Misplay due to poor eyesight

[dcrc2]

Declarer is a player who is known to have poor eyesight. Midway through the play in 2♥, RHO leads a club and declarer, seeing this as a spade, puts the ♠A on it. This isn't a revoke - declarer is out of clubs. Declarer realises his mistake after everyone at the table looks surprised by his ♠A play. Now declarer wants to take his ♠A back and the TD is asked whether he is allowed to do this.

 

As much as we try to accommodate players with disabilities, I suspect we can't just allow declarer to take his card back. But can the card be taken back at the request of the opponents? And if so, is it appropriate for the TD to suggest this to them?

[nige1]

The Director's duties and powers normally include also the following: to waive rectification for cause, in his discretion, upon the request of the non-offending side.

IMO, defenders should ask the director to allow declarer to take his card back and the director should aquiesce. If defenders don't know that they can make such a request, then the director should tell them about their option.

[gszes]

IMHO since it would be OBVIOUS that this was not a "blunder" but a pure case of mistaken identity there should be zero problems with merely calling the director over and allowing the "mistaken" card to be returned to dummy for a more proper play. The rules allow discretion for "expert" players to recover from such mistakes since it was "obviously" unintentional so why not make allowance for the physically infirm? BTW anyone should be able to call the director in these cases. Do not "pressure" the opps into being good/bad guys.

[blackshoe]

IMHO since it would be OBVIOUS that this was not a "blunder" but a pure case of mistaken identity there should be zero problems with merely calling the director over and allowing the "mistaken" card to be returned to dummy for a more proper play. The rules allow discretion for "expert" players to recover from such mistakes since it was "obviously" unintentional so why not make allowance for the physically infirm? BTW anyone should be able to call the director in these cases. Do not "pressure" the opps into being good/bad guys.

Which rule allows this discretion? I can't find it in the law book. As far as I can see, it's a played card, and there's no provision in law for retracting it. That said, it seems pretty mean-spirited to insist on the letter of the law in this case. As director, though, I might suggest that in future this player ask people to call out the cards as they play them (also not in the law book, but it seems a reasonable accommodation).

 

We had a player here who was legally blind. He could see the cards in his hand if he held them up close and had extra lighting. So he brought a desk lamp with him. He couldn't read the bidding cards on the table or handle the bidding box, or read played cards on the table, so the rest of the table would use the bidding boxes, but would also speak their calls, and would speak the cards as they played them. He had an amazing memory for the hands, so his disability didn't slow him down much. Regrettably, he passed away a few years ago, well into his 90s and still playing right up to the end.

[Cyberyeti]

Which rule allows this discretion? I can't find it in the law book. As far as I can see, it's a played card, and there's no provision in law for retracting it. That said, it seems pretty mean-spirited to insist on the letter of the law in this case. As director, though, I might suggest that in future this player ask people to call out the cards as they play them (also not in the law book, but it seems a reasonable accommodation).

 

We had a player here who was legally blind. He could see the cards in his hand if he held them up close and had extra lighting. So he brought a desk lamp with him. He couldn't read the bidding cards on the table or handle the bidding box, or read played cards on the table, so the rest of the table would use the bidding boxes, but would also speak their calls, and would speak the cards as they played them. He had an amazing memory for the hands, so his disability didn't slow him down much. Regrettably, he passed away a few years ago, well into his 90s and still playing right up to the end.

 

Not intending a hijack, but we used to have a pair with similar disability who always sat and had a really bright light on their table. I played them 2 or 3 times and every time, within minutes after leaving the table I had a splitting headache from the light. Do I have any rights here ?

 

In the case of that pair, the wife had the eyesight issues and the husband called everybody's cards.

[blackshoe]

Do I have any rights here ?

Not, I think, in today's world. Unfortunately.

[johnu]

Not intending a hijack, but we used to have a pair with similar disability who always sat and had a really bright light on their table. I played them 2 or 3 times and every time, within minutes after leaving the table I had a splitting headache from the light. Do I have any rights here ?

 

You could wear sunglasses B-)

[billw55]

aaand another case for four color cards.

 

[/dead horse]

[Cyberyeti]

You could wear sunglasses B-)

 

A: I don't own any

B: if I did, the chance of me taking them to a darkish bridge room would be minimal

[barmar]

We had a player here who was legally blind. He could see the cards in his hand if he held them up close and had extra lighting. So he brought a desk lamp with him. He couldn't read the bidding cards on the table or handle the bidding box, or read played cards on the table, so the rest of the table would use the bidding boxes, but would also speak their calls, and would speak the cards as they played them.

I've played against a number of pairs like that, including one at the NABC in Chicago 2 weeks ago. That's been the usual procedure.

 

While I'm sympathetic to the player in the OP, and would probably offer to let him take his card back, I think he should switch to this procedure to mitigate the problem in the first place.

[par31]

As much as we try to accommodate players with disabilities, I suspect we can't just allow declarer to take his card back. But can the card be taken back at the request of the opponents? And if so, is it appropriate for the TD to suggest this to them?

I don't see any justification for allowing this. 47F2 is clear that the card cannot be withdrawn, and 81C5 is not relevant as there has been no rectification. In practice, I'd assume the players would usually just illegally allow a change of card without calling the TD. If the defenders are both concerned about following the laws and sufficiently competent to do so, they could presumably not allow the change of card then manipulate the subsequent play to produce what they consider an equitable result; I don't think this breaches 72A as their "chief" object need not be their only object.