[blml] 2007 laws

[David Grabiner]

Steve Willner writes:

> 5. L75B is changed:
>   [the player whose partner has given MI] if he is to be declarer or
>    dummy, should call the Director and must volunteer a correction of
>    the explanation.
>
> Note separation of calling the director and correcting the explanation;
> the former is now a weaker obligation than before, though still an
> infraction if not done.

This is good, as calling the Director serves little purpose much of the time, 
and it has never been honored.  I frequently will say at the end of the auction, 
"There was a failure to Alert; 1NT-2C-2H-2NT denies four spades," when I do not 
expect a problem, and this clarifies that the infraction is of the same type as 
making a claim without a statement: there is no penalty as long as there is no 
problem.

And L9B1 has also been corrected, so that the general obligation to call the 
Director is dowgraded to "should" (otherwise, it would override L75, since 
attention has been drawn to an irregularity):

  The Director should be summoned at once when
  attention is drawn to an irregularity.

>  But then:
>
>    If [the player] becomes a defender, he calls the Director and
>    corrects the explanation when play ends.
>
> But for a defender, failing to correct the explanation is no longer even
> an infraction!  I confess to being astonished by this.

This is an oversight, but what is intended is clear from context.

More of a problem is that L20F5 has not been corrected to agree with the new 
L75; calling the Director is still a "must" here

  (b) The player must call the Director and inform his
  opponents that, in his opinion, his partner's explanation
  was erroneous (see Law 75) but only at his first legal
  opportunity, which is
  (i) for a defender, at the end of the play.
  (ii) for declarer or dummy, after the final pass of
  the auction.