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

[Ed Reppert]

On May 29, 2007, at 6:41 AM, Tim West-Meads wrote:

> Then why?  The mere act of exposing/naming a card does not meet the
> requirements of 63a2 (for example saying "hang on, I have the S4"  
> would
> be an attempt at correcting the revoke not naming the S4 as a card  
> to be
> played to the next trick).

The player pulled a card from his hand, and waved it about in such a  
way that he clearly intended to play it. If you ask him, he'll tell  
you he intended to play it. Then he realized he'd revoked earlier.  
Before I posted my agreement with Richard, I had a little sojourn  
with my dictionary's definition of the verb "to designate". It fits.