Join Bridge Winners
How would you rule?

The following situation came up at a recent teams trial. 

West
A65
1097
K653
A93
North
84
KQJ8
AQJ82
Q4
East
109
652
1074
K10652
South
KQJ732
A43
9
J87
W
N
E
S
1
P
1
P
1NT
P
4
P
P
P
D
5
4 South
NS: 0 EW: 0
10
8
6
A
3
1
0
K
5
4
10
3
2
0
Q
A
8
9
0
2
1
A
4
2
7
0
2
2
9
Q
K
8
2
2
3
10 tricks claimed
N/S +620
5

After East won the K, South laid out their hand, stating "I have the rest." After examining the North South cards, West called the director. When the director arrived, West said that East was on lead and that South had claimed the rest of the tricks. The director looked at South and North's cards, asked what the contract was and then asked South if all the trumps had been drawn. South said that there no trumps outstanding. West then said "then we have a problem as I still have a trump."

The director recorded the cards that were outstanding and then later returned and advised that, in his opinion, a trick could be lost to the trump by a normal play.

North South appealed that decision. At appeal, the above facts were agreed, however, the appeal committee overturned the director’s ruling on the basis that ‘they would not have called the director in this situation.’ Is that a valid reason for overturning the director’s decision?

45 Comments
Getting Comments... loading...
.

Bottom Home Top