|
Exploring
the Laws
Chapter
VII
'Proprieties'
Having dealt
with bidding and play aspects of law, we have arrived at the
proprieties of the game.
The next 5 laws
define the principles under which the players are expected
to conform. Up until now all the laws have dealt with inadvertencies
with no suggestion of deliberate acts or manner.
Law
72, 'General Principles' looks at the obligation of
players to conform to the accepted procedure of the game.
These principles include
the requirement that all tournaments be played in strict accordance
with the laws, that players must never accept scores they
are not entitled to, that players should not waive penalties
(however, they may ask the director to do so), that players
should 'NEVER' try to act as a director and make table
rulings, odds on the ruling will be wrong.
This law also
makes mention of the appropriateness of an innocent side to
select advantageous options of law and that the offending
side, once having paid the prescribed penalty, can make any
call or play that profits their side. As an example, due to
an inadvertent opening call out of turn, barring partner,
the player decides to open 3NT which happens to make due to
a favourable lie of the cards.
This turns out to be a top board. Whilst the innocent side
has received a bad score, there is no redress as the offending
player 'gambled' the 3NT and having paid the prescribed
penalty, cannot be penalised twice.
Players are expressly
forbidden to deliberately contravene law, if the Director
deems that a player could have known that an irregularity
would be likely to damage the other side, he will direct the
auction and play to continue, awarding an adjusted score if
the offending side gained through the irregularity.
When a player
makes an inadvertent infraction, there is no obligation
for him to draw attention to it, however, there is an obligation
not to attempt to conceal the infraction in any way. If you
revoke, then don't attempt to hide it by mixing up your cards,
conceding or deliberately revoking a second time to avoid
the disclosure.
Law
73, 'Communication'. Bridge is a game of communicating
with partner through approved methods. Under NO circumstances
are players permitted secret understandings or methods which
show strengths, weaknesses or other information. Players should
be aware of tempo sensitive situations, carefully avoiding
any suggestion of giving partner information by way of calls
that are out of tempo of the auction.
Players should
be careful of the manner in which they conduct themselves,
carefully avoiding remarks, gestures, expressions, requests
for explanations and the myriad of ways that partner could
gain information. Players sometimes forget that Directors
are also players who are well aware of what goes through their
minds when partners hesitate, squirm or otherwise show discomfort.
Law deals fairly
harshly with communication infractions giving every
advantage to the non-offending side. In many cases whereby
the Director is called over 'Unauthorised Information' the
response or excuse by the alleged offending side is either
"I didn't notice it" or "I have my bid". Both
of these statements are self serving, the law expects players
to be aware of table presence and to realise their obligations
when faced with unauthorised information. It
is no longer a case of "I was always going to bid",
rather an obligation to carefully avoid taking an action which
could have been suggested by the illegal information.
Law 73D
looks at 'Variations in Tempo or Manner'; This recognises
that not all calls and plays can be executed at the same speed
and that inadvertent tempo or manner does not in itself constitute
a violation of propriety, only the inferences that could be
drawn by partner. In other words, to hesitate is not an infraction,
take as long as you need, but be aware that partner now may
be in receipt of unauthorised information and may have an
ethical problem in any continuing auction or play. Deliberate
tempo breaks, unless authorised by regulation, is an infraction
if the intent is to deceive an opponent.
Law 73E
gives the right to a player to appropriately attempt to deceive
an opponent by means of a call or play, as long as the deception
is not protected by any partnership agreement, understanding
or experience.
Law 73F
is the authority for the Director to adjust a score if he
considers that a player has taken a course of action based
on unauthorised information received and that damage to an
innocent side has occurred. Within this Law is 'Player
Injured by Illegal Deception', again an authority
for the Director to adjust if a player claims damage through
drawing a false inference from an opponent who could have
known that the action could work to his benefit and who had
no demonstrable bridge reason for such action. There is no
requirement of proof only whether the opponent could have
known, in other words, hesitating with a singleton, hesitating
in playing to a finesse position are all candidates.
Law
74, 'Conduct and Etiquette'. The hardest law for players
to conform to, after all it requires one to be pleasant
and courteous to not only ones partner, but to the opponents
as well! Breaches
of table manners occur far too frequently, sometimes by the
ignorance of the player concerned.
As a matter of
law, players are required to conform with correct procedure,
avoid contentious statements and to avoid any suggestion of
gamesmanship. Violations of procedures which may well
incur a penalty include: Using different designations for
the same call, showing disapproval of partners play, trying
to gain an advantage by deliberately noting where opponents
take their cards from, showing a lack of interest, deliberately
playing overly fast or slow, leaving the table during the
play without reason, etc. In most other sports, players would
be disciplined for many of the actions that are almost accepted
as par for the course in bridge. Directors are reminded that
Law is on their side when players misbehave and the authority
to suspend or penalise is absolute under Law
91.
Law
75, 'Partnership Agreements. Within this law are the
examples of the difference between 'Mistaken Explanations'
and 'Mistaken Bids'. In simple terms, whatever agreements
a partnership adopt, all information arising must be fully
and freely available to the opponents. Any mistake in explanations
an infraction and the opponents, if damaged are entitled to
redress. With mistaken bids, there is no infraction as the
only requirement of law is to explain the actual agreement
even though the description in no way shape or form resembles
the hand. It is rub of the green, win some, lose some.
Law 75B
reinforces the right of a player to violate an agreement providing
partner is equally as unaware as the opponents, there must
be no suggestion of any implicit agreement through past experiences
of playing with the partner.
Law 75C puts
the onus on the player to give as much information as possible
when asked for an explanation of a call or play, ensuring
that the opponents know as much as they do. General bridge
knowledge is excluded from this requirement. An important
aspect is to ensure that the intent of the question is answered
which may differ from the literal translation.
Law 75D
covers 'Correcting Errors in Explanation. If a player suddenly
realises that the explanation he gave was incorrect, incomplete
or a failure to alert, an immediate summon of the Director
is required who will apply Law
21 'Call Based on Misinformation', 'Change of Call'
or Law 40C
'Directors Option to Award an Adjusted Score'.
A more common scenario is that the mistake is noticed by partner,
he is not, at this stage, permitted to give any indication
that anything is amiss, nor may he correct his mistake until
law requires him to do so, namely: If Declarer or Dummy,
after the final Pass, if a Defender, not before the
conclusion of the play of the hand. These requirements are
not optional, they are mandatory.
When misbids or
mistaken explanations occur, players, in the mistaken belief
that they are protecting their opponents rights, compound
the problem by either immediately telling their opponents
of the error, calling the Director, or as bad, leaving the
table to talk privately to the Director thus letting everybody
at the table know that something is amiss. The timing of both
the call for the Director and the correction of a mistaken
explanation is a very important piece of information, only
by being involved in an adverse situation do players understand
their obligations, hopefully once bitten, twice shy.
A point worth
reinforcing is that there is no requirement to explain
a misbid, in fact to do so as a Declarer would be an infraction
in itself. In both the scenarios of mistaken explanation and
mistaken bids, a player may well be in receipt of unauthorised
information and has the ethical requirement not to base subsequent
actions on this information. Any suggestion of this may well
incur an adjusted score.
Law
76, 'Spectators' or kibitzers as they are more
commonly known. Spectators differ from officials in that they
have no rights whatsoever at the table. In
general, providing decorum is maintained, regulations permit
spectators with perhaps minor restrictions of allowable numbers.
As a matter of
courtesy, a kibitzer should ask permission to sit and should
graciously leave or move if a player has a genuine reason
for refusal. To avoid any suggestion of imparting unauthorised
information, a spectator should not look at more than one
hand, display any reaction to bidding or play or talk with
any of the players during a round. Spectators have no rights
if a query arises at the table, although the Director may
well ask for input if he deems it appropriate.
|
 |
Chapter VII
Proprieties
LAW 72 - GENERAL PRINCIPLES
A.
Observance of Laws
1. General Obligation on Contestants Duplicate bridge
tournaments should be played in strict accordance with the
Laws.
2. Scoring of Tricks Won A player must not knowingly
accept either the score for a trick that his side did not
win or the concession of a trick that his opponents could
not lose.
3. Waiving of Penalties In duplicate tournaments a
player may not, on his own initiative, waive a penalty for
an opponent's infraction, even if he feels that he has not
been damaged (but he may ask the Director to do so - see Law
81C8).
4. Non-offenders' Exercise of Legal Options When these
Laws provide the innocent side with an option after an irregularity
committed by an opponent, it is appropriate to select that
action most advantageous.
5. Offenders' Options Subject to Law
16C2, after the offending side has paid the prescribed
penalty for an inadvertent infraction, it is appropriate for
the offenders to make any call or play advantageous to their
side, even though they thereby appear to profit through their
own infraction.
6. Responsibility for Enforcement of Laws The responsibility
for penalising irregularities and redressing damage rests
solely upon the Director and these Laws, not upon the players
themselves.
B. Infraction of Law
1. Adjusted Score Whenever the Director deems that
an offender could have known at the time of his irregularity
that the irregularity would be likely to damage the non-offending
side, he shall require the auction and play to continue, afterwards
awarding an adjusted score if he considers that the offending
side gained an advantage through the irregularity.
2. Intentional A player must not infringe a law intentionally,
even if there is a prescribed penalty he is willing to pay.
3. Inadvertent Infraction There is no obligation to
draw attention to an inadvertent infraction of law committed
by one's own side (but see footnote to Law
75 for a mistaken explanation).
4. Concealing an Infraction A player may not attempt
to conceal an inadvertent infraction, as by committing a second
revoke, concealing a card involved in a revoke or mixing the
cards prematurely.
LAW 73 - COMMUNICATION
A. Proper
Communication between Partners
1. How Effected Communication between partners during
the auction and play shall be effected only by means of the
calls and plays themselves.
2. Correct Manner for Calls and Plays Calls and plays
should be made without special emphasis, mannerism or inflection,
and without undue hesitation or haste (however, sponsoring
organisations may require mandatory pauses, as on the first
round of auction, or after a skip-bid warning, or on the first
trick).
B. Inappropriate Communication
1. Gratuitous Information Partners shall not communicate
through the manner in which calls or plays are made, through
extraneous remarks or gestures, through questions asked or
not asked of the opponents or through alerts and explanations
given or not given to them.
2. Prearranged Communication The gravest possible offence
is for a partnership to exchange information through prearranged
methods of communication other than those sanctioned by these
Laws. A guilty partnership risks expulsion.
C. Player Receives Unauthorised Information from
Partner When a player has available to him unauthorised
information from his partner, as from a remark, question,
explanation, gesture, mannerism, special emphasis, inflection,
haste or hesitation, he must carefully avoid taking any advantage
that might accrue to his side.
D. Variations in Tempo or Manner
1. Inadvertent Variations It is desirable, though
not always required, for players to maintain steady tempo
and unvarying manner. However, players should be particularly
careful in positions in which variations may work to the benefit
of their side. Otherwise, inadvertently to vary the tempo
or manner in which a call or play is made does not in itself
constitute a violation of propriety, but inferences from such
variation may appropriately be drawn only by an opponent,
and at his own risk.
2. Intentional Variations A player may not attempt
to mislead an opponent by means of remark or gesture, through
the haste or hesitancy of a call or play (as in hesitating
before playing a singleton), or by the manner in which the
call or play is made.
E. Deception A player may appropriately attempt
to deceive an opponent through a call or play (so long as
the deception is not protected by concealed partnership understanding
or experience). It is entirely appropriate to avoid giving
information to the opponents by making all calls and plays
in unvarying tempo and manner.
F. Violation of Proprieties When a violation
of the Proprieties described in this law results in damage
to an innocent opponent,
1. Player Acts on Unauthorised Information if the Director
determines that a player chose from among logical alternative
actions one that could demonstrably have been suggested over
another by his partner's remark, manner, tempo, or the like,
he shall award an adjusted score (see Law
16).
2. Player Injured by Illegal Deception if the Director
determines that an innocent player has drawn a false inference
from a remark, manner, tempo, or the like, of an opponent
who has no demonstrable bridge reason for the action, and
who could have known, at the time of the action, that the
action could work to his benefit, the Director shall award
an adjusted score (see Law
12C).
LAW 74 - CONDUCT AND ETIQUETTE
A.
Proper Attitude
1. Courtesy A player should maintain a courteous attitude
at all times.
2. Etiquette of Word and Action A player should carefully
avoid any remark or action that might cause annoyance or embarrassment
to another player or might interfere with the enjoyment of
the game.
3. Conformity to Correct Procedure Every player should
follow uniform and correct procedure in calling and playing.
B. Etiquette As a matter of courtesy a player
should refrain from:
1. paying insufficient attention to the game.
2. making gratuitous comments during the auction and
play.
3. detaching a card before it is his turn to play.
4. prolonging play unnecessarily (as in playing on
although he knows that all the tricks are surely his) for
the purpose of disconcerting an opponent.
5. summoning and addressing the Director in a manner
discourteous to him or to other contestants.
C. Violations of Procedure The following are
considered violations of procedure:
1. using different designations for the same call.
2. indicating approval or disapproval of a call or
play.
3. indicating the expectation or intention of winning
or losing a trick that has not been completed.
4. commenting or acting during the auction or play
so as to call attention to a significant occurrence, or to
the number of tricks still required for success.
5. looking intently at any other player during the
auction and play, or at another player's hand as for the purpose
of seeing his cards or of observing the place from which he
draws a card (but it is appropriate to act on information
acquired by inadvertently seeing an opponent's card ).
6. showing an obvious lack of further interest in a
deal (as by folding one's cards).
7. varying the normal tempo of bidding or play for
the purpose of disconcerting an opponent.
8. leaving the table needlessly before the round is
called.
LAW 75 - PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENTS
A. Special
Partnership Agreements Special partnership agreements,
whether explicit or implicit, must be fully and freely available
to the opponents (see Law
40). Information conveyed to partner through such
agreements must arise from the calls, plays and conditions
of the current deal.
B. Violations of Partnership Agreements A player
may violate an announced partnership agreement, so long as
his partner is unaware of the violation (but habitual violations
within a partnership may create implicit agreements, which
must be disclosed). No player has the obligation to disclose
to the opponents that he has violated an announced agreement
and if the opponents are subsequently damaged, as through
drawing a false inference from such violation, they are not
entitled to redress.
C. Answering Questions on Partnership Agreements
When explaining the significance of partner's call or
play in reply to an opponent's inquiry (see Law
20), a player shall disclose all special information
conveyed to him through partnership agreement or partnership
experience, but he need not disclose inferences drawn from
his general knowledge and experience.
D. Correcting Errors in Explanation
1. Explainer Notices Own Error If a player subsequently
realises that his own explanation was erroneous or incomplete,
he must immediately call the Director (who will apply Law
21 or Law 40C).
2. Error Noticed by Explainer's Partner A player whose
partner has given a mistaken explanation may not correct the
error before the final pass, nor may he indicate in any manner
that a mistake has been made; a defender may not correct the
error until play ends. After calling the Director at the earliest
legal opportunity (after the final pass, if he is to be declarer
or dummy, after play ends, if he is to be a defender), the
player must inform the opponents that, in his opinion, his
partner's explanation was erroneous.
LAW 76 - SPECTATORS
A. Conduct
During Bidding or Play
1. One Hand Only A spectator should not look at
the hand of more than one player, except by permission.
2. Personal Reaction A spectator must not display any
reaction to the bidding or play while a deal is in progress.
3. Mannerisms or Remarks During the round, a spectator
must refrain from mannerisms or remarks of any kind (including
conversation with a player).
4. Consideration for Players A spectator must not in
any way disturb a player.
B. Spectator Participation A spectator may not
call attention to any irregularity or mistake, nor speak on
any question of fact or law except by request of the Director.
|
