[blml] Declining to ask a bid's meaning to achieve aspecificpurpose

[gesta at tiscali.co.uk]

Grattan Endicott<gesta at tiscali.co.uk
[also grandeval at vejez.fsnet.co.uk]
*****************************************
"Beware when the great God lets
loose a thinker on this planet."
             ~ Ralph Waldo Emerson.
===========================
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ed Reppert" <ereppert at rochester.rr.com>
To: "Bridge Laws Mailing List" <blml at rtflb.org>
Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 4:45 PM
Subject: Re: [blml] Declining to ask a bid's meaning 
                              to achieve aspecificpurpose


> 
> On Jan 8, 2007, at 5:33 AM, Grattan Endicott wrote:
> 
>> The Director should know what ruling to make
>> where he is working; if he doesn't he should
>> allow the result to stand but refer the ruling to
>> an appeals committee himself.
> 
> Not sure I understand the rationale here. Seems to 
> me "what ruling to make" in this case is a matter of 
> law (or perhaps regulation, but it amounts to the 
> same thing). A committee cannot overturn a TD on a  
> matter of law. So the most the TD can get from a 
> committee is a recommendation to change his ruling 
> - which may or may not be based on knowing what 
> the correct ruling should be. Why shouldn't the TD  
> consult with more knowledgeable directors before 
> ruling? That would make more sense to me.
> 
+=+ We always assume that Directors will consult 
concerning judgemental matters and situations where 
they are doubtful as to interpretation of Law or 
existence of regulation. If the Director (i.e. the one 
in charge) does not know the answer in this matter he
has to make a ruling. If there is an obvious infraction 
he rules accordingly, if not he makes a ruling that 
allows play to continue. But if he is in doubt about 
what his ruling should be, he should make it and refer 
it to appeal, telling them of his problem, not leave it 
unresolved, and then see what the appeals committee 
decides.
                        ~ G ~   +=+