Quote:
Originally Posted by EricH
No, it's not specifically called out as a foul. I can't think of a way to call it as one, either. UNLESS... you could make the argument, somehow, that the transitory property ascribed to the Pinning rule (that is, if there's an object between pinner and pinnee, it's still a pin) also applies to contact with a robot attempting to climb its tower. That would be the only way to even have a chance at calling it, unless someone can dig up a Q&A that says otherwise.
Now, that doesn't seem quite right--after all, they're still interfering with a climb--but that's the way it works.
|
I guess you could say the transitive property applies here. Though I wouldn't term it like that. While red1 is pushing blue1, blue1's movements are a direct response to red1's actions. When blue1 bumped blue2 during their climb, causing them to fall, it was a result of red1 actions. Red1 should be held responsible. It's a gray area in the rules, but it seems to me a judgement call should have been made to penalize red1's actions.
The point is more or less moot, as I don't believe a 30pt climb + tech foul would have changed the outcome of the match; still, I think it should have been made clear that it was not an okay move.