The full text of SG6 is quoted below, with some portions bolded for emphasis:
Additionally, quoting from this Q&A:
The first of those three Q&As states that this is a correct statement:
It also verifies that it is…
The combination of these had seemed to provide a very complete picture of what was legal, but a team was disqualified from the semi finals at the California State championship for using their mobile goal intake to corral the opponent’s mobile goals–an action that I would have thought legal based on my understanding of the rules and Q&As.
Could you provide some further clarification on the following:
What exactly is a “side” defined as, pertaining the the mobile goals? How many “sides” does a mobile goal have? Since there are nonplanar features on a mobile goal, would a “side” be more accurately described as a surface?
The following images show a goal from the top and rear views (sorry I couldn’t figure out how to embed the images). Which of these following examples would violate <SG6>?:
Figure 1:
Figure 2:
Figure 3:
Figure 4:
figure 4 - Album on Imgur
Figure 5:
Figure 6:
In cases like this, is it safe to assume that if the goal is being contacted on multiple “sides” of the same surface simultaneously, some force–however negligable–is being actively applied to the goal?
Figure 7:
Figure 8:
Figure 9:
Figure 10:
Thanks, GDC!