Thread: Loophole in rule G39 and G43 for defense??? (Repost due to edits)
View Single Post
  #6   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 10-01-2016, 17:06
Basel A's Avatar
Basel A Basel A is offline
It's pronounced Basl with a soft s
AKA: @BaselThe2nd
FRC #3322 (Eagle Imperium)
Team Role: College Student
  
Join Date: Mar 2009
Rookie Year: 2009
Location: Ann Arbor, Michigan
Posts: 1,929
Basel A has a reputation beyond reputeBasel A has a reputation beyond reputeBasel A has a reputation beyond reputeBasel A has a reputation beyond reputeBasel A has a reputation beyond reputeBasel A has a reputation beyond reputeBasel A has a reputation beyond reputeBasel A has a reputation beyond reputeBasel A has a reputation beyond reputeBasel A has a reputation beyond reputeBasel A has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Loophole in rule G39 and G43 for defense??? (Repost due to edits)
We identified this as well. There are concerns with traversing vs. attempting to traverse, but I believe that if you are traversing (your bumper is partly within the outer works), a referee will have to count that as attempting to traverse. This feels like a loophole, but "any other carpet" seems like very intentional wording to allow it.

G40 doesn't get in the way as long as you fully enter the courtyard either before or after your shot. Not much of a problem, if you ask me.
__________________
Team 2337 | 2009-2012 | Student
Team 3322 | 2014-Present | College Student
“Be excellent in everything you do and the results will just happen.”
-Paul Copioli