APPEAL no. 30 |

Appeals Committee
Chairman | Steen Møller | DEN
Members | Tommy Sandsmark Herman De Wael | NOR BEL
Scribe | Herman De Wael | BEL

Event
1998 World Championships
McConnell Trophy | Round of 32
Countries
USA | v | France
Players
NS | Wexler | Gwozdzinsky
EW | Renoux | Certain-Michalet
Board
Board 3. Dealer South. EW Game
| ª | A Q J 9 |
© | Q 10
¨ | Q 6 3
§ | 10 9 7 3
ª | 8 4 3 |  | ª | 10 5
© | K J 4 3 | © | 9 7 2
¨ | J 9 5 | ¨ | A 8 7 2
§ | 8 5 4 | § | K J 6 2
| ª | K 7 6 2 |
© | A 8 6 5
¨ | K 10 4
§ | A Q
West |  | North |  | East |  | South
|  |  |  |  |  | 1NT
Pass |  | (Pass) |  |  |  |
Result
4ª+1: +450
Facts
The director was called with the tray on the North-East side of the screen. North had not noticed that partner South had opened the bidding and had taken a Pass out of the bidding box. She had almost put it on the tray, and it may even have touched it, but she had not let go of it. When she did notice her partner's opening, she wanted to change the card, and bid 2¨.
TD's Decision
The director determined that the bidding card had not left the hand, so that the call could be changed according to Regulation 15/1 of the General Conditions of Contest. 'If screens are in use, the bidding cards are removed from the box and placed in the tray, … Any call selected and taken from the bidding box may be changed provided it has not been placed and released from the hand (but Law 73F2 may apply)' (Law 73F2 deals with illegal deception - ed.) The Director ruled that North be allowed to choose her final call in this round. The bidding proceeded to 4ª and this contract was made with an overtrick.

Appellants
E/W
Players' Comments
North repeated the statement that she gave to the director. East said the tray was passed with two green cards. South stated she noticed the tray being passed, and drawn back, but that there had been no green card at her right. North was very upset at the way East had treated her.

Committee's Comments
Although this seems like a purely technical problem, the Committee acknowledged that the Director had ruled under Law 85, Rulings on Disputed Facts, which includes a right to appeal. However, the story presented by the Appealing side to the Committee seemed unconvincing.
Committee's Decision
The facts, as determined by the director, are found to be correct. His ruling is upheld and the result unchanged. The appealing side should not have challenged a technical ruling, and should certainly not have protested so aggressively at the table. East West were given a severe warning as to their conduct at the table.
Relevant Laws
Law 73 F
Deposit
Returned |
Forfeited | X

Return to Top of page | To main Championship page