[Tristan Lall]

The robot section changes are sensible. (I still wish teams could use smaller tubing if they wanted to, provided pressure ratings were met.)

As a practical matter, the change about enforcing the robot rules will recalibrate the way refs call <G30>, and will probably affect the way inspectors and other watchful volunteers raise robot issues with the refereeing staff. There's always an element of discretion involved in identifying robot violations outside of the initial inspections. When is a robot in violation in such a trivial way that can wait until the end of the next match—and when is it in material violation warranting an immediate response (up to and including disqualification)? I think this will encourage more open communication about these issues—because the refs' newfound discretion will ensure that the question is no longer solely about whether disqualification is appropriate (in equitable terms) for a given violation.

As for the new blocking rule, it's pretty awful. The "flow of the match" is hopelessly vague as far as definitions go. Although I trust that the head referees will be briefed as to what that means, to ensure uniform enforcement, what about the teams? Who's planning to explain how to distinguish flow from non-flow gameplay? I think FIRST meant something along the lines of "ALLIANCE ROBOTS may not work together to blockade the FIELD in an attempt to prevent an opponent's ROBOT from possessing game pieces, scoring game pieces, or transiting between locations where game pieces were available and locations where they could be scored"—but if so, why not just say that? (And in my opinion, that's not even a good rule to have in the first place. Defence is useful and strategically interesting.)