Illinois 2018

[hippo9]

It's a legitimate disqualification per General Rule 2 though.

Yeah no where in the Roller Coaster rules does it say that phones are allowed, so according to rule 2 they are not allowed.

Yeah, but first off, it's a stupid rule because you can't cheat with a phone. We were just using it as a timer and even though it wasn't allowed, it's stupid we got dq'd. We weren't cheating and the dqing for not that fair of a reason kind of ruins people's spirit to scioly somewhat.

You could search for ways to fix something... The rule has a reason, and you probably should have brought a timer in the first place.

[EastStroudsburg13]

It's a tough situation. Was the punishment harsh? Yes. Was the punishment within the bounds of the rules? Unfortunately, yes it was. The supervisor has the discretion to user lesser punishments if they so choose, but at the state level, supervisors are going to be more likely to choose the harshest punishment, because that is the standard of competition they are keeping. Speaking as a former supervisor, you never seek out to DQ someone, but if there's evidence of a rule breakage that falls within the bounds of a DQ, then at the state level, more often than not you have to issue that DQ.

Now, if the debate is whether or not General Rule 2 should be amended to be a bit more lenient or clear, that is a separate discussion that can be had, and has a couple of sides to it. As that is something that applies to everyone in SO, I think that would be a worthwhile topic if people have opinions about it.

[GoldenKnight1]

Yeah, but first off, it's a stupid rule because you can't cheat with a phone. .

I can think of some ways that you could use your phone to cheat. The easiest would be having someone on the other end of your phone telling you what to do. I can't tell you how many times I have seen very involved parents trying to tell the competitors what to do during a competition.

I am not saying that the competitor was trying to cheat but from the Event Supervisors perspective that is really hard to determine.

[19alekb]

Yeah no where in the Roller Coaster rules does it say that phones are allowed, so according to rule 2 they are not allowed.

Yeah, but first off, it's a stupid rule because you can't cheat with a phone. We were just using it as a timer and even though it wasn't allowed, it's stupid we got dq'd. We weren't cheating and the dqing for not that fair of a reason kind of ruins people's spirit to scioly somewhat.

You could search for ways to fix something... The rule has a reason, and you probably should have brought a timer in the first place.

Yes, but the event supervisor knew they weren't cheating and could have not dq'd them and just warned them and took the phone for the event.

[Unome]

Yeah, but first off, it's a stupid rule because you can't cheat with a phone. We were just using it as a timer and even though it wasn't allowed, it's stupid we got dq'd. We weren't cheating and the dqing for not that fair of a reason kind of ruins people's spirit to scioly somewhat.

You could search for ways to fix something... The rule has a reason, and you probably should have brought a timer in the first place.

Yes, but the event supervisor knew they weren't cheating and could have not dq'd them and just warned them and took the phone for the event.

They could have, however refer to East's post above.

[Skink]

1. I'm skeptical about it having been a disqualification. It appears to have been a tier (surely a competition violation) according to the final score report. You have about the same odds of getting struck by lightning as you do disqualifying any team, especially one of the best, at the State level.

2. There are very few events where meaningful aid can be obtained via telephone usage of any kind. In this scenario, it's far more likely to receive aid from a parent or coach mouthing tips from just outside the competition area. And, even that is unlikely.

3. While General Rule 2 is clearly cut, it does appear antiquated. After all, what are teams practicing with? Cellular telephones. What are supervisors and their supporting volunteers timing stations with? Cellular telephones. How are some of you probably reading this? From your cellular telephone...I don't think it is all that radical a suggestion to say that using the stopwatch (or clock) function of a telephone could be reasonable. As an analogy, consider a multifunctional probe (or maybe, even, a multimeter). It's reasonable to tell teams that they can use their fancy instrument if they stick to permissible functions. Why should that principle stop applying here? I suppose you could cite the 'dedicated to computation' calculator policies...but that's a separate can of worms.

4. A comment was made somewhere that no issues were had at past tournaments (to which MM has attended many). My usual response to this is pretty dismissive because the rules are what they are, but a high profile team attending many competitions in a single season suddenly getting stung over an innocuous offense (least restrictive penalty and all that) at the first competition that actually has stakes may be symptomatic of an endemic problem. I'm not going to call sabotage or anything conspiratorial like that, but it is worth noting that strong teams draw more attention--and scrutiny--to themselves. While MM was, by the letter of the rules, in the wrong, perhaps the rules need to be rethought to ensure that this doesn't happen again. Because, everyone's heads turn when one of the best teams nationwide bombs a single event. And, the arbitration team knew what they were doing with this ruling.

[Unome]

I'm skeptical about it having been a disqualification. It appears to have been a tier (surely a competition violation) according to the final score report. You have about the same odds of getting struck by lightning as you do disqualifying any team, especially one of the best, at the State level.

Wow, not sure why I didn't notice that (even knowing IL has more than 40 teams at state...). This makes more sense, being basically the least restrictive actual penalty that the ES could have given.

I've witnessed one DQ out of every tournament I've been to. I wonder what the odds in terms of the number of people-events competed at those tournaments are...

[19alekb]

1. I'm skeptical about it having been a disqualification. It appears to have been a tier (surely a competition violation) according to the final score report. You have about the same odds of getting struck by lightning as you do disqualifying any team, especially one of the best, at the State level.

2. There are very few events where meaningful aid can be obtained via telephone usage of any kind. In this scenario, it's far more likely to receive aid from a parent or coach mouthing tips from just outside the competition area. And, even that is unlikely.

3. While General Rule 2 is clearly cut, it does appear antiquated. After all, what are teams practicing with? Cellular telephones. What are supervisors and their supporting volunteers timing stations with? Cellular telephones. How are some of you probably reading this? From your cellular telephone...I don't think it is all that radical a suggestion to say that using the stopwatch (or clock) function of a telephone could be reasonable. As an analogy, consider a multifunctional probe (or maybe, even, a multimeter). It's reasonable to tell teams that they can use their fancy instrument if they stick to permissible functions. Why should that principle stop applying here? I suppose you could cite the 'dedicated to computation' calculator policies...but that's a separate can of worms.

4. A comment was made somewhere that no issues were had at past tournaments (to which MM has attended many). My usual response to this is pretty dismissive because the rules are what they are, but a high profile team attending many competitions in a single season suddenly getting stung over an innocuous offense (least restrictive penalty and all that) at the first competition that actually has stakes may be symptomatic of an endemic problem. I'm not going to call sabotage or anything conspiratorial like that, but it is worth noting that strong teams draw more attention--and scrutiny--to themselves. While MM was, by the letter of the rules, in the wrong, perhaps the rules need to be rethought to ensure that this doesn't happen again. Because, everyone's heads turn when one of the best teams nationwide bombs a single event. And, the arbitration team knew what they were doing with this ruling.

You are right by calling it a tiering because it was. Roller coaster got second tiered, I just called it a dq. I'm just pigeon at the ruling. MM is going to be worsened a lot because our 8th graders are leaving. This leaves me and a two or three other 7th graders to try to carry the team.

[Unome]

1. I'm skeptical about it having been a disqualification. It appears to have been a tier (surely a competition violation) according to the final score report. You have about the same odds of getting struck by lightning as you do disqualifying any team, especially one of the best, at the State level.

2. There are very few events where meaningful aid can be obtained via telephone usage of any kind. In this scenario, it's far more likely to receive aid from a parent or coach mouthing tips from just outside the competition area. And, even that is unlikely.

3. While General Rule 2 is clearly cut, it does appear antiquated. After all, what are teams practicing with? Cellular telephones. What are supervisors and their supporting volunteers timing stations with? Cellular telephones. How are some of you probably reading this? From your cellular telephone...I don't think it is all that radical a suggestion to say that using the stopwatch (or clock) function of a telephone could be reasonable. As an analogy, consider a multifunctional probe (or maybe, even, a multimeter). It's reasonable to tell teams that they can use their fancy instrument if they stick to permissible functions. Why should that principle stop applying here? I suppose you could cite the 'dedicated to computation' calculator policies...but that's a separate can of worms.

4. A comment was made somewhere that no issues were had at past tournaments (to which MM has attended many). My usual response to this is pretty dismissive because the rules are what they are, but a high profile team attending many competitions in a single season suddenly getting stung over an innocuous offense (least restrictive penalty and all that) at the first competition that actually has stakes may be symptomatic of an endemic problem. I'm not going to call sabotage or anything conspiratorial like that, but it is worth noting that strong teams draw more attention--and scrutiny--to themselves. While MM was, by the letter of the rules, in the wrong, perhaps the rules need to be rethought to ensure that this doesn't happen again. Because, everyone's heads turn when one of the best teams nationwide bombs a single event. And, the arbitration team knew what they were doing with this ruling.

You are right by calling it a tiering because it was. Roller coaster got second tiered, I just called it a dq. I'm just butterfly at the ruling. MM is going to be worsened a lot because our 8th graders are leaving. This leaves me and a two or three other 7th graders to try to carry the team.

If you really do have two or three others on board, that's plenty to do it. Between three or four people, you can pretty easily cover most of the events.

Of course, that is contingent on all of you sticking to it and being reliable. The last time I tried this, I had to basically drag our second-best team member out of retirement (a 9th grader - I assume you may not be familiar with the 9th grader rule since IL doesn't allow 9th graders in Div B) a few days before the first tournament. Although, the team ended up doing just fine... (the DuPont trophy is still front and center in the school display case).

[19alekb]

1. I'm skeptical about it having been a disqualification. It appears to have been a tier (surely a competition violation) according to the final score report. You have about the same odds of getting struck by lightning as you do disqualifying any team, especially one of the best, at the State level.

2. There are very few events where meaningful aid can be obtained via telephone usage of any kind. In this scenario, it's far more likely to receive aid from a parent or coach mouthing tips from just outside the competition area. And, even that is unlikely.

3. While General Rule 2 is clearly cut, it does appear antiquated. After all, what are teams practicing with? Cellular telephones. What are supervisors and their supporting volunteers timing stations with? Cellular telephones. How are some of you probably reading this? From your cellular telephone...I don't think it is all that radical a suggestion to say that using the stopwatch (or clock) function of a telephone could be reasonable. As an analogy, consider a multifunctional probe (or maybe, even, a multimeter). It's reasonable to tell teams that they can use their fancy instrument if they stick to permissible functions. Why should that principle stop applying here? I suppose you could cite the 'dedicated to computation' calculator policies...but that's a separate can of worms.

4. A comment was made somewhere that no issues were had at past tournaments (to which MM has attended many). My usual response to this is pretty dismissive because the rules are what they are, but a high profile team attending many competitions in a single season suddenly getting stung over an innocuous offense (least restrictive penalty and all that) at the first competition that actually has stakes may be symptomatic of an endemic problem. I'm not going to call sabotage or anything conspiratorial like that, but it is worth noting that strong teams draw more attention--and scrutiny--to themselves. While MM was, by the letter of the rules, in the wrong, perhaps the rules need to be rethought to ensure that this doesn't happen again. Because, everyone's heads turn when one of the best teams nationwide bombs a single event. And, the arbitration team knew what they were doing with this ruling.

You are right by calling it a tiering because it was. Roller coaster got second tiered, I just called it a dq. I'm just butterfly at the ruling. MM is going to be worsened a lot because our 8th graders are leaving. This leaves me and a two or three other 7th graders to try to carry the team.

If you really do have two or three others on board, that's plenty to do it. Between three or four people, you can pretty easily cover most of the events.

Of course, that is contingent on all of you sticking to it and being reliable. The last time I tried this, I had to basically drag our second-best team member out of retirement (a 9th grader - I assume you may not be familiar with the 9th grader rule since IL doesn't allow 9th graders in Div B) a few days before the first tournament. Although, the team ended up doing just fine... (the DuPont trophy is still front and center in the school display case).

-