Help
blackshoe, on 2013-June-14, 14:24, said:
Yes.
Allowing dummy (as the only player) to draw attention to the first irregularity (before end of play)?
No, I don't buy that.
Can Dummy Call Director?
#61
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 5,344
- Joined: 2009-September-14
- Location:Ski, Norway
Posted 2013-June-14, 14:29
Allowing dummy (as the only player) to draw attention to the first irregularity (before end of play)?
No, I don't buy that.
#62
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 17,693
- Joined: 2006-April-17
- Gender:Male
- Location:Rochester, NY
Posted 2013-June-14, 15:18
pran, on 2013-June-14, 14:29, said:
Allowing dummy (as the only player) to draw attention to the first irregularity (before end of play)?
No, I don't buy that.
No, I don't buy that.
Not what I said. It's relevant to the discussion whether drawing attention to one irregularity is, if it wakes up a player (including dummy) also drawing attention to the other. If they're different irregularities, to cite the most general case, then I would say no. If they're the same irregularity, i.e. a revoke, then I would say yes. You can argue otherwise if you like.
OTGH, if dummy cannot lose his sides rights if he waits until after the play, it doesn't really matter. He should wait. However, while I don't recall ever seeing such a ruling, it seems others here have. So what's poor dummy to do? He's damned if he calls the TD now, and he's damned if he waits.
Of course, he could appeal, and then the "reviewer" could overturn the TD's interpretation of the law.
--------------------
As for tv, screw it. You aren't missing anything. -- Ken Berg
I have come to realise it is futile to expect or hope a regular club game will be run in accordance with the laws. -- Jillybean
As for tv, screw it. You aren't missing anything. -- Ken Berg
I have come to realise it is futile to expect or hope a regular club game will be run in accordance with the laws. -- Jillybean
#63
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 5,344
- Joined: 2009-September-14
- Location:Ski, Norway
Posted 2013-June-14, 16:21
blackshoe, on 2013-June-14, 15:18, said:
Not what I said. It's relevant to the discussion whether drawing attention to one irregularity is, if it wakes up a player (including dummy) also drawing attention to the other. If they're different irregularities, to cite the most general case, then I would say no. If they're the same irregularity, i.e. a revoke, then I would say yes. You can argue otherwise if you like.
I do indeed.
blackshoe, on 2013-June-14, 15:18, said:
OTGH, if dummy cannot lose his sides rights if he waits until after the play, it doesn't really matter. He should wait. However, while I don't recall ever seeing such a ruling, it seems others here have. So what's poor dummy to do? He's damned if he calls the TD now, and he's damned if he waits.
Of course, he could appeal, and then the "reviewer" could overturn the TD's interpretation of the law.
Of course, he could appeal, and then the "reviewer" could overturn the TD's interpretation of the law.
A TD denying rectification on the ground that he was summoned to the table after play ended although he was summoned without delay when attention was drawn to the irregularity proves himself incompetent and ignorant of the relevant laws (i.e. Laws 9 and 11).