Quote:
Originally Posted by dlavery
Redateam gets hit with a 10-point penalty and is disabled for the remainder of the match. Following the match, the Head Referee approaches Redateam and states that they must remove their very large non-transparent ramps before they will be allowed back out on the field.
Redateam realizes without asking that they have been found guilty of violating Rule <S01>. By preventing Blueateam's drivers from being able to watch their robot, they have caused the Blueateam robot to be operated in an uncontrolled and unsafe manner on the field. Even though it was the Blue robot that was operated unsafely, Redateam was the originating cause for the situation and was therefore determined to be responsible. And since Redateam has demonstrated that they would use their non-transparent ramps to cause this situation and could do so again, the ramps must be removed before Redateam can rejoin the competition.
|
The blue team wasn't forced to operate their robot unsafely. They could have stopped it and waited for the hazard to pass, but instead chose to operate their robot despite not being able to see it. <S01> speaks of penalties for "uncontrolled motion that cannot be stopped by the drivers" as an example of unsafe operation; if the drivers could have stopped it, and it was under partial control (inputs were functioning, but drivers couldn't react to the robot's behaviour), it doesn't seem like a plausible extrapolation of the example.
While simply stopping and waiting might negatively impact the blue team's opportunity to play the game, <S01> is a safety rule, not a gameplay rule.