First - this question is a snapshot description of a hypothetical action, which are always difficult to provide absolute rulings for without the context of the Match, Robot, and event in question. However, as described, this would likely fall under clause "a" of <SG9>:
<G17> does not apply to this rule, unless egregiously exploited for strategic gain. It is expected that Triballs which are launched as part of normal Autonomous gameplay may contact foam tiles on the opponent’s side of the field.
The best "thought experiment" for applying G17 is to picture the Triball in question as a literal physical extension of the Robot. In this case, the scenario would not be much different than a Robot jumping across the field and hitting the Triball in the Neutral Zone - which would be legal.
Examples of "egregious exploitation for strategic gain" would be modifying an autonomous routine to launch a Triball directly into an opposing Robot's intake, or directly at the Triball which begins on the opponent's side of the Neutral Zone.
We do not feel that the "ricochet" maneuver described would provide enough control over the Triballs to be considered this form of "egregious strategic gain". However, if a Team attempting this strategy begins damaging or directly interfering with opponents on a consistent basis, it would be reasonable for a Head Referee to determine that this has escalated to "egregious strategic gain".
