Missing card
One evening session, I had to redeal 5 boards because the cards were misplaced. After this we decided that we would instigate a local ruling and posted a notice on the club notice board which says that if any board arrives at the table with any cards misplaced then the preceding table (it actually says those responsible!) will be penalised 25% of the top for that board.
On Monday at the start of round 3, a South seated played called me to say she only had 12 cards. We had a good look for it and failed to find it. After a few minutes, I took a new pack of cards & remade the hand, so that play could continue.
I continued to look for the card for the next 8 rounds, including asking all 3 souths who had touched the board to look in their hand bags. After checking with the club president I applied the penalty to NS at the table who last played the hand, at the penultimate change over. I told the offenders at the time that I would probably have to penalise them.
Then at the end they asked me if I had applied the penalty & I said yes. Well the lady concerned went ballistic ... said how could I do that after all the favours she has done for me.
She says now, having spoken to her teacher: Directors should apply objective, fair rulings, and yours was not.
As teacher said to me, you cannot blame a player for a missing card unless you have definite proof that the player has misplaced the card, and you had none. INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY.
So what do you reckon? She is right in so far as I cannot PROVE that she misplaced the card, but she was the last one to play it ... it happened to be the King of trumps, so her partner & she would have noticed if it had been missing when they played their contract of 4H. Maybe we need to change the wording of this procedural penalty to say that the last person to play the hand will be held responsible.
Comments
Thank you very much Gordon
Maybe she ate it.
Wendy
I am not sure but you could probably consider a disiplinary penalty as well for "blowing up" at you; eitquette etc. etc.
Weejonnie, nah only hogs eat cards, wellll. you could be right.
CMOT_Dibbler
CMOT_Dibbler - I am sure you are right regarding the disciplinarian penalty. The only question is whether the TO has the right to issue a PP by edict as it were. It may be better to make clear who will issue the penalty (they clearly have the right to do so under law 90). I was certainly not suggesting that the honourable lady player had any characteristics of our favourite porcine character.
The laws of bridge do not operate under the English judicial system. A good example is law 75. You are guilty of a misexplanation unless you can show you are not. The EBU apply similar logic to fielding psychs. As I am sure you know they acknowledge that a partnership may feel upset about the ruling. I think that the notice should also have to advise the contestents that they have the right to appeal (at the risk of a further penalty).
Hi Gordon, the bridge player concerned says that this would not apply in Spain. I understood that Spain applies WBF rules, do you know if this is the case? And if so, does what you said fit with WBF rules or only EBU rules?
The laws apply in all countries and may not be over-ruled by local regulations.
LAW 85 - RULINGS ON DISPUTED FACTS
When the Director is called upon to rule on a point of law or
regulation in which the facts are not agreed upon, he
proceeds as follows:
A. Director’s Assessment
1. In determining the facts the Director shall base his
view on the balance of probabilities, which is to say
in accordance with the weight of the evidence he is
able to collect.
You might wish to ask the player what Spanish regulation is claimed to over-rule this.
Knowing that such a rule exists at the club does leave open the possibility that a malicious South could have pocketed the missing card to cause issues for the South player at the preceding table.
"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."
Equally, never assume that the innocent are guilty.
In this situation we're not really considering probabilities; we're considering whom to believe. South1 says she only has 12 cards, South2 says there's no extra card around here and no one can find it. All we know for sure is that a card has mysteriously evaporated.
By applying the auto-guilty law, we're laying full responsibility on South2. What can she do to protect herself other than holding onto the board until Table1 is ready to play the hand and then counting out the 13 cards for them, maybe getting them to sign a document of exchange in the process?
Needless to say, I don't like this piece of club legislation.
Thank you again Gordon.
The reply is here. I am sad I thought she was a friend, & I would not speak to an enemy like that.
What's wrong with the aeb??
Write to the aeb: Spanish Bridge Association. I've given you their email address!! And, please, nothing your English friend -arbitrator says is going to convince me, only the aeb.
Just leave me in peace, if you don't want to contact the aeb!!
I see there are no Spanish TDs listed in the WBF, so it is pointless and I refuse to give her the satisfaction. I just hope she doesn't come to play for a while when I am directing, I don't think she will. Personally I think directors should be able to direct without fear of arguments, intimidation and recriminations on this level. This is the second time she has done this with me & she once did it to someone else, even threatening them with a lawyer. (She is actually a lawyer, it must be why she just keeps arguing! Apologies to lawyers out there.) Right now I just feel like giving up directing, what happens next time I have to rule something she or her partner doesn't like? Sigh. Yes, the club president supports my decision, but I am fearful for the next time.
Thank you for the humourous posts too, guys! They helped.
I support everything you have said, done and how you handled it. Support from Gordon and the other replies on this thread is also appreciated.
I’ve been TDing for 25 years now and come across all sorts of ‘fearful’ situations in the past and thought about giving up. Some people used to make the hairs on my neck stand up. But please don’t let this make you give up; I’m sure you have the support of many of your club members with the actions you have taken. Take strength from it.
If anything I find Best Behaviour at Bridge BB@B Laws 74, 90, 91 are worth a read, and also have a chat with other Club TDs to share advice on how to handle these situations.
Good luck and Happy TDing,
Steve
I am sorry to hear that it has come down to this. Yes I can understand how unpleasant it is to be questioned and (basically) attacked about an action/decision you have made.
I don't have any suggestion on a way to move forward, for you and the other members of the club. I just hope you don't think that you are alone over this.
One thought that I have is that you could make a written report to the committee and ask them to consider whether sanctions, by them, should be the next action. From what you say it looks as if she might be a repeat offender.
Good luck
CMOT_Dibbler
If you are affiliated to the AEB then I think you should ask them. Not having a WBF TD is no reason not to listen to them - indeed if they are your governing body you should listen to them in preference to me, though I do rather hope we would both say the same thing about this!
Thank you Gordon.
Another thing possibly that could of eased things on the evening was to consult with three or four other present Directors and/or experienced players and come to a decision together.
I was the only director there, but I did communicate with the other qualified director & club president, who said I should apply the penalty.
I did write to the AEB (yes we are affiliated) by email on Fri Feb 22, at 11am. I checked on the following Wednesday that they had received my query, and they said yes, they are looking at it. Next time I will come here first too! Thank you for such good service.