[blml] played or not?

[Grattan Endicott]

Grattan Endicott
grandeval at vejez.fsnet .co.uk
[also gesta at tiscali.co.uk]
****************************
"
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "André Steffens" <andre.steffens at hccnet.nl>
To: <blml at amsterdamned.org>
Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2007 5:20 PM
Subject: Re: [blml] played or not?




-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----

The contract is 3NT but declarer is confused and he thinks  he's playing 5
diamonds. He plays a card from hand and instructs dummy to "ruff". When the
table stops laughing, the director is called.
Has the lowest diamond been played or not?
--
Herman DE WAEL

-----------------------------

Law 46B:
In case of an incomplete or erroneous call by declarer of the card to be
played from dummy, the following restrictions apply (except when declarer's
different intention is incontrovertible)

To me it seems that declarer's intention was incontrovertible to play a
small diamond.

André

+=+ Law 45 determines whether a card has been played. Which
condition in Law 45 has been satisfied?
                                                             ~ Grattan ~ 
+=+