[blml] Marvin French's Procedures for handling UI - part one[SEC=UNOFFICIA

[Marvin French]

From: "Ed Reppert"

> Marvin French wrote:
>
> > If no damage results from an infraction, assign a PP. If
there is
> > damage, handle the UI normally, and maybe a PP.
>
> The logic of this escapes me. If you must, in the sense of
"must" in
> the laws, maintain even tempo, then a PP is appropriate
whether or
> not there is damage. The fact there is damage, and that
therefore the
> score will be adjusted, should not obviate the requirement
for a PP.

As you know, I oppose the use of PPs for disciplinary
purposes. The whole story is on my website under "Bridge
Laws and Regulations." It follows a well-known legal
principle (*sui generis*, of the same kind) that says PPs
should be used only for things typified by L90B, none of
which involve punishment for breaking a law that provides
its own remedy. Except for extreme cases covered by L91,
discipline should take place outside the game, not in the
game. For that reason Zero Tolerance offenses are covered by
L91, not L90.

In this case you could be right. If the TD will make clear
beforehand that he expects players to maintain proper tempo,
then not doing so could be taken as a "Failure to Comply"
with an instruction of the TD (L90B8). If so, the PP could
be assigned whether or not there is damage. However, most
TDs would probably just give a lecture, not a PP, if the
offender has suffered a score adjustment.

While on this subject, I'd like to point out that TDs ought
to have latitude when implementing poorly-worded laws. If
L16A's literal meaning is that it is not illegal to take an
illogical action (e.g., to give partner a lesson in ethics),
then in spite of that a TD should not give more to the
non-offenders than they would have received after a logical
(but illegal) action (the worst result "at all probable.").
The offending side keeps its illogical result, of course,
unless it represents an advantage in the score attributable
to the infraction (WBFLC, Lille).

Thank goodness an AC may not overrule a TD in regard to the
interpretation of a law. It can judge the logic of an
action, but not its legal consequences.

Marv
Marvin L. French
San Diego, California
www.marvinfrench.com