[blml] Pointing out who won the trick [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]

[Grattan Endicott]

from Grattan Endicott
grandeval at vejez.fsnet.co.uk
[also gesta at tiscali.co.uk]
***************************
"I work with so fine a brush as
produces little effect after much
labour."        [Jane Austen]
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

+=+ For information. This topic has been ;laid before
the WBF Laws Drafting Subcommittee by Ton Kooijman
(who is now 'hors de PC' until late in November). I am
in no doubt that removal of the relevant wording in 1987
was intended to remove the authority to draw attention
to a mispointed card. However, I am thinking that the
intention was poorly implemented since the authority
appears to transfer to Law 9A2. (Mispointing the card
is a failure to conform to correct procedure, ergo an
irregularity - albeit perhaps not an infraction. I fail to
find in the laws any prohibition of drawing attention to
it.)  I have invited my colleagues to address my reading
of the position, correct me if there is something I have
overlooked, and in any case sort out what the intention
is to be at some future time and how to express this
effectively.
                                    ~ Grattan ~   +=+
--------------------------------------------------

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Sven Pran" <svenpran at online.no>
To: "blml" <blml at rtflb.org>
Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2006 7:52 AM


> > On Behalf Of Steve Wright
> > West-Meads <twm at cix.co.uk> writes
> > >Ben wrote:
> > >
> > >> Until the 1987 Lawbook Law 65 ended with: "Any player may request
> > >> that a card incorrectly pointed be turned in the proper direction."
> > >>
> > >> So it seems no longer permitted. On the other hand there is Law74C4:
> > >> "commenting or acting during the auction or play so as to call
> > >> attention to a significant occurence, or to the
> > >> number of tricks still required for success."
> > >
> > >Prior to 1987 the blanket provision of L65 would give permission to ask
> > >at any time.  Law74c4 OTOH only makes it an offence if their is
> > >considered motive.  The current laws are not in conflict with "It's
> > >generally OK to correct immediately, it's likely to be an offence if
> > >attention is drawn at a key moment (e.g. when pard appears to be trying
> > >to decide whether to cash the setting trick)".  Note to Steve, I'm not
> > >suggesting mind-reading required here, just an adjusted score if the
> > >timing of the correction appears opportune and action is taken as a
> > >result.
> > >
> > >Tim
> >
> > Would any of the following be an offence
> >
> > [1] "It's not your lead partner - you didn't win the last trick" as
> > partner is about to pull a card from their hand.
> >
> > [2] "You won that trick partner". Partner is absent mindedly gazing
> > around the room waiting for somebody else to lead.
> >
> > [3] "Who won that trick - you all appear to be claiming it" as I am in
> > the process of turning my card over and deciding which way to turn it
> > (I've actually turned it face down but am still holding it).
>
> IMO none of them would be an offence as such, but either of them _could_
> convey UI as judged on the circumstances in the actual situation.
>
> (Exactly as explicitly stated regarding otherwise legal questions on
> opponents' auction.)
>
> Regards Sven
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> blml mailing list
> blml at amsterdamned.org
> http://www.amsterdamned.org/mailman/listinfo/blml
>