End of appeals in WBF events

[jallerton]

From Tuesday's Bali Bulletin:

 

Starting next year in Sanya, Rona said, there will be no more appeals committees at world championships. The system in use will be the same as the one introduced at the 6th Open European Championships in Ostend, Belgium, in June. In that system, a player not satisfied with a tournament director’s ruling will be allowed to ask for a review of the process by which the TD reached the decision. If the review of the process determines that it was not adequate, an adjustment could be made. There was only one such request during the two weeks of the tournament in Ostend, although Grattan Endicott, one of the reviewers, said there were a few cases that might have been reviewed had requests been made.

[nige1]

Starting next year in Sanya, Rona said, there will be no more appeals committees at world championships. The system in use will be the same asthe one introduced at the 6th Open European Championships in Ostend, Belgium, in June. In that system, a player not satisfied with a tournament director's ruling will be allowed to ask for a review of the process by which the TD reached the decision. If the review of the process determines that it was not adequate, an adjustment could be made. There was only one such request during the two weeks of the tournament in Ostend, although Grattan Endicott, one of the reviewers, said there were a few cases that might have been reviewed had requests been made.

The end of our wishes, the end of our wives,

The end of our loves, and the end of our lives,

The end of conjunction, 'twixt mistress and male,

Tho' the head may design, has its end in the tail.

The end of appeal-committees, the end of transparency,

The end of case-law, the end of catharsis. We hope ...

The end of enormous WBF expenses but not the end of the game of Bridge :)

[ArtK78]

We can get by without appeals committees. At least until there is some major controversy after a "conclave" of directors makes a ruling.

 

(If a conclave of directors makes a ruling, should there be white smoke eminating from the conclave from the burning of the hand records?)

[Vampyr]

We can get by without appeals committees. At least until there is some major controversy after a "conclave" of directors makes a ruling.

 

I predict that any and all such cases will provoke a major controversy. And the WBF seems to be treading the path the ACBL has already blazed -- Law 92 can be ignored if that is what we prefer.

 

A lot of trouble could be saved between now and 2017 if the drafting committee just didn't bother, and let all SOs make up their own version of the Laws.

[lamford]

We can get by without appeals committees. At least until there is some major controversy after a "conclave" of directors makes a ruling.

 

(If a conclave of directors makes a ruling, should there be white smoke eminating from the conclave from the burning of the hand records?)

Is that the collective noun for directors? I thought "drunkenship", "chattering" or "hastiness", which are collective nouns, were more appropriate.

[nigel_k]

Sorry I didn't read all of the other thread on this, but what is the expectation that this practice will filter down to national and club level? Where I live there is a truly massive gap between the playing skill of most directors and even above average players. Rulings that involve bridge judgment would be a real problem.

[blackshoe]

Around here, at Regional level there are usually several directors, I think. At the Sectional level, however, I've never seen more than one. Kind of hard to have a "conclave" of one. Clubs, well, the typical club game has one director, although there may be some qualified club directors playing. Not sure a "conclave" here would be much different than a committee. Fact is, though, that IME club directors hate committees. If they have an excuse not to have one, they'll use it.

[iviehoff]

Fact is, though, that IME club directors hate committees.

When has anyone ever enjoyed having the quality of their work assessed? But those of us who suffer from the risk of incompetence know it makes sense.

[paulg]

Sorry I didn't read all of the other thread on this, but what is the expectation that this practice will filter down to national and club level? Where I live there is a truly massive gap between the playing skill of most directors and even above average players. Rulings that involve bridge judgment would be a real problem.

The EBL introduced this for the European Open Championships earlier this year but then, even though planned, did not continue with it at the European Youth Championships because the directors were less experienced.

 

I hope this suggests common sense will be used, even at European and World level.

 

I doubt it'll be discussed much in the UK but I wouldn't mind certain English events just using TDs - Premier League and the Summer Congress at Brighton are two events where the top directors are easily good enough and there are sufficient experts around to ask. I doubt anyone wants it in Scotland, where the TDs are less experienced with high-level events.

[blackshoe]

When has anyone ever enjoyed having the quality of their work assessed? But those of us who suffer from the risk of incompetence know it makes sense.

That's a reason, I suppose, but it wasn't among the reasons I was thinking of, those being "they're a PITA, and they take up too much time".

[nige1]

The EBL introduced this for the European Open Championships earlier this year but then, even though planned, did not continue with it at the European Youth Championships because the directors were less experienced.

I hope this suggests common sense will be used, even at European and World level.

I doubt it'll be discussed much in the UK but I wouldn't mind certain English events just using TDs - Premier League and the Summer Congress at Brighton are two events where the top directors are easily good enough and there are sufficient experts around to ask. I doubt anyone wants it in Scotland, where the TDs are less experienced with high-level events.

IMO, the higher the level, the more valuable are appeals-committees. They

• Allow players to purge their demons,
• Provide independent review,
• Help ensure fairness,
• Show justice being done,
• Point out flaws in rules,
• Create what amounts to case-law, and
• Spawn books of case-history/comment to entertain and educate players, directors and rule-makers.

[chrism]

When has anyone ever enjoyed having the quality of their work assessed? But those of us who suffer from the risk of incompetence know it makes sense.

I dislike club committees, but certainly not because of any fear of an adverse assessment of my work. If I make an error I want the players to get the correct ruling, and I want to learn to do better in future. In any case, for the most part committees are making a deeper analysis of the bridge issues involved in a ruling, so that overturning the table ruling is by no means necessarily an indication that the director erred.

My objections to committees are:

- They delay the results at a time when players are anxious to get away (our games are held in the evening, ending around 11pm);

- They impose on the time of those who generously agree to sit (though we do give a free play to committee members as partial recompense);

- They cost the club money (3 free plays);

- It can be hard to find a suitable committee.

Occasionally I have organized a post-game committee via email, but the lack of easy back-and-forth interaction makes that unsatisfactory, and it is even more time-consuming, with results delayed interminably.

 

We will continue to have committees (about once every 3 months, in practice), because the players deserve fair, independent arbitration, but I will continue to regret the need to hold them.

[paulg]

IMO, the higher the level, the more valuable are appeals-committees. They

• Allow players to purge their demons,
• Provide independent review,
• Help ensure fairness,
• Show justice being done,
• Point out flaws in rules,
• Create what amounts to case-law, and
• Spawn books of case-history/comment to entertain and educate players, directors and rule-makers.

I think players should pay for their own therapy.

 

We have lamford and gnasher, amongst others, to point flaws.

 

Casebooks are expensive to produce and that, in reality, few people read. This forum is more useful than the casebooks.

 

You haven't convinced me that an appeals committee will produce a fairer result than suitably experienced directors with access to world-class players.

[Jeremy69A]

When people started getting excited at poor umpiring decisions in this summers Ashes tests they began to appreciate that an awful lot of the best umpires come from England and Australia and could not stand in the series. In a WBF event such as Bali the best directors may be present but their effect is diluted by the "need" to have directors from each of the zones. When players are polled their minds are on other things and they often, I feel, give an answer designed to get rids of the polling TD as soon as possible.

Neither of these things bode well for the end of appeal committees although given the speech at each captains meeting which includes "Don't even think of appealing because we have the best directors on the planet, who are never wrong and you WILL lose your money" it was perhaps inevitable.

Theoretically there should be some cost advantage as the dozen or so appeal committee members put up in 7 star hotels will no longer be needed and travelling expenses from Ursa Major will also be reduced.

I wondered whether for Bali they had considered having judges in the Miss World competition, which took place in the same building, doubling up as appeal committee members.

[aguahombre]

Nige1's tongue was firmly protruding from his cheek during part of his post.

 

Sometime we might want to share what we believe experienced TD's are experienced AT. Over here, it seems seasoned professional TD's have honed their law-knowledge, organizational and people skills.

 

Bob Dischner, Max Hardy, and perhaps about five others in ACBL history whom I won't name because they are still alive and active found the time to develope Bridge judgement to apply to their rulings effectively. We still need comittees. Mere consultation with expert players of their choice won't get it done.

[axman]

 

When people started getting excited at poor umpiring decisions in this summers Ashes tests they began to appreciate that an awful lot of the best umpires come from England and Australia and could not stand in the series. In a WBF event such as Bali the best directors may be present but their effect is diluted by the "need" to have directors from each of the zones. When players are polled their minds are on other things and they often, I feel, give an answer designed to get rids of the polling TD as soon as possible.

 

Neither of these things bode well for the end of appeal committees although given the speech at each captains meeting which includes "Don't even think of appealing because we have the best directors on the planet, who are never wrong and you WILL lose your money" it was perhaps inevitable.

 

Theoretically there should be some cost advantage as the dozen or so appeal committee members put up in 7 star hotels will no longer be needed and travelling expenses from Ursa Major will also be reduced.

I wondered whether for Bali they had considered having judges in the Miss World competition, which took place in the same building, doubling up as appeal committee members.

 

hmmm. we have the best is not synonymous with being able to pass muster. Inclusive of those referenced.

[nige1]

I think players should pay for their own therapy. We have lamford and gnasher, amongst others, to point flaws.

Casebooks are expensive to produce and that, in reality, few people read. This forum is more useful than the casebooks.

You haven't convinced me that an appeals committee will produce a fairer result than suitably experienced directors with access to world-class players.

• Perhaps appeals should cost more and perhaps a player should not be allowed to appeal if a certain number/percentage of his previous appeals have been rejected over the previous year. But an appeals committee does provide an audience and time for an appellant to get his grievance off his chest and it may be able to explain the reasons for its decision, in terms that he can understand. The aims of a game should include happy players.
• The ACBL and EBU produce on-line bulletins and case-books for appeals in major events. They are amusing and instructive. IMO they would be worth the effort and cost, even if consulted only by rule-makers.
• Director-reviews seem to inhibit appeals. Grattan Endicott judges that there were cases worth review that would-be appellants didn't not take further. Perhaps the perception is that a review by people from the same group who made the original decision is unlikely to change it. Judging from posts here by players, who experienced the new process, it is inefficient and slow. AFAIR Individuals had to button-hole a series of individual directors, trying to persuade them that relevant rules had been overlooked or misapplied. There seemed to be no opportunity for immediate cross-examination/counter-argument by the other side. One appellant was told that there was no point in proceeding because the weightings could be adjusted to counter-act the effect of a change. (Incidentally, weighted rulings seem to have become an even worse farce).

They took me to that big jailhouse the months and months rolled by

The jury found me guilty poor boy and the judge said you're gonna die

And yet they call this justice poor boy then justice let it be

I only killed a man who's just a fixin' to kill me

[WellSpyder]

I wondered whether for Bali they had considered having judges in the Miss World competition, which took place in the same building, doubling up as appeal committee members.

I can't help wondering whether there was an appeals process in place for Miss World for disgruntled competitors who thought the judges had got it wrong....

[gordontd]

Perhaps the perception is that a review by people from the same group who made the original decision is unlikely to change it.

But that's not the process, is it?

[nige1]

But that's not the process, is it?

It's early to judge but some perception seems to be deterring appeals to Director-panels. My guess was based on what's been written here. If I'm wrong I'll be pleased.

[gnasher]

The reviewer is not one of the directors. However, if the review is successful, the reviewer doesn't replace the ruling with his own. Instead, the ruling goes back to the directing staff for them to give another ruling.

 

www.eurobridge.org/competitions/13Oostende/Microsite/RULINGS_REVIEW.pdf

[gordontd]

It's early to judge but some perception seems to be deterring appeals to Director-panels.

Appeals do not go to "Director-panels".

[nige1]

The reviewer is not one of the directors. However, if the review is successful, the reviewer doesn't replace the ruling with his own. Instead, the ruling goes back to the directing staff for them to give another ruling.

www.eurobridge.org/competitions/13Oostende/Microsite/RULINGS_REVIEW.pdf

Appeals do not go to "Director-panels".

Reviewer will then need to be satisfied that the correct law was applied and that other TDs were consulted where appropriate. In matters involving the

judgement that was exercised by a player following unauthorised information, incorrect explanation or failure to alert, the Reviewer will clarify that suitable players have been asked appropriate questions to enable a judgmental view to be obtained. Finally the Reviewer will check that ruling that was issued based upon all the information available to the TDs was within the bounds of reasonableness. The fact that the Reviewer might have determined a slightly different ruling would not be good reason for the ruling to be varied. In the event that the process had not been followed properly in some material way, the Reviewer will ask the Chief TD to correct the failings and issue a new ruling ... The Reviewer has the power to impose a sanction in the event that a request for a review was without merit. The sanction will be quantified in IMPs or VPs as appropriate to the type of event being played.

OK, the reviewer has to persuade the directors that they've made a mistake. A "slighty different" more "reasonable" ruling may change the result of a competition but the new protocol should be enough to convince an injured player that appeal would be fraught and futile.