[blml] ...have we really come to this??? [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]

[richard.hills at immi.gov.au]

WBF Code of Practice, page 7:

"A player who, without design, makes unauthorized information
available to his partner does not commit an infraction of law or
propriety; it is the use of that information that is a breach of
the laws."

Richard Hills:

>>The "strong body of opinion" on the WBF Appeals Committee made
>>a basic error by assuming that it is _the hesitation_ which is
>>"the irregularity".

Tim West-Meads:

>Hesitations *are* irregularities:

Law 73A2 (first phrase):

"Calls and plays should be made without special emphasis,
mannerism or inflection, and without undue hesitation or haste"

Richard Hills:

In my opinion, "without undue" in Law 73A2 equals "without
design" in the CoP.  That is, it is only those rare hesitations
which are Law 73F2 "could have known" deceptive hesitations, or
alternatively those rare hesitations which are Law 73B2
deliberate communications with partner, that can be described as
irregularities.


Best wishes

Richard James Hills, amicus curiae
Level 6 Aqua Training Suite, DIAC
02 6225 6776

Important Notice: If you have received this email by mistake, please advise
the sender and delete the message and attachments immediately.  This email,
including attachments, may contain confidential, sensitive, legally
privileged and/or copyright information.  Any review, retransmission,
dissemination or other use of this information by persons or entities other
than the intended recipient is prohibited. DIAC respects your privacy and
has obligations under the Privacy Act 1988. The official departmental
privacy policy can be viewed on the department's website at www.immi.gov.au
See: http://www.immi.gov.au/functional/privacy.htm