| |
BGonline.org Forums
ruling regarding touching checkers
Posted By: W Womack In Response To: ruling regarding touching checkers (Phil Simborg)
Date: Friday, 29 July 2011, at 9:26 p.m.
The ideal of a "guide" is pretty common in sports. Many sports organizations publish official casebooks as supplements to the rules. These case books typically present situations in the context of game play then discuss how the actual rule is to be applied in that situation. For example, there is mention in this thread of using the dice as an aid in keeping the pip count and whether or not this is a violation of the rule against use of a mechanical aid. A casebook example of this might be written as follows:
Case: Player A counts the pips for one one side then positions the dice adjacent to specific pips on the board in a manner that facilitates remembering this count while counting the other side. Player B objects that this use of the dice is illegal and ask the TD for a decision. What is the correct ruling?
Ruling: Rule (###) prohibits the use of mechanical aids during the course of play. The dice are intended only as devices to generate random numbers for play (or decisions such as board choice prior to the start of play) and are not intended as aids in counting or remembering counts. Therefore using the dice in this manner, or any other manner beyond their intended use, constitute the use of a mechanical aid and Player A should be penalized . . . Of course the case should go on to state the penalty, with the underlying rule to support it. (Which might be something that needs to be expanded in the actual rules)
OR if the governing body took the other opinion on the use of the dice in this manner the ruling might read:
The prohibition in Rule (###) is intended to apply to outside mechanical aids and does not refer to backgammon equipment normally used in the course of play. Therefore the use of the dice in this manner is not a violation of the rule and Player B's protest is denied.
Once a rulings has been codified in the case book, which ever way it happens to go, there would no longer be any question for anyone playing in a match governed by the rules of that body as to whether dice could be used as an aid in remembering pip counts. I think it is common for such case books in sports to run longer than the rules, and they allow the governing body a means to clarify rules and address situations that come up in the real world without having to rewrite or expand the basic rules. Once a ruling is in the case book it is binding and any official working under that governing body's rules must apply the ruling as detailed in the case book.
As far as it being intimidating, I think in most sports very few of the players have read the actual rule book, and even fewer would ever open a case book but they still play the game successfully.
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.