[blml] almost td problem 2

[Jeff Easterson]

Thanks for the input; probably more will come.  To clarify a few points: 
yes the TD asked if there had been a hesitation ("pass" was typo that I 
didn't catch when rereading).  Naturally someone should have called the 
TD.  The lady in question was afraid to, the partner of the willfully 
misscoring fellow appears to have agreed with him and I don't know about 
the partner of my lady acquaintance. But she and her partner are, as far 
as I know, not terribly experienced players and were conscious of being 
guests in a foreign club and there were some linguistic limitations as 
well.  None of this excuses their pusillanimity (there's a word creation 
for you!) of course.  Naturally, when she told me the story I 
immediately told her that playing duplicate bridge carries certain 
obligations.  Such as not falling asleep at the table so as to naturally 
be aware of any hesitation, particularly the partner's, and that it was 
100% necessary to call the TD in such a case, allowing the opponents to 
get away with such an action, "if you want a top so much, okay" does not 
only give the opponents a top (or good score) but affects all other 
competitors and falsifies the result.
The club was licensed by the French federation and awarded MPs, so it 
was hardly social bridge and surely subject to the rules of bridge and 
civilised behaviour.  I think most of the ruling is obvious.  What 
inspired my enquiry was the personal speculation as to what I, as TD, 
should have done. Only a warning (with explanation) is too little I 
think, even a most severe warning.  The culprit was an experienced 
player.  I think a procedural penalty is necessary but don't know how 
massive it would have been.  I also considered reporting the whole 
incident to the national federation (or at least threatening to do so) 
but, of course, I wasn't there.  As to hearsay: yes, of course, you 
can't be certain but that was not the point.  Assuming that things were 
as reported and you were the TD, what would you have done?  That is what 
I wanted to know.
To Sven:  No, as far as I know the social aspect is unimportant at said 
club, the opponents were described as being very intense and ambitious. 
    Yes, I also immediately said that 3 hearts would probably have been 
better than pass after the 2 spade bid.  I don't know if there was a 
stop before 2 spades (probably was since it wasn't mentioned) but that 
is really irrelevant I think since the (probable) hesitation of partner 
which was the cause of the discussion was after the 3 diam. bid.  I also 
think that it was a competitive auction but then there are hesitations 
in such auctions as well, only the time-limit of normal tempo is 
somewhat increased.
I, of course, told her that she was obliged to call the TD as soon as 
the trouble started, but timid players against veteran players can cause 
the timid player to not do so.  Incidentally, I assume that the 
opponents were not only more experienced but also more proficient 
players which makes their transgression all the more serious.
I agree with your 4 points at end of your email; was pondering further 
steps (such as procedural penalty) without commotion or further 
problems.  As one of the other correspondents wrote, "un-f-believable 
arrogance" (and he didn't even mention that it was willful falsification 
of a result!).  Thus I was pondering what I'd do after carrying out your 
4 steps.  Ciao, JE