[blml] Revoke established?

[raija]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Sven Pran" <svenpran at online.no>
To: "blml" <blml at rtflb.org>
Sent: Tuesday, July 04, 2006 2:30 AM
Subject: RE: [blml] Revoke established?


> On Behalf Of Steve Wright
> Trick nine: LHO leads a spade, dummy follows, RHO follows, declarer
> discards.
>
> Trick ten: LHO leads a club. Dummy plays the only club left in the dummy
> in tempo without being instructed by declarer. RHO follows.
>
> Declarer pauses briefly before saying, "Oops I have got a spade. I think
> I have revoked on the previous trick".
>
> Is the revoke established?

My first reaction was "Yes, of course, Dummy has played to the next trick"

But technically Law 45D saves Declarer; Dummy has placed in the played
position a card (his only remaining club) that Declarer did not name.

Actually Declarer has not named any card from Dummy for trick ten. The fact
that the single club is the only card that can legally be played from Dummy
to this trick is irrelevant; no card has yet been played from Dummy to trick
ten!

So No, the revoke is not established, Declarer takes back the card he
discarded to trick nine and replaces it with a spade. And Law 62C then
applies to trick ten.

Regards Sven


Does not Law 63A clearly indicate that the revoke is established. "When the 
offender or his partner leads or plays to the following trick (any such 
play, legal or illegal establishes the revoke). "
Here, dummy's placing the singleton in a played position was obviously a 
"play",  so declarer has "played" the card (since dummy is an extension of 
declarer)  illegally. Nevertheless played.