[robocup-small] Proposed Rule Changes for SSL 2006

[NAGASAKA Yasunori]

Hello, SSL teams and TC members.
Below is our(Owaribito-CU) answers to the TC's proposals.

   > INCREASE FIELD SIZE.
   > No change to the rules for 2006.

Fine.

   > WALLS
   > No change to the rules for 2006.

Fine.

   > LOCAL VISION
   > No change to the rules for 2006.

Fine.

   > RESTART RULES
   > This is not so much a rule change but a desire to rewrite some of the 
   > restart rules that are not clear. For example the distance that the
   > defending robot must stay from the penalty mark during penalty kicks, is 
   > it a semicircle distance or a line parallel to the goal line. For 
   > example simplifying the rules regarding where to restart the ball. For 
   > example including diagrams in the rules.

Clarifing the detail of restart is fine.

   > OFFICIAL COLOURS
   > If a team wishes for their opposing team to use official colours then 
   > they must, otherwise teams are free to use whatever colours they want. 
   > (Of course it must still be yellow and blue markers, etc).

Fine.

   > GOALS
   > We propose adding a round steel bar at the front of the goal, the bottom 
   > of which is 150mm from the carpet.  The bar is 10mm in diameter, and 
   > will provide a firm object to hold the net above it, and ensure that 
   > balls entering the goal are below 150mm.  It will be black in color to 
   > avoid interfering with global vision.  Also, because the bar is rounded, 
   > it should not damage robots near the maximum height. The net will be a 
   > thin wire mesh similar to Osaka.

Fine. And all team must not modify the goal, must not remove the parts of goal.

   > BALL
   > Many teams over the past few years have proposed a replacement ball for 
   > the golf ball. It is very hard for the TC to decide
   > on a change to the ball between competitions. Therefore we wish to move 
   > the focus of the discussions to the competitions themselves. So far, 
   > several new balls have been proposed; a less elastic ball, a lighter 
   > ball such as the one made out of foam, the dog league ball and the 
   > hockey ball. Which ball is suitable for the SSL? We need to see them 
   > demonstrated on a real field at the RoboCup competition. Therefore the 
   > TC proposes that teams that are keen for a ball change may champion the 
   > idea under a Ball Technical Challenge as follows:

Competition style is good.

   > VIRTUAL ENERGY BUDGET
   > The TC has decided on the same course of action as for the ball. If you 
   > feel strongly about this concept then champion the idea and bring your 
   > system to the competition. This has three parts and a team can attempt 
   > 1, 2 or 3 of the parts:
   > 1. A system observes the motion of  each robot and calculates the energy 
   > consumed using the vision system. So, the TC would like to propose to 
   > develop a vision system for observing the virtual energy of each robot. 
   > The system has to be able to distinguish the IDs of both teams' robots 
   > and track them. Moreover, the system can calculate the consumed energy 
   > of each robot. This must be sent to both teams.
   > 2. An autonomous referee system that can detect infringements of the 
   > rules and sends commands to the teams computers.
   > 3. An autonomous referee robot. This is a robot that can detect 
   > infringements of the rules (most likely from a global vision system) and 
   > can pick up the ball and move it to the restart locations. Stop/Halt 
   > type commands are still sent to the other teams computers from an PC via 
   > serial.
   > The TC proposes that teams that are keen for a these systems may 
   > champion the idea under a Virtual Energy/Autonomous Referee Technical 
   > Challenge as follows:

Concept is good. But a referee program will be very complex one. I wonder
actually who build above system.

   > PHYSICAL ENERGY BUDGET
   > No changes to the rules for 2006.

Fine.

   > INCREASE NUMBER OF ROBOTS
   > Three proposals for this rule change.
   > A. No Change.
   > B. Increase the maximum number of robots per team to 6.
   > C. Provide the option for teams to increase the number of robots to x 
   > but must reduce the robot outer diameter to x mm. I suggest 8 robots 
   > with a decrease to 120mm. This means that there could be 5 v 5, 5 v 8 
   > and 8 v 8 matches. It is really a small amount of work for teams that 
   > don't want to increase the number of robots to ensure that they can 
   > handle detecting up to 8 opponent robots. This is similar to how the 
   > local vision rules provide the option for teams to work on local vision.

A is our selection.

   > CHIP KICKING
   > We would like to redefine the rule regarding chip kicking for to 
   > encourage using it to pass. The proposal is then:
   > A. No Change. Leave the rule as a limit on chip kicks from restarts.
   > B. Change the rule for restarts.
   > 
   > If B is your choice, there are two options for the new rule, these are:
   > 1. Allow chip kicks from the first touch of the ball and modify the free 
   > kick rule so that indirect means it must touch one of
   >  your team, other than the kicker, before entering the goal AFTER it 
   > has  gone below 150mm. If the ball enters the goal without meeting this 
   > rule  then an indirect freekick is awarded from where the chip kick was 
   > taken.
   > 2. Allows chip kicks from the first touch of the ball on restarts. A 
   > chip kick begins whenever the top of the ball travels above 150mm from  
   > the ground plane. A chip kick ends whenever the ball touches another 
   > robot, and the top of the ball is under 150mm. A goal cannot be scored  
   > by a chip kick. Any such attempt at a goal will result in 'no goal' and 
   > a goal kick awarded to the defending team.

B1 is our selection. It is close to actual human soccer.

   > LENGTH OF PERIODS / TIMEOUT / HALFTIME:
   > Two proposals here:
   > A. Decrease the half time to 5 minutes.
   > B. Decrease the half time to 5 minutes, increase the length of halves
   > to 15 minutes and decrease the maximum timeout time to 5 minutes.

We hope no change to current rule. Next selection is A.

   > RED CARDS / SAFETY ENFORCEMENT:
   > Proposal :To remove a robot for X-minute when a yellow card is given to 
   > a team.
   > Rationale: Currently, the yellow card and red card are not very 
   > effective. Typically, when a team commits a bookable offense, a warning 
   > is given first. On the next offense, a yellow card. And finally the red 
   > card. Which means a team would not have felt the punishment until the 
   > third offense.

We understood the problem mentioned above. But we do not agree short
time removal. To make the yellow card more effective, referees should
simply give both warning and a yellow card against even first time
violation.  It is close to actual human soccer.

   > FREE KICK/KICKOFF PROCEDURE:
   > During restarts, allow a robot to touch the ball multiple times within 
   > 50mm of traveled distance. This is to minimise the number of restarts 
   > because of minor loss of contact of the ball that does not result in an 
   > advantage for the team. A more complete phrasing:

Fine.

   > TWO ATTACKERS RULE
   > The two attackers in the defense zone rule will be removed.  It was 
   > originally motivated to protect the goalkeeper from being pushed or 
   > otherwise interfered with by multiple attackers.  However, it is the 
   > opinion of the TC that the rule is no longer necessary as the 
   > "goalkeeper touching" rule offers sufficient protection for the goalkeeper.

We do not agree this. We think current rule (only one robot can enter
the defense zone for both attackers and defenders) is well balanced.
Allowing multiple robots to enter the defense zone for only attackers
is not balanced. Defense against multiple robots inside the defense
zone will be difficult.

Regards,

Owaribito-CU, NAGASAKA Yasunori

---
// NAME   :: NAGASAKA Yasunori  URL:: http://falcon.solan.chubu.ac.jp/
// E-MAIL :: any at isc.chubu.ac.jp  or  any at nn.solan.chubu.ac.jp
// ADDRESS:: Dept. of Electronics and Info. Engg., College of Engg., 
//        :: Chubu University, Kasugai, Aichi, 487-8501 JAPAN
// PHONE  :: +81-568-51-9469 [bus.hr.only,JST]  FAX:: +81-568-51-1478