Answered: Clarification on <SG9>, <G11>, and <R3>

Last year a topic was raised on the Official Sack Attack Q&A. As rulings don’t carry over between years and the question is virtually the same, I’ll post it, the rules in question and leave a link to the relevance topic here.

Is it legal to build a robot to obstruct the vision of an opponent, providing we understood that it must still pass all inspection guidelines and would be regarded as a wallbot?

Relevant rules include <G11>

"<G11a> Robots which have expanded horizontally in an effort to obstruct the field will undergo even more scrutiny under <G11>, and will not be protected under <G11>. e.g. If you choose to undertake this type of strategy, your robot should be built to withstand vigorous interaction.

i. Furthermore, teams that undertake this type of obstructive strategy would not be protected by <SG3>. e.g. There is no penalty for pinning a “wall-bot”"

Also <SG9>

“Robots may not intentionally grasp, grapple or attach to any Field Elements with the exception of the Bar. Strategies with mechanisms that react against multiple sides of a field element in an effort to latch onto said field element are prohibited. (See figures 8-10) The intent of this rule is to prevent teams from both unintentionally damaging the field, and from anchoring themselves to the field. Special attention will be paid to any teams interacting with the Hanging Structure. Violations of this rule will result in a Disqualification”

And <R3>
"The following types of mechanisms and components are NOT allowed:

c. Those that pose an unnecessary risk of entanglement"

Here’s where the question was asked last year and your response. If you could clarify how, if any, the ruling has changed this year other than that we need to follow all of the new rules within Toss Up rather than Sack Attack, that would be great.

The ruling has not changed between Sack Attack and Toss Up. The thread you linked answers all potential questions and gives the applicable explanations.