| |
BGonline.org Forums
Time to stir the cauldron again... Appeals committee
Posted By: mfic In Response To: Time to stir the cauldron again... Appeals committee (Chuck Bower)
Date: Thursday, 29 October 2009, at 6:11 a.m.
As usual I got here late (sorry that I don't have the time to be here more often). YES, I do not provide (and my printed 2009 Modified U.S. Backgammon Rules and Procedures says so) a player-appeal-option that requires me (the director) to form an Appeals Committee for a second chance to get a different ruling.
Most of the rulings that occur, imho, are very clear per the published rules. Whenever I am called to rule and after listening to both players, and at my discretion asking any observers, I make my ruling. Typically sighting the particular USBGR&P rule that pertains. If I am unsure, I may decide to form a committee for a discussion, but that is at my option not the player's right; then I make my ruling.
I have read the complete thread (through 10/28 9pm)prior to inserting this feedback. I agree with much of the expressed thinking. Lessening the pressure on the director is an opt-out of his/her responsibility to conduct their event. The reasons offered for why it is disruptive to event flow, both the two players involved and the appeal's committee players are valid. Offloading the decision to those who have no responsibility for any outfall of the ruling just does not sit well with me.
Requiring a 3-0 vote of the Appeals Committee to overturn my original ruling is a plus for me to re-consider allowing my events to give a player the right to request an Appeal. I remain concerned about "unrealistic requests" causing disruption in event's flow. Perhaps I will experiment with my June and December 2010 ABT events as a trial to see how many unrealistic requests occur.
Consider the "cauldron stirred"
___________patrick (the MFIC)
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.