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

[richard.hills at immi.gov.au]

Raija:

I have followed this thread with interest, but...
If one table has the benefit of having a TD so close by that the TD is in a

position to observe the play at that table AND the TD had the right to call

attention and give redress for infractions without being called, then that
table is put in a different status than the rest of the tables in the room
- unless there is a "resident TD" present at every table, watching and
catching irregularities or infractions.

>From the "Claim in Sofia" thread, April 2005 ->

John (MadDog) Probst:

>>>English premier league, screens, the whole show: TD leaning on screen (I
>>>usually lean on a wall, but was enjoyably engaged in scratching my back
>>>on the top corner of the screen). Overheard at the table, all players
>>>knew I was there.
>>>
>>>"Was it down one or two?"
>>>"No idea, how about -75?"
>>>"TD won't like it. Toss you for it"
>>><tosses coin>
>>>"Down two, ok"
>>>"Yes"

Sven Pran:

>>And the "KNEW" you were there !!!!!  Indeed.  8-)

John (MadDog) Probst:

>ok, we all know each other very well, and the teams are great personal
>friends anyway. They know that I would have intervened if I had thought
>it appropriate, but as far as I can see a bridge result was obtained and
>I was not called to the table. As I recall after the result was written
>down one of them winked at me, I said "I didn't hear a TD call" and
>there was a nod from round the table.
>
>As Herman says, once they had called on the next hand the matter was
>over, why should I interfere in their game when I'm not asked to?


Season's greetings

Richard James Hills, amicus curiae
National Training Branch
02 6225 6285