Answered: Ref question on Pinning/Trapping/Entanglement

A robot drives over and parks on another robot’s clear lexan shovel, preventing the robot from moving. To the referees it looks like the team has tripped a breaker (which maybe it did from trying to get unstuck) or otherwise lost communication with the now immobile robot.

It doesn’t quite fit under:
Pinning – A Robot is considered to be Pinning an opposing Robot if it is inhibiting the movement of an opponent Robot while the opposing Robot is in contact with the foam playing surface and another Field Element.

Trapping – A Robot is considered to be trapped if an opposing Robot has restricted it into a small, confined area of the field, approximately the size of one foam field tile or less, and has not provided an avenue for escape.

Would it fall under G11 entanglement as “Intentionally grasping an opponent robot”?

If it trips a breaker should the offending team be a DQ from the match or is it a warning because the temporarily immobilized robot could have guarded against this with programming/design/? ?

Driving on top of a robot, immobilizing it and not rectifying the situation would be considered intentional entanglement.

Whether or not a team trips a breaker is not relevant to this ruling.