[craigbutcher]

The blue robot was not defending against seating a tetra, merely bashing another robot to no purpose. In fact the contact could serve no defensive purpose; defense in the rules is clearly conceived as impeding or blocking. One robot may not pick up and move another robot. That's the clear intent of the rule. Hence one robot may not position another robot either.

If the red robot's arm were contacting the tetra stack, and blue then blocked the red robot, preventing it from moving away, then that would be defensive. Forcing the other robot against the goal is not blocking or impeding. That is the same as picking up and moving the other robot.

The blue robot pushing the red robot against the goal for the purpose of positioning it against the goal is purposive, not accidental.

Contact which is not defensive or accidental cannot be justified.

Thus the blue robot's action should be considered in the same light as if the blue robot had grabbed some other object and placed it against the goal tetra. The other object effectively becomes an extension of the blue robot. This is forbidden.

If the blue robot, ramming a red robot, caused the goal to fall over and spill tetras, the red robot would not have "descored" the pile even though the red robot would have been the only robot contacting the goal. The penalty would go to blue because red was not the actor.

If anything, blue should be penalized.