Quote:
|
Originally Posted by 2016 Rule G11
G11 Strategies aimed solely at forcing the opposing ALLIANCE to violate a rule are not in the spirit of
FIRST Robotics Competition and not allowed. Rule violations forced in this manner will not result in
an assignment of a penalty to the targeted ALLIANCE.
Violation: FOUL. If egregious or repeated, YELLOW CARD
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by 2014 Rule G14
3.2.3.6 G14: 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
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by 2013 Rule G18-1
3.2.3.10 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
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by 2012 Rule G26
[G26] Strategies aimed at the destruction or inhibition of Robots via attachment, damage, tipping or entanglement of Robots
are not in the spirit of the FRC and are not allowed.
Violation: Technical-Foul plus Yellow Card
|
We have not played an official match of STEAMworks yet. In the reffing of the above years with the listed rules, however, what you're discussing was never the interpretation. (I say having reffed that exactly situation several hundred times under those rules and having coached champion defensive and offensive bots under the same.) If an offensive robot had a right to be somewhere or do something, pushing a defensive robot that put itself in the way was not at all a "strategy aimed solely at forcing the opposing ALLIANCE to violate a rule". The pusher's strategy is to "play offense", and the defense is just in its way. The foul is on the defense. The only time one of my ref crews has ever
not given it to the defense is one case in which the defensive bot actually broke down in front of a protected zone, stayed there dead for a good chunk of the match, and an offensive bot went out of its to hit it repeatedly and then leave. When I coach, my rule is always Defend at My Own Risk.
You're of course free to Q&A this, but forwarning to phrase it carefully lest you provoke the dreaded Your FRC Overlords Do Not Comment on Hypothetical Situations response. (Myself, I wouldn't bother provoking them for such a perennial situation; this is by no means a new phenomenon unless you have an edge case in mind.)