[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]

 nige1, on 2013-October-07, 07:07, said:

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

Appeals do not go to "Director-panels".

[nige1]

 gnasher, on 2013-October-07, 07:16, said:

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, on 2013-October-07, 09:50, said:

Appeals do not go to "Director-panels".

Gnasher's Rulings Review document said:

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.