I am looking for further clarification on how to referee the interaction of scoring and defense in the 5 point zone to ensure it is being called correctly. Lets assume a Red Alliance robot is blocking the Blue Alliance while in the 5 point zone of the Blue Alliance. The Blue Alliance approaches with a base loaded with a stack of cones and pushes into the 5 point zone to score the base and cones. In the process of pushing into the zone to score, some of the cones fall off the stack reducing the score enough that the Red Alliance wins with a small margin. Does the score stand as scored, or should the Red Alliance be DQ’d for causing stacked cones to fall off the base even though the Blue Alliance was the one driving (pushing) into the Blue zone to score its base and cones. Thank you for your clarification.
Answered: 5 Point Zone Defensive Actions
In the future, please quote the relevant rule from the manual in your question, per the Q&A guidelines. SG5 is quoted below for reference:
Next, please see the following Q&A posts and the Q&A Summary to better understand how defensive interactions in the 5 Point Zone should be handled. (SG10, G12, and G13 are quoted in these posts, for reference):
Now, these questions mostly ask about SG10, not descoring Cones (SG5), but the principle is largely the same. In general, the only time an offensive robot would be at fault when attempting to score in their own offensive zone is if they were clearly acting solely in the interest of “drawing a penalty” (G13).
Additionally, SG5 is clear that any intentional or accidental, direct or indirect action that removes an opponent’s Cones would be considered a violation. Teams are advised to be cautious when attempting purely defensive strategies such as the one you are describing.
So, yes, this hypothetical interaction would likely be considered a violation of SG5 by the red alliance. If it was Match Affecting, then a DQ would be issued.