Robotics Education & Competition Foundation
Inspiring students, one robot at a time.
This Q&A is now read-only

Official Q&A: VRC 2018-2019: Turning Point

Usage Guidelines All Questions

241: Referee Definition of Egregious


169A
11-Feb-2019

Hello,

It has recently come to my team's attention that "egregious" is no longer defined by VEX in the Game Manual. In the Toss Up Game Manual, "egregious" was followed by the parenthetical "(Match Affecting)", drawing clear correlation between the two definitions. For example: " <G7 (2013-2014)> During a Match, Robots may be operated only by the Drivers and/or by software running in the onboard control system. A Coach may not touch his/her team’s controls anytime during a Match. Violations of this rule will result in a warning for minor offenses which do not affect the match. Egregious (match affecting) offenses will result in a Disqualification. Teams who receive multiple warnings may also receive a Disqualification at the head referee's discretion."

However, when looking through the Turning Point Game Manual, no such clarification exists. "Egregious" is left as a stand alone word with no clarification on how the word can be defined. For example: "<G12 (2018-2019)> Don’t destroy other Robots. But, be prepared to encounter defense. Strategies aimed solely at the destruction, damage, tipping over, or Entanglement of opposing Robots are not part of the ethos of the VEX Robotics Competition and are not allowed. If the tipping, Entanglement, or damage is ruled to be intentional or egregious, the offending Team may be Disqualified from that Match. Repeated offenses could result in Disqualification from the entirety of the competition."

Because of this, should it be assumed that Vex no longer associates the word "egregious" with "Match Affecting," or can it be assumed that the word and phrase can still be paired? The cause for this question stems from a tip in one of our matches. The referee argued that the tip was unintentional, and therefore disqualification was not applicable. In addition, we were not able to argue that it was an "egregious offense" due the vagueness of the word's dictionary definition "outstandingly bad; shocking," as this definition is difficult to interpret in the context of robot interactions. If there is damage/tipping caused to a robot that is match affecting, would the action be "egregious", or does "egregious" depend solely on the severity of the action in question?

Thank you for your time and attention in this matter.

Answered by Game Design Committee

should it be assumed that Vex no longer associates the word "egregious" with "Match Affecting," or can it be assumed that the word and phrase can still be paired?

Your first assumption is correct. The breaking apart of "egregious" and "Match Affecting" in recent Game Manuals is a conscious and intentional verbiage change.

It is worth noting that just like Q&A's, the only rules which apply to a given game is that game's official Game Manual. Previous rules, interpretations, or precedents can not always be assumed to apply.

The referee argued that the tip was unintentional, and therefore disqualification was not applicable. In addition, we were not able to argue that it was an "egregious offense" due the vagueness of the word's dictionary definition "outstandingly bad; shocking," as this definition is difficult to interpret in the context of robot interactions. If there is damage/tipping caused to a robot that is match affecting, would the action be "egregious", or does "egregious" depend solely on the severity of the action in question?

There is no VRC-specific definition of the term "egregious". The dictionary definition that you quote is the intended one when applying it to <G12>. Note that <G12> does not include "Match Affecting" verbiage, and only includes "intentional or egregious" verbiage.