[blml] Minor/Major

[Jerry Fusselman]

On 1/29/07, Eric Landau wrote:
>
> Indeed, IME, those with "real knowledge" of the laws (which undoubtedly
> includes all of us on BLML) know enough (L72A6) to be appropriately
> deferential to TDs making rulings at our table -- perhaps because we
> have a special appreciation for the difficulties that can be
> involved.  From time to time we may, after having heard the TD out,
> make a polite suggestion along the lines of, "Could you please take
> another look at law...?"
>
> The people to watch out for are the ones who don't so much as ask the
> TD for a ruling as tell him what happened and explain to him how he
> should rule, citing some principle of law that may or may not be
> real.  Often such folks reveal their ignorance rather than their
> knowledge of the laws.  How many times have you heard, "His partner
> hesitated so he has to pass."?
>

Yes, I misunderstood you; sorry about that!  I will not argue your
point of suspecting a player who cites a false principle of law.  But
I am interested in the case you included where the cited principle is
accurate and beneficial to the citer.

Is your point that if a player cites an accurate law or principle to
the director that would be beneficial to his side, and if he tells the
director how he should rule, then he is probably dishonest?  But if he
knows the laws just as well and is polite and does not suggest how to
rule, then he is probably honest?  Is it your point that the suspect
action---the one that marks dishonesty---is not the knowledge of the
laws per se, but the act of suggesting or telling what the ruling
should be?

-Jerry Fusselman