[blml] Réf. : Re: De Wael School (was ...poll) [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]

[Alain Gottcheiner]

-------Message original-------
 
De : Herman De Wael
Date : 19/02/2007 11:10:14
A : blml
Sujet : Re: [blml] De Wael School (was ...poll) [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]
 
> Richard Hills:
>
> There is an inconsistency between Law 75D2 and Law 75C.
> The De Wael School assumes that Law 75D2 prevails in the
> event of any clash between the two; but most of the rest of
> the world's directors assume that Law 75C prevails.
 
Herman :  
 
I know that, and I've never said it was not an infraction. But you
need to consider damage as well as MI. Since I have correctly
explained what they might expect in his hand, they cannot be damaged.
So even if it is an infraction, it is a very mild one.
 
AG : 
 
Non-bridge jurisprudency has it that, when you have only two possible
courses of action, and both of them are infractions, then none is. 
Couldn't it be one of those cases ? As long as there is no item in TFLB that
defines precedence between L75C and L75D.
 
Best regards
 
    Alain
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.amsterdamned.org/pipermail/blml/attachments/20070219/48ae6b67/attachment-0001.htm 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 1458 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://www.amsterdamned.org/pipermail/blml/attachments/20070219/48ae6b67/attachment-0001.jpeg 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/gif
Size: 21075 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://www.amsterdamned.org/pipermail/blml/attachments/20070219/48ae6b67/attachment-0001.gif