Well it’s probably a bit late by now but just for future reference: according to <R7> k you would be allowed to use it because it’s just for bundling(/protecting your wires) your wires together. However, in <R3> c it says that you CAN’T use something that poses an unnecessary risk of entanglement or section b that includes things that could potentially damage other robots so I think a case could be made for either side. I would personally rule in favor of not allowing it because yes it may be easy to drive over for MOST robots but I’ve seen some pretty crazy stuff happen that shouldn’t have happened and I just don’t think you’re able to prove that it poses ZERO risk for the other robot.
I’m pretty sure there was a Q&A ruling that said tethers like that were legal because entanglement applied only to the opponents.
ok. Good to know. I must of not seen that 
https://vexforum.com/t/answered-tethers-on-the-divided-field/35363/1
Here’s the official ruling stating that it is legal.
To clarify, this was a team we are friendly with. We showed the director that q&a- she threatened to kick us out.
EDIT: by us i mean the sabercats(the other team)
Nice
Sounds like old times. I would have lost my mind.
Man, it doesn’t sound like that person should really be in a position of power…
Finding good employees is hard. RECF is no exception I guess; AZ knows
Yeah, it just seems like some people think that they’re in a higher position than they really are, which gives them the authority to over rule things said by Karthik and stuff like that. Or maybe people just don’t like people coming to them with complaints about how they ruled something. I don’t know 
It just gets kind of frustrating when you know something is supposed to be ruled 1 way and they rule it the other way and won’t even let you make a case for yourself.
This really angers me I was called by three different people about this I ruled that the robot was legal yet they didn’t take my word and ruled against having the robot compete. The EP who is a close friend said she was stressed she did not have any REC rep there as a former REC employee I can say there does need to be a change in the leadership in that region, when the RSM was called she said it was an illegal robot design (as REC employees we have to know the rules and the touchy subjects this is one of them) clearly that isn’t the case here and I am truly sorry to the Sabercats that this happened. I look forward to seeing this robot comepete at the State Championship.
I blame a complete lack of awareness of the rules of the game. I always challenge these people to tell me by what rule something is illegal; they never come up with a logical resppnse (rather, they just say “I’m in charge”).
Hearing stories like this makes me infinitely grateful that the tournaments in Colorado are always well run by people who know what they’re doing. It’s great that we don’t have to worry about rulings, and if we ever come into conflict the head ref is always open to seeing official Q&As.
In Indiana, I am not saying mistakes are never made, but on the rare occasions they are made and the rule or the ruling on the official Q and A is shown, they get corrected. We have a great group of volunteers in this state. Most tournaments do not have an RECF rep at the tournament but it is really not needed. We have hosted 6 events and I think I have had a rep at one of them.
RECF reps often seem to do more harm than good in my experience.
Next year the good teams in AZ should figure out what tournaments Justin is reffing and only go to those whenever possible Not that there aren’t other great volunteers, Justin is just probably at the most tournaments out of all of us.
Usually its just whatever EP asks first on said weekend lol
Agreed, Justin is always out there looking cute on any individual day.
I just wanted to reference the “you look cute today” running joke.