[blml] Are the laws clear on telling pard to ask a question?[SEC=UNOFFICIAL]

[Grattan Endicott]

from Grattan Endicott
grandeval at vejez.fsnet.co.uk
[also gesta at tiscali.co.uk]
****************************
"The best words in the best order"
                          ~ S T Coleridge.
''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jerry Fusselman" <jfusselman at gmail.com>
To: "Bridge Laws Mailing List" <blml at rtflb.org>
Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2007 7:36 AM
Subject: Re: [blml] Are the laws clear on telling 
pard to ask a question?[SEC=UNOFFICIAL]


> Richard:
> 
> >
> > The table Director was obviously unaware that East had infracted
> > the correct procedure laid down in Laws 41A and 41B.
> >
> > The combined effect of those two Laws is that West must first
> > place their chosen opening lead face down on the table and only
> > then is East permitted to ask a question.
> >
> 
> Sorry if I was unclear. The director was fully aware of the correct
> procedure and timing of questions and face-down leads.  He even told
> East that it was not her turn to ask questions.  There he was perfect.
> 
> It was his next ruling I find troubling:  He felt that the instant
> West asked East's question, his job was done, so he left and did not
> return.
> 
> I challenge BLMLers to go through that in silence and without raising
> an eyebrow.  (I failed, though I was silent.  Well, maybe I said
> "Huh?")  I would be impressed if any BLMLers are sure they would do
> it.
> 
> -Jerry Fusselman
> 
+=+ Hi,
        I have had an interesting time reading all this waffle. I fail to 
see where anyone has yet suggested applying the law. Everyone 
seems to be going on about whether a question is an action. I'll 
return to the point in a minute.
        First let us step back and consider. East has asked a question 
illegally. This action has conveyed UI to West. The UI suggests 
attention to Spades. If West has a logical alternative to a Spade 
lead she is precluded from leading a Spade. The Director is 
required to consider whether an infraction of law has resulted in 
damage. That is the applicable law and it is unaffected by whether 
West asks a question subsequent to the infraction or not.
      Now, as to whether a question is an action, when we have a 
word in the laws that is not included in the Definitions we are to
interpret it in accordance with its dictionary meaning. ["Action :
a thing done, an act" - New Oxford English Dictionary.] Is a 
question such? Would you say "I am in the act of questioning 
him"? "My questioning is done"? Would that make a question 
an action ? I think so. But for the ruling the answer is not relevant. 
                                          ~ Grattan ~   +=+
P.S. My apology if someone did point to the law and I missed it.