[zenbiddist]

I work as a director in a bridge club, and usually the games are very harmonious. Unfortunately today I had this situation, and two of the players involved were upset:

With four minutes on the clock, a player refused to play the last board, claiming there was not enough time. I didn't get called until there was two minutes on the clock, and they were too upset to play it quickly, so I had to decide which adjusted score if any to give (law 90A). I haven't needed to issue a procedural penalty in five years of directing. How do you think the laws apply, and what would you have done?

Thanks

[blackshoe]

If you normally issue a "do not start any new boards" instruction at some point, and that point has been reached, the player is correct to decline to start a new board. If the point has not been reached, he is not correct. In the latter case, you could issue him a PP. I'd give a PP(W) (a PP in the form of a warning) for a first offense, but if you do that, be sure that a second offense by the same player gets a PP in MPs or IMPs.

Why did it take two minutes for them to call you?

As for the score adjustment, if they argued for two minutes before calling you, I'd give both sides average minus. If only one side was directly at fault, they get average minus and the other gets average or (unlikely, I think) average plus if they were in no way at fault.

[barmar]

It sounds to me like that the side that started it by refusing to start the board was primarily at fault and should get average minus. The other side, by not calling you immediately to resolve the problem, is partly at fault, so should get average.

[blackshoe]

Works for me.