I have been hearing about teams attempting to intentionally violate <SG8> in order to guarantee that their disks get scored in the high goal so that they can earn the autonomous win-point from <SC6>. From my perspective as a referee and others that I talked with, this is a blatant disregard for the rules and Code of Conduct and would constitute a <G1> violation if it occurs multiple times at a singular competition. Teams are entitled to a warning for the first offense in this scenario as is the ruling with anything pertaining to <G1>.
For example: In match 1, Team 1234A (Red) scores both rollers on its side to Red in autonomous, then it drives across the lines to line up along the blue barrier to guarantee that it makes its shot of two disks into the high goal. Blue wins autonomous due to Red crossing the line, but Red gets the win-point. The head referee notes this down in the match anomaly log. In match 4, Team 1234A (Blue) does the exact same strategy. This shows that it is intentional because it happened twice, even for different sides of the field. The team is given a "final warning" per <G1> for intentionally violating the rules. In match 8, Team 1234A (Blue) does the exact same strategy again. At the end of the match they receive a DQ per <G1>. In match 15, Team 1234A (Red) does the exact same strategy again. At the end of the match they are DQ'ed from the competition per <G1>.
Is this an appropriate response to seeing this strategy applied or should no action be taken as it also benefits the opposing alliance who would win autonomous each time this occurs? I am only asking for if it is the exact same strategy or a very similar one due to the many different causes that may occur and have a robot cross over the autonomous line unintentionally.
Is something going to be changed in the rules for <SC6> so that if you cross the autonomous line and violate <SG8> that you cannot earn the autonomous win-point?
Thanks for your time,