Quote:
Originally Posted by faust1706
What I was trying to say is, with the G18...I think the rule is, they gave us a technical foul for keeping them outside the autozone. The head judge interpreted that we were doing that to SOLELY get the foul points, when really we were trying to clear a path for our full court shooter. That's what costed us the second match in the finals
|
The rule is G18-1:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by G18-1
Strategies aimed solely at forcing the opposing ALLIANCE to violate a rule are not in the spirit of FRC and are not allowed. Rule violations forced in this manner will not result in assessment of a penalty on the target ALLIANCE .
Violation: TECHNICAL FOUL
|
It's an hard call to make, though in most situations, I would rule against the 84" tall robot, I think. Assuming the 84" tall robot is attempting to block shots, they're at some point between their opponent's feeder station and their autozone boundary. Odds are, there's only about 2'-3' of play in that spot, so if they get hit hard enough, they'll be out of the autozone. If they don't imediately attempt to return to their autozone or decrease their height, the penalty should be assessed to them.
Now, If they're attempting to return to the autozone and kept from it by an opponent, then technically the opponent is the reason that the blocker is in violation. Now, if the blocker can decrease their height (retract their mechanism) they should do so to be back at the correct height. If they cannot... I'd have to say that they should have build a machine that has a way to retract the blocker or not be moved from the autozone... Unless, of course, a team is obviously keeping a blocker/over height robot outside of the loading zone for no reason other than to attempt to have a technical foul assessed against them (i.e. the blocker has no robot to block)...