Chris3875 Posted March 17, 2012 Report Share Posted March 17, 2012 Australia. Today I was asked about this situation which occurred yesterday when I was neither playing nor directing. I don't know the hands but I don't think it matters. Declarer (North) led the Jack of spades and before East could play a card dummy pushed forward the singleton spade in dummy and West played a small spade. My thoughts would be that the card was misplayed by dummy (Law 45D) and West should have beeen given the opportunity to retract her card and East is given the opportunity play. But Law 45D doesn't quite cover this situation in my opinion. What is the correct ruling and Law please. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMB1 Posted March 17, 2012 Report Share Posted March 17, 2012 West's play is out of rotation but there is no penalty (Law 57C - in the English edition of the laws, you must remember to turn the page after reading Laws 57A/B!). Dummy (the hand) has not played the singleton, but dummy (the player) has "illegally suggested that it be played". East may play any legal card to this trick and the cards apparently played by dummy and West are the cards played to the trick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mycroft Posted March 17, 2012 Report Share Posted March 17, 2012 ...and East is allowed to know that West is going to, and wanted to, play the spade she did. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iviehoff Posted March 21, 2012 Report Share Posted March 21, 2012 You also need read Law 57, especially 57C, a few pages further on. If declarer does indeed play from dummy before LHO plays, then RHO is legally permitted to play ahead of LHO, see Law 57C. However if LHO plays first, RHO loses that right, it is not something that he is entitled to, rather it is something he won't be penalised for. However here declarer has not played from dummy, rather dummy acted without instruction, so 57C does not apply. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfi Posted March 21, 2012 Report Share Posted March 21, 2012 You also need read Law 57, especially 57C, a few pages further on. If declarer does indeed play from dummy before LHO plays, then RHO is legally permitted to play ahead of LHO, see Law 57C. However if LHO plays first, RHO loses that right, it is not something that he is entitled to, rather it is something he won't be penalised for. However here declarer has not played from dummy, rather dummy acted without instruction, so 57C does not apply. As RMB1 points out, Law 57C also covers the situation (as here) where dummy has "illegally suggested that it be played." West's play is not subject to rectification and is authorised information for East. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vampyr Posted March 22, 2012 Report Share Posted March 22, 2012 However here declarer has not played from dummy, rather dummy acted without instruction, so 57C does not apply. But lots of times when this happens declarer never actually names the card; in cases like this can the card ever be considered played? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.