Answered: Pin Or Trap Question

[Connor]

<SG4> A Robot may not Pin or Trap an opposing Robot for more than five seconds during the
Driver Controlled Period. A Pin or Trap is officially over once the Pinning Robot has moved away
and the Robots are separated by at least 2 feet (approximately one (1) foam tile). After ending a Pin
or Trap, a Robot may not Pin or Trap the same Robot again for a duration of 5 seconds; if a Team
does pin the same Robot again, the pinning count will resume from where it left off when the
pinning Robot initially backed off.
Minor violations of this rule that do not affect the match will result in a warning. Match Affecting
offenses will result in a Disqualification. Teams that receive multiple warnings may also receive a
Disqualification at the Head Referee’s discretion. There is no penalty for Pinning during the
Autonomous Period

Using the term match affecting, what would you consider to be a match affecting violation vs a non-match affecting violation about pinning? Is it based on the assumption by the history of the pinned robot? How would it be decided if a robot hasn’t competed before and it was the first match? If it’s based on the assumption of the history of the pinned robot, could it be possible that a robot with a good record could’ve actually tanked that match? If that’s true, can’t I assume that the robot pinned would’ve tanked anyways, and I could intentionally pin that robot for longer than 5 seconds?

[VEX_GDC]

Using the term match affecting, what would you consider to be a match affecting violation vs a non-match affecting violation about pinning?

One which results in a change of the winner and the loser of the match.

Is it based on the assumption by the history of the pinned robot? How would it be decided if a robot hasn’t competed before and it was the first match? If it’s based on the assumption of the history of the pinned robot, could it be possible that a robot with a good record could’ve actually tanked that match?

Please see this Q&A post, specifically the section quoted here for reference:

With the exception of formal warnings that are recorded over the course of an event, a referee can only be expected to make judgment calls based off of the actions seen on the field in a given match. The only way to rule consistently is to look at objective outcomes, like “5 cones fell”, “5 cones fell into the 20 Point Zone”, “the pin prevented them from getting to the parking bonus”, etc. Referees cannot (and should not) predict what “would have happened” or take a team at their word for what their strategy “would have been”.

In general, referees should not issue a Disqualification unless they’re fairly certain that the action changed the outcome of the Match. They should also take previous formal warnings into account. That is, a team with no warnings should receive some “benefit of the doubt”, while one who has been warned in every match gets closer to a Disqualification at the referee’s discretion, Match Affecting or not.

If that’s true, can’t I assume that the robot pinned would’ve tanked anyways, and I could intentionally pin that robot for longer than 5 seconds?

Pins lasting longer than 5 seconds could result in a greater likelihood of being interpreted as Match Affecting. You also may stack up multiple warnings for non-Match-Affecting violations and result in a Disqualification at the head referee’s discretion.