The violation notes under Rule <SG11> state that:
Intentional, strategic, or egregious Violations will be considered Major Violations
We can think of two scenarios of gameplay in which different interpretations of the meaning of "intentional" can be used:
- A robot drives up to the goal in the corner and clearly attempts to grab the goal once the 15 second buzzer has passed. The robot seems to willfully violate the rule, regardless of whether or not it actually removes the goal.
- A robot drives towards the positive zone with a clear intent of manipulating other game elements (i.e. grabbing a ring, or taking a goal that is not considered scored in the corner), and in the process of doing so, bumps or jostles the goal in the corner slightly by accident. There is an intent to move towards the corner, but not to interact with the goal, so one could determine this to be an intentional violation due to the fact that the robot intended to drive close to the positive corner after the 15 seconds.
An example of where scenario 2 became a major violation can be seen in the clip below, where a red robot attempts to grab a red ring near the positive corner and in the process the goal is jostled slightly but is not removed from the corner, nor does it have any impact on the scoring of that goal:
https://youtube.com/clip/Ugkx0mCDOybwb09hk1PLrNMQJZcpCKwka883?si=5wLVfUnZhCNRUJBZ
Given that there is no change to the scored status of the goal and that the team has no prior minor violations, are both of the two scenarios above considered an intentional violation of SG11? Or does only one of these fall under that interpretation?