[blml] a matter of moment [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]

[Sven Pran]

> On Behalf Of Grattan Endicott
..............
> > [snip]
> >
> > >What you have overlooked is that TD did not
> > >become aware of the revoke in his capacity as
> > >Director but in his position as a spectator. So
> > >initially the relevant law is Law 76.
> >
> +=+ A tournament director appointed to direct a
> tournament never has the status of 'spectator' in that
> tournament. He remains at all times a director.
>                              ~ Grattan ~   +=+

This statement leads to some very interesting implications:

Law 81C6: [The Director's duties and powers normally include] to rectify an
error or irregularity of which he becomes aware in any manner, within the
correction period established in accordance with Law 79C.

If the Director is present at the table from being summoned he is of course
there in his capacity as a director. This will often be the case when a
player has a penalty card or is under special restrictions due to some other
irregularity. In such cases the players have every right to expect the
Director assisting them from committing further irregularities.

But when the director is noticing events at a table maybe even without the
players at that table being aware of his presence? 

I read your statement to say that if the Director while accidentally
watching the play like any other spectator becomes aware of an irregularity
happening or about to happen he shall take immediate action and interfere
with the activities at that table in order to prevent or rectify the
irregularity? 

This will in many situations mean preventing the non-offending side from
executing their legal rights after opponents' irregularity and also the
offending side from limiting the consequences of their irregularity as best
they can.

Some irregularities coming to my mind include call out of turn, insufficient
bid, lead or play out of turn and revoke.

Say that the Director notices a player about to lift an insufficient bid
from the bid box. If his insufficient bid is completed the next player will
have the option of getting extra bid space in the auction. Is it the duty of
the Director to prevent this option for the non-offending side?

Say that the Director notices a revoke before it is established. Is it the
duty of the Director to deprive the non-offending side of their right to
delay calling attention to the revoke until it becomes established?

Say that the Director becomes aware of an established revoke but that no
player on the non-offending side has called attention to it. Is it the duty
of the Director to take any action before expiration of the time limit in
Laws 64B4 and 64B5? Shall the penalty for the revoke (except for restoring
equity) in that case be waived or not?

When I was trained to become a director back in 1980 I was told by the
instructor the importance of realizing the distinction between acting as
director and acting as spectator. I still feel that this distinction is
important.

Regards Sven