Your ruling?

[PhilG007]

You are TD in a tournament. You are summoned to a table. The defenders tell you that declarer

had called for a card from dummy naming a suit but not its rank.As there were more than one

on the table, Dummy had asked "which one?" And declarer had replied "the high one of course"

The defender next to play objected as declarer had not specifically stated a high card in his call

and he(the defender) claimed he didn't know which card to follow with due to declarer's vagueness.

How would you deal with this issue as Director?

[wank]

well now the defender does know which card declarer wanted so he can play happily. no problem. stop whining.

 

for future reference, 'club' always means 'low club'.

[lamford]

well now the defender does know which card declarer wanted so he can play happily. no problem. stop whining.

 

for future reference, 'club' always means 'low club'.

Not always. Law 46B <snip> "(except when declarer’s different intention is incontrovertible) <snip>". The TD should be called immediately, and then will decide whether he considers this applies.

[gordontd]

well now the defender does know which card declarer wanted so he can play happily. no problem. stop whining.

 

for future reference, 'club' always means 'low club'.

If this were true it would lead you to having to deal with a change of designation, so how would you deal with that?

[wank]

If this were true it would lead you to having to deal with a change of designation, so how would you deal with that?

 

i'd deal with it by de-editing the OP to make my answer look daft.

[Zelandakh]

i'd deal with it by de-editing the OP to make my answer look daft.

What was the original scenario?

[robert2734]

Club means low club unless declarers intent is incontrovertible.

[blackshoe]

Dummy is presumably aware of Law 46B2, unless he's been playing for less than a week. Thus his question is a violation of Law 43A1{c}: "Dummy must not participate in the play, nor may he communicate anything about the play to declarer." Such violation is specifically subject to procedural penalty (Law 46B1: "Dummy is liable to penalty under Law 90 for any violation of the limitations listed in A1 and A2 above." Further, "must not" is the strongest prohibition in the laws. If you do something that you "must not" do, IMO a good director will look for a good reason not to give a PP, and not finding one, he will give it. "It's just not done" is not a good reason.

 

I would start by reading 46B2 and asking dummy if he was aware of this law when he asked the question. If he says yes, I read 43A1{c} and 46B1 and give him a standard PP. I am inclined to set this at 10% of a top (the EBU standard) in North American club games, despite the "ACBL standard" being 25% of a top, as I think that's too harsh, particularly if you're giving out PPs when you should, rather than "almost never". As to the change of designation, I will investigate, and if I find declarer's intention to play a high card incontrovertible (i.e., there is no doubt in my military mind that's what he meant) I'll let him change it. Otherwise not. Law 46B, Law 45C4{a}.