| |
BGonline.org Forums
Nordic Open Ruling in Quarterfinals -- O'Laughlin vs. Mitrelis
Posted By: Bill Riles In Response To: Nordic Open Ruling in Quarterfinals -- O'Laughlin vs. Mitrelis (lucky)
Date: Monday, 28 March 2016, at 2:30 p.m.
I watched the entire episode live. I did not have the sound on for most of the match but did turn it on for the controversy.
Several thoughts in response to your comments.
I know Ed well. Yes, Ed plays sloppily and should focus on cleaning it up -- one hand play, less mistakes, etc. Guaranteed it is all careless, thoughtless, incidental, and not malicious.
Any prior Ed mistakes were of no consequence to the immediate issue. Only the facts of the exact incident mattered. There was no argument as to what happened, the sequence it happened, etc. It was straightforward.
Other occurrences earlier in the match, if they were frequent and if they bothered Mitrelis, should have been brought to the attention of the TD for resolution.
I do not know Mitrelis, I have met him a time or two. I do not believe it was his intention to cheat at the time of the incident. He thoughtlessly made a mistake. What made him look worse with the passage of time in the incident was his arguing and his refusals to accept an obvious ruling, etc. And some of his arguments and refusals were non-sensical, increasingly so. Unfortunately, he made himself look bad where it should have been a non-event for both of them.
Unfortunately, the rules are written a bit differently in various locales. I wish we had a common international rule set -- but that is a discussion for another day. I think Steen and the Committee handled the whole situation professionally and properly in accordance with their rules. In the States I would have ruled that Ed got to replay his illegal play and that Mitrelis had to re-roll. I think everything was null and void after Mitrelis moved Ed's checker.
Had Mitrelis had to re-roll he had some disastrous numbers in the cup which could have easily cost him a gammon and the match on that game -- 1-6 and 1-4, as examples. Ed several times offered a compromise solution (a compromise in Ed's mind as he apparently also thought Mitrelis should re-roll). I thought this gracious and sporting, though Mitrelis would not hear of it. Personally, I don't think a compromise should be allowed -- the rules are the rules. As it turned out, Ed's offered compromise was the actual final ruling.
Fortunately, in this circumstance, the event and the ruling ultimately had absolutely no bearing on the outcome of the game or the match. It did not determine or influence anything. It could have, it did not. That is a good thing.
We should all attempt to familiarize ourselves with the rules and we can avoid many of these situations.
The foremost take on all of this for everyone is that, other than putting a checker on the bar, a player should ABSOLUTELY NEVER move the opponent's checkers.
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.