[YMTC] Red robot on blue bridge

[Jared Russell]

Originally Posted by Tristan Lall

Where did they get that from? It certainly wasn't the rulebook.

Even [G23], the rule about blockading, only applies when multiple robots from the same alliance are doing it. (It says "This rule has no effect on individual Robot-to-Robot defense.")

Or were they treating blocking the bridge as a [G25] issue? (A very big stretch.)

I think the intention was to make it clear that [G45] wouldn't be invoked as long as you were clearly trying to get robots onto the bridge.

[bduddy]

Originally Posted by Tristan Lall

Where did they get that from? It certainly wasn't the rulebook.

Even [G23], the rule about blockading, only applies when multiple robots from the same alliance are doing it. (It says "This rule has no effect on individual Robot-to-Robot defense.")

Or were they treating blocking the bridge as a [G25] issue? (A very big stretch.)

It's not like FIRST hasn't made ridiculous rule stretches before. I'm disappointed, though... honestly, FIRST needs to accept that sometimes teams will come up with strategies it didn't intend, and allow that to happen. Some bridge defense within the actual rules could have made the last few matches very interesting.

[FrankJ]

This was discussed at the Archimedes driver's meeting. Blocking the bridge is an acceptable strategy. Touching the bridge will trying to block is you own fault & a <G25> regardless of the reason.

If you are driven into a the bridge from across the field could be a [G44] Up the referee determination.