Can someone give an example of a G45 violation ?
How could one “exploit Rule G44” since G44 violations are not penalized ?
Dean
[G28]
Robots may not touch an opponent Robot in contact with its Key, Alley, or Bridge.
*Violation: Foul; Technical-Foul for purposeful, consequential contact.*
This rule applied at all times, no matter who initiates the contact, see [G44]](http://frc-manual.usfirst.org/viewSingleItemMap/570).
It means you couldn’t hit a robot back up then hit them again drawing a second foul, this is all dependent upon the head ref at you event make sure you know what they consider to be exploiting. Regardless its not GP to do so.
I have three <G45> scenarios I’m vague on.
Scenario 1: To keep your opposing alliance out of your alley and the 38” next to it, you “patrol” your alley and dart out when an opposing robot comes within a robot’s length of the alley. Your intent isn’t to score points necessarily but rather deprive the opposing alliance of a quarter of the court and any balls that may have rolled into it. Does this violate <G45>?
Scenario 2: You stay in the corner by the ball window trying to make full court baskets/passing balls to your alliance partners. An opposing robot backs into the alley and you dash out to touch them. Does this violate <G45>?
Scenario 3: There is a spot between the key and alley where one robot is on the key and another in the alley can touch. From Q & A we know that if they touch, both alliances will score a foul. But a defensive robot may want to keep bumping the shooter not to run up the score but just to keep the shooter from making a successful shot. After all, the shooter can always move to the other side of the key. Does this violate <G45>?
I’m interested in what you think and I’ll give my take. I think scenario 1 does violate <G45>. The GDC hasn’t said explicitly but I think they want to rule out a zone defense. I don’t think <G45> applies to Scenario 2. If the opposing alliance is in your alley, you get to drive them out. I think Scenario 3 is a legitimate defense. If not, the GDC would have said key trumps alley.
The GDC prefers an offensive game. They could have designed a game that lined up each alliance on separate sides of the court with the winner being whichever could score the most baskets in two minutes but they didn’t. They expect some level of interaction and some kind of defense.
Let me start out by saying, I’m not a referee, and the referees have final say. However, I’ve been doing this for quite a while…
You bet it does. You’re using [G28] to rack up penalty points instead of playing the game.
Scenario 2: You stay in the corner by the ball window trying to make full court baskets/passing balls to your alliance partners. An opposing robot backs into the alley and you dash out to touch them. Does this violate <G45>?
Less clear-cut. However, they’re in the alley, and you could be seen as trying to get to your bridge. The first time or two, probably no penalty (well, other than the [G28] on them). After that, though, you can probably expect a [G45].
Scenario 3: There is a spot between the key and alley where one robot is on the key and another in the alley can touch. From Q & A we know that if they touch, both alliances will score a foul. But a defensive robot may want to keep bumping the shooter not to run up the score but just to keep the shooter from making a successful shot. After all, the shooter can always move to the other side of the key. Does this violate <G45>?
This one I’m not touching without a long pole. Personally, I would say that it’s a legitimate defensive strategy, and the offsetting fouls, at 3 points/hit/alliance, keep it even if you’re trying to play defense without leaving the alley. BUT, as I said before, I’m not a ref. And if you LEAVE the alley, it’s all on you. So with this one, ask the head ref at your regional during the driver’s meeting if it hasn’t been cleared up by then.