| |
BGonline.org Forums
Paris Ruling, Committee
Posted By: Phil Simborg In Response To: Paris Ruling, Committee (Stick)
Date: Saturday, 31 October 2009, at 9:43 p.m.
I believe the ruling committee can and should interpret a ruling if questioned, and in this case it is clear that a Crawford cube is offered and refused and the cube stays at 1.
As for the handling of poor sportsmanship, that, in my opinion, is a matter that is totally up to the discretion of the tournament director and is not something that should be subject to appeal. If a tournament director tells two people to shut up and play and assigns a monitor and warns them both that anything further will be penalized, the tournament director should penalize as he feels appropriate. These situations are never black and white.
The guy who called the other one an asshole might have been provoked by the other person glaring had him or making faces or gestures or mumbling nasty things under his breath, etc.
If I were tournament director I would get the monitor's take on what happened and I might issue a further warning or I might take even stronger action including forfeiture of the match or expulsion from the tournament. In any event, I do not believe this would be a matter to appeal except to appeal the director's right to take action he feels appropriate, and of course, any good committee would agree that the director has the authority.
This is simply another example of why I believe the rules need to be clearer and more specific as to what can be appealed and what can not.
Example, in racquetball you can appeal to an official if you think the referee is not applying rules properly, but you cannot appeal his judgment calls (unless there are linesmen to appeal to, and even then, they can't overturn a ref who calls a hinder or screen, as those are purely judgment).
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.