[kevinw]

Personally, I think this is a fine strategy. And I think it will be used a lot more than most people believe. Especially if penalties are handed out as freely as I understand they were at scrimmages.

If my robot can't pick up a tetra without incurring a penalty, I would want it to prevent an opponent from picking up a tetra. Especially if we wouldn't get a penalty unless they could out-push us.

FIRST did clarify the "in-the-loading-zone" definition (part of the robot which remains within the intial footprint which is contacting the hdpe), but the comment regarding how it should be obvious to the referee that this is the case is where I see a lot of issues arising. There will likely be a lot of penalties issued as it is. This will likely be followed with team members explaining to referees where there robots "obviously" touch the ground, and where they would "obviously" be touching the hdpe if their robot was loading.

Does it need to be this complicated? Maybe. Either way, a lot of robots will end up moving towards a defensive strategy with the current penalty situation.

Personally, I hope FIRST limits penalties in the future to those cases that are safety related and game-play limiting (pinning, flipping, etc). This penalty doesn't appear to fall into either category.

Still, the rules for this year are in place, and all we can do is hope for great game play this year, and improvements for next year.