[blml] 40B3?

[gesta at tiscali.co.uk]

Grattan Endicott<gesta at tiscali.co.uk
[following address discontinued:
grandeval at vejez.fsnet.co.uk]
*******************************
"Judge not the play before the play be done"
                     [Sir John Davies 1569-1626]
 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "richard willey" <richard.willey at gmail.com>
To: "Bridge Laws Mailing List" <blml at amsterdamned.org>
Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2008 6:39 PM
Subject: Re: [blml] 40B3?


> On 1/17/08, Herman De Wael <hermandw at skynet.be> wrote:
> 
> What does concern me greatly is that the laws are consistent.  I
> consider a situation where one group of players follows the mainstream
> school while another group of players follows the DWS highly
> problematic.  This can't lead to anything good...
> 
+=+ Do not worry. Directors will not follow the DWS view in 
their rulings. I can add the comment of one more DSC member 
to those I quoted previously (leaving just one member unheard).
Viz: to 
"this group just likes to hear themselves talk"
"we have contentious language,  self-styled 'Schools' taking
on unqualified reality by monotonous repetition, guru-like
pronouncements, heels dug in positions regardless of
overwhelming evidence to the contrary, and out-of-context
usage of words".
" (the above) words reflect my own thought."
"what Herman says is clearly wrong"
"when a player explains a partnership agreement it is possible
that his partner becomes aware of a mistake he made. We
deal with that in another law. But people in positions to decide
about the meaning of the laws have said that this is the way
bridge should be played. And that your (Herman's) very
superior solutions are not valid."
*now add* 
"I agree with ( .......) here and broadly with your solution. 
However I think it could be done with fewer words eg.
<In trying to explain fully and correctly his partner's call 
a player may unintentionally reveal he thinks his partner 
has misexplained a prior call. In such a case there is no 
violation of law 20F5(a)>"
                                          ~ Grattan ~  +=+