[blml] Appeals Committees at ACBL NABCs

[Tim West-Meads]

John wrote:
> > I don't know about the US but over here I can't think of many EBU 
> > TDs who are more than third rate players (and some pretty good TDs
> > are about eighth rate players).  Likewise I cannot think of many
> > first rate players who have any real understanding of (or interest
> > in) the laws.
> > Since an AC (for a quality event) needs both bridge and legal 
> > knowledge a combination of 1TD+2 top players (or 2TDs and 1 one
> > top player) would seem the least one should be considering.
> 
> Strongly disagree. See my other post.  It's just possible I'm one of 
> the few who both can and can't, but the TD instruction to the AC is 
> an absolute requirement of a competent TD. 

Sorry John I don't understand.  If the ruling is going to appeal I'd 
expect the TD to be less than competent in at least 60% of cases 
(probably more).  We simply cannot rely on the AC having been instructed 
competently - there aren't enough top flight TDs to cover the floor at 
(e.g.) Brighton.  There are enough to ensure that one is sitting on 
every AC.  Indeed even if the TD gives competent instruction we cannot 
always rely on AC members to follow those instructions.

Note that I am not requiring that a TD on the panel be an official at 
the given event.  Someone like Gordon (while competing at Brighton) 
could serve to ensure that an AC comprising say Townsend and Sandquist 
is kept on the legal rails.  He isn't in the same class as a player, 
they aren't in the same class (as far as I am aware) as to TD skills and 
legal/OB knowledge.

Tim