[blml] ...have we really come to this??? [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]

[Tim West-Meads]

Richard wrote:
> If Tim should read the English Bridge Union "White Book", the
> EBU's official guide for EBU Tournament Directors, Tim will note
> that the EBU has adopted most of the clauses of the WBF Code of
> Practice, including this particular clause that we are debating.
> EBU regulation.

> Therefore, if Tim should direct an EBU tournament, Tim cannot use
> his own interpretation of Law 73A2, but must instead abide by the
> CoP interpretation of Law 73A2, 

My own interpretation of L73a2 does not conflict with that given in the
CoP.  A hesitation which is "without design" may nevertheless be "undue"
and the CoP says nothing to contradict that.  

I would enquire as to why there was a BiT and would accept answers such
as "There was a stop bid", "The TD was picking up the table money", "The
waitress was delivering sandwiches" when making a judgement as to the
"dueness" of the hesitation. An answer such as "I had a difficult
decision" will result in me telling the player "I'm afraid the difficulty
of a problem does not relieve you of the obligation to bid in tempo."

Thus I address the next bit on purely academic grounds in relation to
this particular regulation.
 
> since that has the status of Law 81B2:
> 
> "The Director is bound by these Laws and by supplementary
> regulations announced by the sponsoring organisation."

Which is mitigated by L80F "to publish or announce regulations
supplementary to, but not in conflict with, these Laws."

As a TD I refuse to enforce regulations which are in conflict with the
laws.  Illegal regulations are not binding on TDs and "interpretations of
law" by bodies other than the WBFLC have no legal standing.

Tim