[blml] Law 12 A 1.

[David Burn]

[WS]

At the risk of jogging some minds that need jogging, this paragraph is 
unchanged from the previous laws, and appeared originally word-for-word in 
1963 -- a date where some of you had not yet even been the result of 
heterogeneous sex!  It is pure and simply there to let the bridge world know

that there may be infractions that have not yet been thought of and taken 
care of by the rest of the laws. When such an occasion arises this paragraph

gives the TD the tool to rectify the situation seeing to it that the 
non-offending side is not hurt. It by no means was ever meant to be in 
conflict with any of the provisions of the rest of the law book, and there 
are even words to that effect in 12 B 2 to make it clear that those 
specified and covered elsewhere are not to be screwed around with. Can it be

any simpler?

[DALB]

I am having considerable difficulty with this. Bridge is a game that has
laws; those laws establish how the game is played - and, of course, how it
is not played. There can never be, and could not ever have been even in
1963, "infractions that have not yet been thought of"; anything done while
playing bridge is either in accordance with the laws or it is not.

The problem is highlighted by the substitution of the word "rectification"
for "penalty" in the new Laws. A "penalty" may be unduly severe on the
offenders or unduly advantageous to the non-offenders. Similarly, as in the
case of East giving West a ruff after East has led out of turn, a "penalty"
may not seem to penalise the offenders sufficiently, or may even give them
an advantage they would not otherwise have enjoyed. When we talk of
"penalties", we may dismiss such occurrences as "rub of the green" - we may
even use the expression "Oh shit happens".

But to "rectify" a situation means to put it right; a situation cannot be
said to have been "put right" if someone suffers or benefits unduly after
the supposed "rectification" has taken place. The new L12B2 seems to me to
be simple nonsense. It could not be simpler nonsense - that much is true.

David Burn
London, England