G43 enforcement level

[backdrive]

At CVR the refs almost never called fouls, although this might be because teams often crossed defenses, went into the courtyard a bit, then came back on to a defense to shoot. I'm a bit confused on whether or not hitting an opposing bot that does this constitutes a penalty or not.

[Anteprefix]

Originally Posted by backdrive

At CVR the refs almost never called fouls, although this might be because teams often crossed defenses, went into the courtyard a bit, then came back on to a defense to shoot. I'm a bit confused on whether or not hitting an opposing bot that does this constitutes a penalty or not.

It looked like refs were only calling the G43 when it was really obvious that there was contact. Often, the refs wouldn't call it if the shooting robot only had bumpers over the ramp, but would call it if they were actually touching the ramp.

[Tomker]

In Israel it was called most of the time but not enough as far as I'm concerned. The thing is, if they don't give a foul each and every time it is being done, it becomes a viable strategy to keep ramming into the shooter - you are only punished with a foul once in a while and manage to keep your opponent from weakening their tower (since they have less opportunities to make shots).
I think they should have either instructed the refs to call it ALOT more often, or change the ruling so that each of those fouls would also weaken the tower's strength by 1.

[pntbll1313]

Originally Posted by backdrive

At CVR the refs almost never called fouls, although this might be because teams often crossed defenses, went into the courtyard a bit, then came back on to a defense to shoot. I'm a bit confused on whether or not hitting an opposing bot that does this constitutes a penalty or not.

This is a foul

Q532
Q."A robot carrying a boulder crosses a defense into their opponents' courtyard. They then move back such that a part of its bumpers are within the opponent’s outer works while their robot is still in contact with the courtyard carpet. They attempt to line up a shot, but an opponent contacts them. Does the opponent incur a G43 penalty?"
A.This situation does demonstrate a violation of G43. Per G43: "A ROBOT is considered traversing the opponent’s OUTER WORKS if any part of its BUMPERS are within the opponent’s OUTER WORKS." Even if you are shooting a BOULDER, you would be protected by G43 if your BUMPERS are within the OUTER WORKS.

[Citrus Dad]

Originally Posted by backdrive

At CVR the refs almost never called fouls, although this might be because teams often crossed defenses, went into the courtyard a bit, then came back on to a defense to shoot. I'm a bit confused on whether or not hitting an opposing bot that does this constitutes a penalty or not.

We found that rule was enforced quite well. We made a distinct effort to get into the OW to make it clear to the ref. I rarely saw other teams actually shooting from the OW--they were often off the OW which makes a hit legal.