[blml] Law 12A1 and Law 12B

[Peter Eidt]

Eric wrote:
> At 06:26 AM 10/11/06, twm wrote:
> 
> > Peter wrote:
> > 
> > > Try this one ...
> > > 
> > > 7
> > > 84
> > > (3)
> > > J7
> > > 
> > > J6           --
> > > 5             93
> > > --             Q8
> > > 632         K9
> > > 
> > > 98
> > > --
> > > 10
> > > AQ10
> > > 
> > > South is declarer in 4 spades and has lost 1 trick.
> > > East to lead plays the DQ.
> > > West ruffs with the J and when South asks
> > > dummy to play a club the diamond 3 appears
> > > from behind the C7. TD !
> > 
> > There has been an infraction of Law41D, it is known that concealing
> > cards in dummy may well work to the player's advantage, we can
> > adjust under L72b1.
> > 
> 
> Can we?  L72B1 requires not merely that the infraction "may" damage
> the NOS, but that it "would be likely" to do so.  ISTM that a hidden
> card in the dummy is as apt to work to the defenders' advantage as to
> the declarer's, and therefore fails to meet the threshhold required to
> apply L72B1.
> 
> I'm not sure how to parse the letter of TFLB here, but in my
> experience no director would adjust in this situation.  They might
> find that the damage to the NOS was "self-inflicted" by virtue of
> their failing to notice that dummy had the wrong number of cards.  Or
> cite the
> "principle" that all three players are responsible for noticing that
> dummy's cards are misarranged.  That is nowhere to be found in TFLB
> (perhaps it should be considered?), but is in some sense "suggested"
> by L64B3 (commonly stated as "dummy can't revoke"), and seems to be
> widely accepted.

But is not accepted within the board of European (EBL)
TDs.

It is an infraction of dummy (Law 41 D) but there is
no penalty prescribed for any infraction of Law 41 D.

It is not a Law 72 B1 case - as Eric argued above -

If the D3 would have stuck under a small heart,
it would have resulted in a revoke and therefore
in a Law 64 C case (allowing West to ruff low)

So, all we have - and we need it - is Law 12 A1
("the laws do not provide indemnity to the non-
offending contestant for the particular type of
violation of law by an opponent.")

Peter