Q&A

Answered by committee

1. Do the repeated incidental contacts between a team and opposing alliance goals without any game elements being knocked down escalate to a major violation at any defined point?

There is no defined point at which repeat Minor Violations escalate to a Major Violation; the Head Referee must determine if an escalation is warranted based on the context of the Match(es), including the actions of the Robot and the consequences of those actions. If a Robot commits two or three inconsequential Minor Violations, that Robot likely does not deserve a Major Violation for those repeat Minors. Escalation of repeat Minors to a Major Violation should typically be reserved for more consequential violations, or for violations committed with a blatant disregard for the rules and/or disregard for Head Referee warnings.

2. Does the incidental pushing of an alliance robot into their own matchloader by their opponents count as a major or minor violation? How can this be decided?

A single incidental SG13 violation would typically be considered a Minor Violation. Repeat SG13 violations may escalate to a Major Violation at the discretion of the Head Referee, especially if there have been prior warnings to cease this behavior or if this repeat behavior appears to be intentional. Any single SG13 violation could also be considered a Major Violation if it was deemed by the Head Referee to be an egregious violation. For example, prolonged contact (interference) with a protected Robot in its Load Zone could be deemed egregious and deserving of a Major Violation by the Head Referee.

3. Should the violations described in parts (1) and (2) be combined for a greater/major violation, or should they be considered separately as separate violations in a match?

They should be considered separately. Any violation notes that mention the possibility of repeat Minor Violations escalating to a Major Violation are referring to repeat violations of the same rule, such as a Robot that commits multiple SG13 Minor Violations. Committing multiple Minor Violations across different rules, such as one SG9 Minor Violation and one SG13 Minor Violation, would not count as repeat Minor Violations in this way.

4. The team which had argued that these incidents occurred in the match had definitely committed a major violation during the match. How are referees to resolve this match in elimination rounds; a double disqualification, or only a disqualification for the team which had more Major Violations/the stronger case for having committed a Major Violation?

If an Elimination Match results in both Alliances receiving at least one Major Violation each, the result will be a double disqualification, and the Match must be replayed to determine which Alliance will advance. It does not matter if one Alliance has 2, 3, or more Major Violations while the other Alliance only has 1 Major Violation; the result is still a double disqualification.

Answered by committee

1. Can an opposing robot park in front of the load zone if it does not break the 3-D plane of the tape, and thus prevent access to the load zone?

Yes.

2. While a robot is match loading, an opposing robot pushes into it and causes the pin/cup to topple over at the bottom of the loader. The opposing robot backs off, and then repeats the offense when the robot tries to match load again. Would this count as separate minor violations of the same rule, or a singular minor violation of SG13 for the match? Would repeat offenses within the same match be considered a major violation?

Each offense would count as a separate <SG13> Minor Violation, or as a Major Violation if the offense was determined to be egregious. Repeat <SG13> Minor Violations may escalate to a Major Violation at the Head Referee's discretion. (When contemplating escalation to a Major Violation, Head Referees should consider the context of the Violations within a Match. Repeat Violations involving incidental/inconsequential interactions likely do not warrant escalation to a Major Violation in most cases.)