[blml] nashville 12 [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]

[Tim West-Meads]

Nigel wrote:
> 
> In this instance, the committee may or may not have re-interpreted 
> a law. But they do seem to have the right to do so, if they feel 
> like it. There is the notorious precedent of an appeals committee 
> inventing a horrendous new law at a World Championship...

I really don't know why you bang on about this Nigel.  The legal impact
on rulings of the WBF AC making those arrangements was absolutely zilch.

Since the introduction of L12c3 any TD has been able to recommend a L12c3
ruling to an AC of his own volition.  If the TD says to the players "I
will be recommending a score of X" and both pairs agree then actually
convening the AC is just a waste of time.  If either of the pairs
disagrees a L12c2 ruling (and mooted L12c3 recommendation) go to an AC in
the normal way.

All the AC did was tinker with the admin procedures to make everybody's
(including the players) lives easier.  It didn't change the laws.

Tim
 
> [WBFLC 2000]
> The Laws Committee not having so far changed Law 12C3, the Appeals
> Committee at the World Championships in Bermuda, January 2000, 
> issued
> the following directive to the Chief Tournament Director: "As part 
> of
> its arrangements under Law 80G the Appeals Committee requires the
> Chief Director of his own volition, as a preliminary in the appeals
> process, to consider whether an adjustment in accordance with the
> provisions of Law 12C3 would be appropriate. If so, in pursuance of
> the terms of the WBF Code of Practice he is authorized to make such 
> an
> adjustment before the players are given the ruling in order to 
> achieve
> equity as he judges it. Such a score adjustment may be appealed to 
> the
> Appeals Committee on the same basis as an appeal of any other 
> ruling,
> but the fact that a judgmental ruling by the Director is made with
> these enhanced powers, and after consultation with colleagues and
> expert opinion, means that appeals committees will require strong
> evidence that puts it beyond reasonable doubt a ruling should be
> varied." The WBF Laws Committee will return to the question of Law
> 12C3 at a future time. In the meantime it has stated that it finds 
> it
> acceptable if other regulating authorities adopt this method of
> achieving the intention of the Code of Practice.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> blml mailing list
> blml at amsterdamned.org
> http://www.amsterdamned.org/mailman/listinfo/blml
> 
> 
>