[blml] When too late

[Sven Pran]

I have never understood this thread to be a dispute on a contestant's right
to request a ruling by the Director and do indeed hope that I haven't given
that impression?

My intention has all the time been to focus on the problem for TD in giving
a ruling on UI when the reason for UI has not been established and then
eventually an allegation of a Law 16A2 violation is presented. That was also
how I understood the kernel of the original question that started this
thread.

When requested to make a ruling on opponents' alleged violation of Law 16A2
but where the complaining side has failed to secure their case by
establishing agreement of BIT (or whatever action may have created UI) and I
find it impossible to establish facts of UI, I invariably dismiss the
complaint unless they can show reasonable cause for not securing evidence in
time (as specified in Laws 16A1 and 16A2 footnote). I honestly believe that
this is the only possible way a serious director can rule.

The effect of this is obvious: If a contestant might suspect that a
particular activity by an opponent could result in a later violation of law
16A2 he should in his own interest (Law 16A1) immediately establish
agreement that the activity (BIT or whatever) did occur, and if necessary
summon the Director forthwith in order to establish such facts. Note that
this is NOT summoning TD for a ruling; that will in case come later.
Normally a polite question like: "Do we agree that there was a BIT here?"
will be sufficient.

I do not call this "reserving any rights"; I call it establishing agreement
on what happened in case subsequent ruling by TD might be needed.

Regards Sven 

> On Behalf Of WILLIAM SCHODER
> I remember it as a simple question of when a player can no longer call a
> director FOR a ruling. The reason for asking for a ruling makes no
> difference. It may make a difference in the ruling, but that doesn't
> prevent
> the player from asking within the period specified. The "long time
> afterwards" only has meaning if it is beyond the limits stated in 92 B or
> other limits imposed by the sponsoring Organization.
> 
> I think the discussion on Law 16, 12, etc., is interesting and the
> positions
> taken, whether right or wrong, at least revealing of the poster's
> erudition,
> but I still can't help but regret that in so many "threads" the original
> question is quickly segued away from and long and involved arguments ensue
> without an answer to the original question.
> 
> Kojak
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Sven Pran" <svenpran at online.no>
> To: "blml" <blml at rtflb.org>
> Sent: Friday, January 05, 2007 9:50 AM
> Subject: Re: [blml] When too late
> 
> 
> Unless I remember completely wrong this thread was about discovering the
> possible use of UI in a situation where NOS was unaware that UI had been
> given until "long time afterwards". Thus it is indeed a question of Law
> 16.
> 
> Regards Sven
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: blml-bounces at amsterdamned.org [mailto:blml-
> bounces at amsterdamned.org]
> > On Behalf Of WILLIAM SCHODER
> > Sent: 5. januar 2007 14:40
> > To: blml at rtflb.org; Hans-Olof Hallén
> > Subject: Re: [blml] When too late
> >
> > Aw, come on Hans.  You take all the fun out of looking all over the law
> > book
> > for something to pontificate on!!!
> >
> > Gee...there it is...in black and white.... Law 92 B  ".....The right to
> > REQUEST or appeal a Director's ruling expires......." AND THEN IT TELLS
> > YOU
> > WHEN.  (Italics mine).
> > You have to learn that when there is a simple solution or answer to a
> > problem it's no fun, so just change the problem, and off you go! It's
> also
> > known as blowing smoke thereby giving everyone so inclined the
> opportunity
> > to cuss the FLB which has served us remarkably well for many decades in
> > ruling the game at all levels and venues.
> >
> > Kojak
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Hans-Olof Hallén" <hans-olof.hallen at bolina.hsb.se>
> > To: <blml at rtflb.org>
> > Sent: Friday, January 05, 2007 2:47 AM
> > Subject: [blml] When too late
> >
> >
> > > I think that all of you except Harald Skaeran have misunderstood the
> > > problem. It is not about law 16. The problem Torsten refers to is when
> > you
> > > discover e g a wrong explanation some time after play of a board. How
> > long
> > > time after the play can you call the director for a ruling? And I
> think
> > > the correct answer is 30 minutes after the end of the session.
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > blml mailing list
> > > blml at amsterdamned.org
> > > http://www.amsterdamned.org/mailman/listinfo/blml
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > blml mailing list
> > blml at amsterdamned.org
> > http://www.amsterdamned.org/mailman/listinfo/blml
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> blml mailing list
> blml at amsterdamned.org
> http://www.amsterdamned.org/mailman/listinfo/blml
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> blml mailing list
> blml at amsterdamned.org
> http://www.amsterdamned.org/mailman/listinfo/blml