"Oh sh..." (Law 25)
On similar forums there has been the odd cause celebre where a player has done something stupid, realised, said something along the lines of "Oh, sh..." and tried to recover.
In a recent match W, in second seat after a pass from S, took out the Stop card and removed a number of bidding cards from the box, got them close to the table, said "Oh, sh..." and returned them to the box. Had the TD been called (I will clarify in a later post), the conversation would have gone something like this:
W: Director, can I speak to you away from the table?
TD: Sure, but when we return it is my decision as to how much of what you tell me I need to pass on to the other players.
[away from the table]
W: I took the 2NT cards out of the box, intending to show a balanced 20-22, but then woke up to the fact that 2NT in our system shows a weak minor two-suiter, and I should have opened a Multi. Do the Laws give me any basis for recovering from this?
TD:You removed the bidding cards from the box with apparent intent so you have made the call. It is not an unintended call within the meaning of Law 25. If you wish to change the call, you can only do so if LHO agrees. If LHO does not agree, the original call stands and the problem is UI to your partner, AI to the opponents.
[back at the table]
TD: W has asked me whether she may change her call and on the basis of what she has told me I have ruled that it was not an unintended call so she can only change it if LHO agrees. Otherwise the original call stands [repeats statement about UI/AI]. W, please put the call back on the table; E, please alert or announce if appropriate.
[2NT put on the table; E alerts]
TD: W, in the light of what I have explained, do you wish to change your call?
W: No, I'll stick with 2NT.
TD: Please proceed with the auction.
E: 3D (no alert from W)
N, on lead, asks about 2NT and is told "Weak minor two suiter"; asks about 3D and is told "To play"; asks about 3NT and is told "does not exist: she is required to pass".
N holds 4, J62, K63, AQ7532 and elects to lead a heart rather than a club, and the contract is made. A club lead beats it trivially. E/W have a 5-4 spade fit (W has the 5). The normal contract is 4S which equally trivially goes off (and duly did at the other table).
E/W's system card is conclusive that 2NT shows a weak minor two suiter.
E's hand is QJ65, Q103, 10974, 104.
N says she was put off a club lead by W's actions.
Has the hypothetical TD handled it correctly, and is there any basis for an adjustment?