[blml] Two questions on incorrect TD rulings

[Jerry Fusselman]

On 3/16/07, Peter Eidt <PeterEidt at t-online.de> wrote:
> David Grabiner asked:
> >
> > [snip]
> >
> > > When a TD gives a ruling which could be proved to be incorrect from
> > > the Law book, and you are dummy and have not been asked by the TD to
> > > say anything, what are you supposed to do? Wait until the end of
> > > the hand and then call the TD back and ask for a L82C ruling (which
> > > could be more favorable to your side than an immediate correct
> > > ruling)?
> > >
>
> Richard Hills answered by citing the law:
> > Law 43A1(b):
> >
> > "Dummy may not call attention to an irregularity during play."
> >
>
> Peter Eidt found:
> Minutes of the Meeting of the WBF LC, Paris, 30.10.2001:
>
> "5. The committee agreed that references to irregularities
> in the laws refer to irregularities committed by players. An
> action by a Director may be an error but this does not
> constitute an 'irregularity' within the meaning of the laws."
>
> Therefore I think, that dummy may point to a
> TD's error while applying the law.
>

Good point.  There is also L42A1:  "Dummy is allowed to give
information, in the Director's presence, as to fact or law."  That
seems pretty explicit to me as to allowing David to speak up
immediately.  I don't think the game will become unraveled if we
realize that directors have a difficult job, are only human, and
sometimes make mistakes---and that some of these mistakes are
preventable if caught early enough by one of the players.

If you can find a technique to do it when you are dummy without making
the director livid, please let us know how it is done.  Meekly asking,
"I wonder if you might reconsider law x for this" is no panacea, but I
suppose it may be the best try.  I realize that I am likely to be
called a sea-lawyer (again) very soon, but my request is honest.

-Jerry Fusselman