[blml] ...have we really come to this???

[Eric Landau]

On Jul 26, 2007, at 5:51 AM, <gesta at tiscali.co.uk>  
<gesta at tiscali.co.uk> wrote:

> +=+Law 16A2:  "The Director shall require the auction
> and play to continue, standing ready to assign an adjusted
> score if he considers that an infraction of law has resulted
> in damage."
>       Law 12C3: "Unless Zonal Organisations specify
> otherwise, an appeals committee may vary an assigned
> adjusted score in order to do equity."
>       Law 12C2 contains the phrase "had the irregularity
> not occurred". Variation under Law 12C3 is open-ended
> in the discretion of the appeals committee (subject to any
> regulation). It is for the appeals committee to judge how
> to "do equity". One should not be led by one's personal
> inclination to read into a law words that are not present.
>       I support a principle that was enunciated by our WBF
> CTD Emeritus in 1997:      "Mr Schoder remarked upon
> Edgar Kaplan's skills in separating out the concerns of the
> committee from those of other bodies, avoiding trespass
> in other areas of responsibility  He invited the committee
> post-Kaplan to further this aspect of his methods."
>   Matters of bridge judgement, including the assessment of
> 'equity', are not within the purview of the Laws Committee
> and there should be no restriction in law on the making of
> such judgements by appeals committees.

In other words, the (presumably intended) effect of L12C3 is to  
totally invalidate L12C2, at least for infractions that reach an AC,  
which is free to give any assigned score it chooses (including scores  
that could not actually have been obtained in play) any time it  
chooses on any basis it chooses (that is what "open-ended in the  
discretion of" means, isn't it?), subject only to whatever  
regulations may be imposed by local jurisdictions; TFLB has no  
guidance whatsoever to offer on the subject beyond "do equity".


Eric Landau
1107 Dale Drive
Silver Spring MD 20910
ehaa at starpower.net