[blml] When to late

[Sven Pran]

> On Behalf Of Ed Reppert
> On Jan 1, 2007, at 5:46 AM, gesta at tiscali.co.uk wrote:
> 
> > The Laws are
> > silent on the question of  the manner in which the contestant
> > becomes aware of a 'substantial reason to believe' (16A2).
> > There is no restriction on this in the laws.
> 
> 
> What of the footnote? "When play ends; or, as to dummy's hand, when
> dummy is exposed." This would seem to obviate the practice (I want to
> say "common practice" but that may be just my perception) of calling
> the TD whenever the recipient of UI does something an opponent thinks
> (without any evidence) he shouldn't have done.

The main problem with a late accusation of a law 16A2 violation is that of
establishing the facts.

Personally I am very reluctant to try such accusations if I feel that the
accusation has been delayed by NOS for no particular reason.

If a break in tempo is not established immediately it is almost always
impossible to have it established afterwards. 

On the contrary if late discoveries make it likely or even probable that a
partnership has created UI using some sort of concealed partnership
understanding I see every reason to try an accusation of a Law 16A2
violation on such basis within the correction period.

Regards Sven