[blml] L20F1

[Grattan Endicott]

from Grattan Endicott
grandeval at vejez.fsnet.co.uk
[also gesta at tiscali.co.uk]
*****************************
"Reason's whole pleasure, all the 
                               joys of sense,
 Lie in three words, health, peace, 
                          and competence."
                       -~ Alexander Pope. 
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Herman De Wael" <herman at hdw.be>
To: "blml" <blml at rtflb.org>
Sent: Thursday, November 23, 2006 10:13 AM
Subject: Re: [blml] L20F1


> But that just proves my point. The lawmakers 
> have made certain that as  soon as the problem 
> with regards to UI is no longer active (because 
> one of the playes of that side is no longer active 
> - becoming dummy),  the MI has to be corrected. 
> Can you see a better proof that the lawmakers 
> thought UI was worse than MI?
> 
+=+ I have been trying to recall if it is said anywhere 
in the Laws that it is illegal to create UI. To give MI 
on the other hand is a breach of correct procedure.
       It is true that the Laws require a player not to 
correct his partner's misexplanation until the due time 
under Law 75D2. That is absolute. However in 
giving explanations of partner's subsequent calls he 
is required to disclose partnership experience as well 
as any special information arising from partnership 
agreement. It is common for the discrepancy then 
to become manifest, in which event the Director 
may be summoned. (A 'manifest' irregularity is not 
the same as an irregularity merely suspected.) 
      Considerations of UI do not affect the operation 
of Laws 20, 75C and 75D.  If UI arises it is handled 
under Law 16A.
                           
                                ~ Grattan ~  +=+