[blml] Interesting question - HELPed [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]

[Ed Reppert]

On May 26, 2007, at 10:27 PM, richard.hills at immi.gov.au wrote:

> Richard Hills refutes:
>
> I disagree.  While Sven Pran and Ed Reppert are correct in
> asserting that the revoke has not yet been established under
> the criterion of Law 63A1 (Offending Side Leads or Plays to
> Next Trick), which criterion requires a "played card", not
> merely a "_must be_ played card", what about Law 63A2?
>
> Law 63A2 (A Member of Offending Side Indicates a Lead or Play):
>
> "A revoke becomes established: when the offender or his partner
> names or otherwise designates a card to be played to the
> following trick."
>
> In my opinion, a defender waving a card around so that their
> partner can see it would fit the criterion of "otherwise
> designates a card to be played to the following trick".
>
Hm. Let me think about it. :-)