[blml] What constitutes a frivolous appeal?

[David Grabiner]

Nigel writes:


> [Wayne Burrows]
> What if any guidelines exist for determining whether or not an appeal is
> frivolous?
>
> [Nigel]
> My view is still that an appeal has merit if...
>
> [A] The director *recommends* or orders an appeal.
> [B] The rule (law or regulation) is ambiguous or directors interpret it
> inconsistently (for example "rule of x" regulations in the old EBU
> Orange book, interpreted literally by some directors, while others
> seemed to temper them with "judgement", especially where their own
> actions were affected).
> [C] The appellants submit the official appeals write-up to an official
> appeals advisor who judges it to have merit (perhaps after further
> questions). IMO this step should be compulsory -- although the
> appellants should be free to ignore that advice at their own risk.

These three are clear.  If a screener, with full knowledge of the facts, advises 
the players that the appeal has merit, the players should not pay a penalty for 
bringing the case to appeal.  And if the TDs do not agree on the application of 
the laws, how are the players supposed to know?

> [D] The ruling involves substantial subjective judgement.
> [E] The case is difficult and complex.
> [F] The ruling is close (e.g. whether a call is a logical alternative).

The standard for these three rules should be whether the players, given their 
own level of experience, should have known how the ruling would go.  If there 
has been a screener, the screener can advise less experienced players that they 
have no case.

> [G] The committee's ruling isn't unanimous.
> [H] The committee's ruling differs from the director's. (Unless,
> perhaps, the committee's ruling is substantially the same but harsher).

I would write G and H as, "no member of the committee recommended a ruling which 
was potentially better for the appellants than the director's ruling."  If the 
director rules average-minus, and the committee unanimously rules that the score 
should be -100 for the appellants, the appeal has merit even if -100 turns out 
to be worse than average-minus.  (The appellants' case might be that a ruling of 
average-minus is not allowed under the Laws, and they should get either +620 
or -100.)

Again, the "no member" ruling protects the players.  If one member of a 
committee would have ruled in favor of a player, the player can hardly be 
expected to determine that he had no case.

Note that procedural penalties imposed by the committee are independent of the 
merit of an appeal.  If the committee imposes a penalty against the 
non-appealing side but lets the director's ruling stand, the appeal could still 
be without merit, as the committee is correcting an unrelated director's error.

> Of course, I believe appeals are *good* for the game. Justice is usually
> done and seen to be done. Appeals also publicise and clarify the law and
> its interpretation for the benefit of players. Shortcomings in the rules
> are highlighted so that they can be urgently rectified (although they
> rarely are).
>
> Hence, IMO, guidelines (like those above) should be enshrined in the
> law-book.
>
> Some directors seem to regard an appeal as a personal slight. For them,
> few appeals should be judged to have merit.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> blml mailing list
> blml at amsterdamned.org
> http://www.amsterdamned.org/mailman/listinfo/blml
>
>