[blml] Law 21B1

[Sven Pran]

> On Behalf Of Tim West-Meads
..........
> > Law 16 is clear on this principle, why should we not enforce the same
> > principle also with Law 21B1?
> 
> In UI situations there is no immediate TD decision to be made.  

Oh yes, there is! I can remember some 40 years ago when tournament directors
looked at players' hands and announced that he allowed or prohibited the
call made by a suspected violator of what is now Law 16B2. That seemed to be
the normal procedure until someone realized that in doing so the Director
really destroyed the board.

In Law21
> cases (as in L25a/b cases) there is an immediate decision
> needed.  

I just do not see any sensible reason why this is important in L21 cases but
not in L16 cases.

If necessary the TD can take the player away from the table in
> order to hear what he has to say.  Mostly it's not going to make a
> difference because both you and I are saying something like "You may not
> change your call simply because you realise there has been a
> misunderstanding" before allowing a change immediately (as you would
> always do) or, if the player still indicated a desire to change, by
> talking to him further away from the table (as I would do).
> 
> BTW in L16 situations it is sometimes pragmatic (perhaps there are no
> hand records) for the TD to rule "Play on..call me back if.., I'm just
> going to make a note of the bidding and hand" - this doesn't create UI
> providing the hand is looked at only *after* ruling "Play on".

Even if there are hand records the Director must not make any ruling during
the auction or play if the players could know that the Director based his
ruling on knowledge from such records.

Sven