[Tristan Lall]

Good to know they don't want anyone trying that move. It's better to make it explicit in this manner than sort it out later during an event.

But what's with the precedence implied in the last sentence? If you got your alliance disqualified, but the other alliance got disqualified first, you win? The rules previously implied nothing of the sort—both alliances would be disqualified, and there would be another match—so this is a change to "The Tournament" that should be specified. (It's one thing to give teams a heads-up that something will be considered an aspect of an existing rule; it's another to change the rules without adding the relevant language to the rulebook.)

And what happens if the DQ was for another perfectly valid reason? Or what if both teams use the same banned strategy? Is the "necessarily precede contact" clause an implication that if there is an order of events causing alliance disqualifications, only the first one counts toward the final resolution of the match?

And what about the qualifying rounds? My initial impression is that this changes nothing, even in the situation where a robot attempts this strategy to disqualify the last undisqualified member of the opposing alliance. (The fact that it's in the eliminations seems to be a fundamental part of the scenario.) In that case, both robots get disqualified (instigator and victim), and the remaining alliance members on the instigator's alliance get the benefit of 5.3.6: their own score as RS.