds qualifying event failed to acknowledge one of the most important rules in the manual. IMO he should be prevented from being a head ref for at least half a season, and definitely not the states ref for a year

3 Likes
13

Re-read the OP conclusion. It was not asking for retribution but seeking a remedy if it exists. I stated my opinion that there is no remedy at this point. I then offered a way small step that can help teams assess and possibly prevent ill-prepared refs from making poor decisions.

I will add this: All of you students that are invested in VRC being a quality program, please volunteer as refs for a few years after you conclude your participation as competitors. You people are the very best option for that role, because you know exactly what is at stake.

8 Likes
14

That’s crazy. I’ve never heard of a judge making a critical error like this.

15

Welcome to the community!
It is actually Referee. There is a difference that is worth noting, judges are the people who judge notebooks and conduct interviews, and referee’s are the people on the fields who make the calls.

11 Likes
16

Just so you know, there is nothing to be done now but I’m the future bring it up with the recf rep at the event, they can change rulings after they happen (in a reasonable time that is)

17

This is incorrect. Read rule T1 for details.

18

No it’s not, it said in a reasonable time and the rule says all questions must be asked in a timely manner

19

contact your RSM/RECF rep about this
Whats the worst answer you can get? You already arent able to go so if you ask maybe something can be done.

1 Like