[blackshoe]

IMO it's worse for a qualified director to make his own ruling at the table than for an ordinary player. After all, the qualified director ought to know better.

[barmar]

blackshoe, on 2019-June-02, 08:25, said:

Consequences for which side?

The context we're discussing is when the non-offenders cause their own damage through an ESE. So only consequences to the NOS.

[pran]

blackshoe, on 2019-June-02, 12:27, said:

IMO it's worse for a qualified director to make his own ruling at the table than for an ordinary player. After all, the qualified director ought to know better.

Quite true.
But in ordinary club events we frequently have a playing Director who prefers to play bridge rather than be bothered with every trivial case.
And we have several players who are fairly competent with at least the most trivial cases. They do of course consult and seek advice when they feel unsure.

Serious events with non-playing directors are of course different.

[blackshoe]

pran, on 2019-June-02, 15:57, said:

Quite true.
But in ordinary club events we frequently have a playing Director who prefers to play bridge rather than be bothered with every trivial case.
And we have several players who are fairly competent with at least the most trivial cases. They do of course consult and seek advice when they feel unsure.

Serious events with non-playing directors are of course different.

Whoa! I've been a playing director. It never occurred to me to take that attitude. IMO someone who "prefers to play bridge" rather than do the job should not sign up for the job.

[pran]

blackshoe, on 2019-June-02, 17:36, said:

Whoa! I've been a playing director. It never occurred to me to take that attitude. IMO someone who "prefers to play bridge" rather than do the job should not sign up for the job.

I wonder if you got this wrong?
The Director of course responds if/when called, but he sees no reason to react for not having been called when a correct ruling has been made by another player who knows his things.

My experience is that most average or better Norwegian players are fully competent to handle trivial irregularities correctly and can be trusted to seek advice in more difficult situations.
Do you have a different experience in your clubs?

[weejonnie]

pran, on 2019-June-03, 00:35, said:

I wonder if you got this wrong?
The Director of course responds if/when called, but he sees no reason to react for not having been called when a correct ruling has been made by another player who knows his things.

My experience is that most average or better Norwegian players are fully competent to handle trivial irregularities correctly and can be trusted to seek advice in more difficult situations.
Do you have a different experience in your clubs?

I am sure there is a law about players not applying the laws. Somewhere around 81C. Although this seems to mean that the director can let the players make rectification and apply damages but he'll correct them at the end.

[pran]

weejonnie, on 2019-June-03, 04:15, said:

I am sure there is a law about players not applying the laws. Somewhere around 81C. Although this seems to mean that the director can let the players make rectification and apply damages but he'll correct them at the end.

For technicality see

Law 81D said:

The Director may delegate any of his duties to assistants, but he is not thereby relieved of responsibility for their correct performance.

and consider (as a technicality) that the Director delegates his duties (within limits) to fellow players who he concerns capable to help him.

Satisfied?

[blackshoe]

pran, on 2019-June-03, 00:35, said:

I wonder if you got this wrong?
The Director of course responds if/when called, but he sees no reason to react for not having been called when a correct ruling has been made by another player who knows his things.

My experience is that most average or better Norwegian players are fully competent to handle trivial irregularities correctly and can be trusted to seek advice in more difficult situations.
Do you have a different experience in your clubs?

There are a lot of players here, including a few who still have a director's card, but haven't directed in a couple of decades, who think they know the rules, but are wrong. There are players here (I'm one) who do know the rules, including the one that says that rulings are in the purview of the director, not the players. I admit that lately I haven't seen a playing director, so that's a difference.

[pran]

pran, on 2019-June-03, 00:35, said:

I wonder if you got this wrong?
The Director of course responds if/when called, but he sees no reason to react for not having been called when a correct ruling has been made by another player who knows his things.

My experience is that most average or better Norwegian players are fully competent to handle trivial irregularities correctly and can be trusted to seek advice in more difficult situations.
Do you have a different experience in your clubs?

blackshoe, on 2019-June-03, 08:27, said:

There are a lot of players here, including a few who still have a director's card, but haven't directed in a couple of decades, who think they know the rules, but are wrong. There are players here (I'm one) who do know the rules, including the one that says that rulings are in the purview of the director, not the players. I admit that lately I haven't seen a playing director, so that's a difference.

After almost 40 years experience as Director I have a pretty good knowledge of which players I can trust and which not. And playing directors are common here except at the highest tournament levels.

[Vampyr]

blackshoe, on 2019-June-02, 17:36, said:

Whoa! I've been a playing director. It never occurred to me to take that attitude. IMO someone who "prefers to play bridge" rather than do the job should not sign up for the job.

That is a bit unfair. Restricting the pool of playing directors to those who love making rulings would reduce the pool of volunteers, and see the same half-dozen people having all of the responsibility.

[blackshoe]

Vampyr, on 2019-June-03, 11:18, said:

That is a bit unfair. Restricting the pool of playing directors to those who love making rulings would reduce the pool of volunteers, and see the same half-dozen people having all of the responsibility.

Where did I say anything about "love making rulings"?

[barmar]

I've never seen a playing director ask players to make their own rulings because he doesn't want to be bothered. In my experience as another competent director at a club, the only times I've seen a director ask me to make a ruling have been because the director stepped out to the restroom (this can happen whether they're playing or not) or the ruling was at the table where the director is playing (they'll usually handle routine rulings themselves, but if there's a judgement call involved it may be best to ask someone unbiased).

[pran]

barmar, on 2019-June-05, 18:55, said:

I've never seen a playing director ask players to make their own rulings because he doesn't want to be bothered. In my experience as another competent director at a club, the only times I've seen a director ask me to make a ruling have been because the director stepped out to the restroom (this can happen whether they're playing or not) or the ruling was at the table where the director is playing (they'll usually handle routine rulings themselves, but if there's a judgement call involved it may be best to ask someone unbiased).

Neither have I.

[Cyberyeti]

barmar, on 2019-June-05, 18:55, said:

I've never seen a playing director ask players to make their own rulings because he doesn't want to be bothered. In my experience as another competent director at a club, the only times I've seen a director ask me to make a ruling have been because the director stepped out to the restroom (this can happen whether they're playing or not) or the ruling was at the table where the director is playing (they'll usually handle routine rulings themselves, but if there's a judgement call involved it may be best to ask someone unbiased).

I've also seen a playing director who hasn't played a board ask the other qualfied directors in the room if they have to avoid being unable to play it themselves.

[pran]

Cyberyeti, on 2019-June-06, 03:08, said:

I've also seen a playing director who hasn't played a board ask the other qualfied directors in the room if they have to avoid being unable to play it themselves.

Sure, that is quite OK. It is called directors cooperation and happens whenever needed.

[barmar]

Cyberyeti, on 2019-June-06, 03:08, said:

I've also seen a playing director who hasn't played a board ask the other qualfied directors in the room if they have to avoid being unable to play it themselves.

While I can understand it, I don't think I've seen anyone do it. They usually just try to minimize how much of the hand they have to see while making the ruling, or try to forget the hand, and if neither of these is successfully they give themselves avg-minus when they get to the board.

[blackshoe]

Many years ago, at a club team game, the director was playing on one team when there was a call from the table where the other half of his team was playing. So the director asked somebody else to take the call. Unfortunately that worthy apparently hadn't directed in some years, because shortly after he went to the calling table, the player who had originally called exclaimed loudly "I want a real director!" I remember this not just because of this comment, but because the resulting brou-ha-ha caused me to blow the 3NT contract I was trying to make.