[blml] normal lines ad nauseum

[Jeff Easterson]

This is surely going to be a very minority opinion.  Why not demand that 
claims be made properly and completely (with statement of further play)? 
  If that is not done, then, if a line of play is not obvious (or if it 
makes no difference) in short if there is any element of doubt, then 
rule "against" (the most unfavourable (for him) line that is not 
illogical) him; he should have claimed properly.  We'd save a lot of 
time and space if we concentrated on having players claim properly (with 
statement of play and less on what to do if they don't.  (In such cases 
the problem can be solved by a capable TD.)  (Excuse me for agreeing 
with Kojak.)  Would it be so difficult to emphasize that claims should 
be made properly?
Postscriptum: Please don't advance arguments that the discussion is 
being held for the benefit of inexperienced (weak was the term used I 
think) TDs or that thr element of doubt is decisive.  If there is no 
doubt about the line of play there is no problem; if there is doubt 
(what claimant knew or how he intended to play) then he should have 
stated it.  The TD must decide what he believes to be probable and base 
his decision on it.
But, who am I to quibble?  I am obviously simpleminded to take such a 
position.  JE