G9/C8/G10 and defense


I haven’t seen a thread or QA on this yet…

Let’s assume both alliances have a robot playing defense.

The red alliance’s defense robot is able to push a blue alliance offense robot over to the red alliance’s side of the field creating a G9 violation situation.

Is sumo defense considered standard game play so C8 doesn’t apply?

Would C8 not apply because only 1 blue robot is being forced to the far side of the field?

If C8 does apply, how long would C8 apply? (would the blue defense team have to leave or would C8 cover until the blue offense robot could reasonably leave)

If C8 applies against red, does C8 also apply against blue (the defense robot is what is causing the C8 foul against red).

When does the referee start a G18 count on the red defense robot?

Consider the same scenario except the offense robot is outside frame parameter and G10 is now in play.

Is the offense robot getting pushed responsible to get back into frame parameter to avoid G10? or is the pushing robot responsible to not push an extended robot into their side to avoid a C8?

Bear in mind G9 and G10 fouls occurring at that same time have escalated penalties.

My opinion is the easiest thing to do is call sumo defense against one robot standard game play. That would mean calling G9 and/or G10 as it happens and starting a G18 count on the defense robot.

I was curious what other people thought would happen.

1 Like

[ymtc] c8

While there’s nothing against sumo activities in general, when it’s done for the purpose of forcing the other alliance to foul, it’s against C8.

The general principle seems to be that C rules trump G rules.



So in your opinion if a robot has a drop down intake they don’t have to worry about G10 if they get pushed to the other side of the field because it will be a C8 foul? That arguably is a C8 foul for trying to force a C8 foul. It seems to me there is a real gray area on G9 and G10 when a robot gets pushed over if C8 applies or to who it should apply to.

I am not really sure what the right call is but I hope the various head referees discuss it before it happens.



If OFFBOT’s alliance partner is playing on the defensive side (breaking the opposing CARGO SHIP line, or on the other side) and DEFBOT pushes OFFBOT so they break the opposing CARGO SHIP line, that’s a clear C8 in trying to force a G9 violation.
Assuming OFFBOT has their extension out already, or has a valid game reason to put it out (trying to intake a nearby CARGO, for example), DEFBOT pushing them completely across the opposing CARGO LINE to draw a line to draw a G10 is a C8 against DEFBOT.
About the only way I can see G8 invoked “in reverse” in this situation is if OFFBOT’s alliance robots are all on their own sides of the field; DEFBOT pushes OFFBOT across the opposing CARGO LINE, and OFFBOT pushes out an extension trying to draw a G8. The thing here is that DEFBOT pushing OFFBOT across the CARGO line would not have drawn G8 otherwise.
I’m sure there are grey areas where the refs would have to try to judge intent, but as I read the rules, I think that a DEF robot trying to push an OFF robot onto the DEF side of the field would be at a disadvantage as regards C8 rulings; other than by pushing the robot away from its scoring opportunities, what advantage is to be obtained? – and how is this enough better than just pushing them away from where they can score is this consistent with normal gameplay?



I don’t agree that pushing a robot to the other side of the field is automatically a C8. I think its good defense to push an offensive robot to the other side of the field. If that offensive robot’s alliance decided to have a defender already on the other side already then either they, or their partner better fight to stay on their side. It shouldn’t penalize the pushing robot that the other alliance is already playing defense.

I’m not saying my interpretation is correct, but the fact that at least 1 person (me) can think that pushing a robot to the other side of the field is not necessarily to draw a foul but instead to play effective defense means there is at least a chance 1 referee thinks the same. It wouldn’t be a bad Q & A (but I can already see their response “we cannot comment on hypothetical scenarios, all judgement will be up to the referees at your event”). All of the events I’ve been to have a driver meeting before matches start, so it could be a good question to bring up to the head ref to get her thoughts.



It may be good to ask a Q&A regarding the “priority of the rules”. If nothing else it’ll provide one more thing for the GDC to no-comment; on the other hand it may end up being discussed in trainings. Or just ask your head ref at the driver’s meeting.

I would say that C8 is going to take priority, IF there isn’t a reasonable chance for the defended robot to avoid it (for example, their defender was being blocked from returning at that point in time). While defense is consistent with normal gameplay, there’s a fine line between taking advantage of an opponent being in a bad spot and either forcing the opponent into the bad spot for the points or hammering on that opponent before they can leave.