Big Problem with Ruling at Regionals

[kansashoops]

My son and I went to a regional tournament in Denver last weekend, and I'd like to hear opinions on what I should do about a situation that occurred in one of my son's matches.

My son was playing a Strike Ninja deck with two Returns in it. In this match, his opponent had cleared his monsters and all he had on the field was a set Return. The opponent went to attack with the first of his 3 monsters. When he declared the attack, my son chained Return. He doesn't remember what all he had out of play, but knows he had 6 monsters, including a Mystic Tomato and a DMOC, and that 2-3 of them were under 1500 attack. His opponent chained Bottomless Trap Hole.

A debate ensued about whether my son could play Return, and whether his opponent could play Bottomless. A judge was called over, and he couldn't resolve the debate. He called another judge over. This was Judge #2's ruling: at first he said that the opponent could chain Bottomless, then he said "Let's put it this way: you can't play Return from the Different Dimension in the damage step." This ruling was grossly incorrect. Return was chained in response to the declaration of an attack, not during the damage step. Return should have gone through, Bottomless should have gone through, my son should have gotten a spell for summoning DMOC, and his sub-1500 monsters should have remained on the field in defense position.

It was bad enough that my son was subjected to a glaringly incorrect ruling by a judge, but here's the kicker. The judge was the father of my son's opponent. He had no business ruling on this match, and given his ruling, I can only conclude that he purposely ruled incorrectly to benefit his son.

I am steaming mad about this. I intend to complain about this situation to the tournament organizer and to UDE, but I'd like to hear opinions from other judges first on how I should proceed, and how far I should push my complaint.

 

[masterwoo0]

That is a classic error that a few Judges make. You can still activate effects of Trap Card's and Quick-Play's, like Book of Moon, or Compulsory Evacuation Device, before you move into the Damage Step.

I sympathize with your situation as many times I have watched in horror as my own son was the victim of bad calls, such as the now famous "Barrel Behind the Door vs Wave-Motion Cannon" call that never should have happened.

The best you can do is send a email to UDE, voice your complaint, and maybe get the obligatory response, but I highly doubt that anything more will be done than reassurance that things will improve in the future.

As far as the TO goes, same situation. All you can do is complain. It's difficult to "prove" your allegation of cheating, whereas it would have been more than fair to allow another Judge, or disinterested party to make the Ruling, rather than a biased Official.

 

[kansashoops]

I know I can't prove that he was cheating to benefit his son, but I have a hard time believing that this was a simple mistake on his part. Chaining a trap to the declaration of an attack is basic stuff, and you don't have to be a judge to know that if the trap in question summons a new monster to the field, the attack is cancelled and you never reach the damage step. This happens all the time with Call of the Haunted.

 

[Digital Jedi]

It certainly raises questions. An incorrct ruling in favor of a prevailing judges son. In addition to that, it involves basic mechanics that even a Level 1 should have basic knowledge of. I'd be surprised if UDE didn't have a few questions to ask and conduct an investigation. As much as I bad mouth some of there operational proceedures I don't think they would let something like this go by unresolved.

 

[squid]

That could still be a simple mistake on the judge's part. He could have misinterpreted the question to be that the trap was activated during damage calc. (sounds like it, at least) I personally don't see your case going too far, based on a ruling made.

Instead, if I were you, I would press the matter of having an objective party, ie: judge not related to a player, being the one to issue the ruling. If this L.2 was the head judge, there isn't much that can be done. That is the head judge's responsibility. But, if it was just a conferencing of another floor judge, then the matter could have been handled by a different person.

 

[slither]

Noones to know what exactly was going through this judges head at the time, but it certainly is not something anyone can be happy about, though many, many judges make similar absurd calls, now the "family" relationship situation does make it even more not unprofessional.

**By the way, love the Avatar **

 

[squid]

Noones to know what exactly was going through this judges head at the time, but it certainly is not something anyone can be happy about, though many, many judges make similar absurd calls, now the "family" relationship situation does make it even more not unprofessional.

**By the way, love the Avatar **

I have to ask: Are you supporting the judge's standpoint, with your double negative, or agreeing that the relationship between judge and player makes the situation unseemly?

oh, and if you are talking about my avatar.....thank you

 

[slither]

I don't support the judge, I mean that the relationship makes the situation unseemly ^.^.


I was saying that kansashoops avatar was cool @_@

 

[kansashoops]

That could still be a simple mistake on the judge's part. He could have misinterpreted the question to be that the trap was activated during damage calc.

Extremely unlikely. Why would anyone allow an attack to occur, then try to chain Return from the Different Dimension during damage calculation? Clearly the whole point of chaining Return was to blunt the attack.

This was another floor judge, BTW, a Level 1. The head judge (a Level 2) was not consulted.

 

[Big Oldprankster]

I am steaming mad about this. I intend to complain about this situation to the tournament organizer and to UDE, but I'd like to hear opinions from other judges first on how I should proceed, and how far I should push my complaint.[/QUOTE]


I would suggest to first contact the Premier Tournament Organizer of this event. Here is a link for information pertaining to this tournament:

http://entertainment.upperdeck.com/op/search/tournament_detail.aspx?tid=96259

His name is listed to be Jeff Morris. The head judge appears to be a woman. From your post I could not tell if the conference contained a woman. If there was not, do not forget it is always the players ability to appeal a ruling made by a floor judge to the head judge. If you get no response from the PTO(which should take interest in your complaint), then mail to UDE and copy the PTO. If I was the head judge of this event, I would have wanted to know about it. I have responded to individuals complaints they wrote to the PTO. Once in a great while I have to apologize for an incorrect ruling. Judges are not perfect but your situation should not have happened the way it did in my opinion.

 

[Digital Jedi]

It should still prompt even a cursory investigation. I don't think UDE would just say "oops" when two family member were involved in the whole situation.

 

[masterwoo0]

The reason nothing is going to happen is because the protest is not recorded at the time it happened.

At this point, its just an allegation of unfairness.

 

[kansashoops]

My son is 11 years old. The judge in question is an adult in his mid to late 40's. My son has been taught to respect adult authority, and it never occurred to him to appeal the decision to the head judge, as you or I would have done.

The fact that he didn't protest at the time is irrelevant, in my opinion. If the head judge had been called over, she could have corrected his faulty ruling, possibly changing the outcome of the match. But I'm not complaining about the outcome of the match. I'm complaing that a UDE certified judge behaved in an unethical manner, and he shouldn't be off the hook just because no one called him on it at the time.

 

[Digital Jedi]

In the past, my only concerns when a faulty ruling is made, is the precedence it sets in the mind of the duelists involved. I really don't care that much about whether I would have won or not. There's no way to know what would have happned in most cases. But what I don't like is the misinformation that abounds because of situations like these. I've actually heard players say that they won't belive the Official FAQ untill they hear a judge tell them that it's correct. Am I kidding you? No, I'm dead serious. Some players have gotten it into there head that the judges are the law and that the rulings are just an interesting read. While some don't go that far, the prevailing attitude among most players is "Well, he told me I could, and he's a judge." With such an important roll that judges play, I'm deeply dissapointed when even the most basic of mechanical issues slip by them. I can understand that fatigue and disorientation can be a factor along with each individuals ability coming into play. But with such an important position in the department where understanding the game is concerned, it's much more dangerous to make these small mistakes because there will be more people to blow a mistake out of purportion then there will be to spread the word of a correct ruling around.

 

[John Danker]

I'm not siding with anyone here...but be careful what is assumed.

I think many of you remember the article I wrote about asking the right questions. This could very well be a part of the problem here.

A great deal of how a judge rules something is far too often based on how the scenario was explained to them and not on the questions they ask.

Do we know how the scenario was presented to the judge? Was it, "I attacked immediately activated Rfdd then I activated BTH after the resolution of Rfdd." First problem here is did turn player retain priority after the attack, next was it aGreed to enter the damage step.

Did the judge ask questions about the scenario or take it at face value? Did the judge ask about entering damage step? Did the judge use the term mentioned in the original post about "Chaining to the attack"? (We know you don't chain to an attack, you respond to it. Using the term chaining to an attack by a judge would certainly give cause for concern)

It does indeed sound like a shameful blown call, however, without knowing the paticulars, without being there to ask questions and do some investigation, it's very difficult to say if the judge ruled the scenario correctly based on the information they were given. From what you've described it sounds as though the judge was lead to believe that Rfdd was activated in the damage step by someone, then again that judge may have been fumbling for a way out of a call they didn't know how to make.

As far as the judge being the father of the opponent, yeah, that's a bad situation but one you're going to run into from time to time. Quite honestly I feel sorry for my own son at times because I'm harder on him if anything with rulings than I am anyone else. I probably go overboard to make sure I don't show favoritism. If someone is a floor judge they and is related or is friends of one of the players in judge call they should always flag over another judge to take the question / call. Sometimes though the appeal goes to the head judge (my case) and I'm forced to make the call involving my own son. I'm afraid Moms & Dads are the ones who become involved and often end up being the judges.

This post by me may sound like I'm siding with the judge, I'm certainly not. It sounds (emphasis on sounds) like a completely blown call, all I ask is to be careful how much is assumed and to consider how it was presented to the judge. If it was presented as a response to an attack without entering damage calculation first and it was aGreed by both parties that was the case then you have reason to be steamed.

As mentioned in previous posts, an e-mail to UDE along with the parties involved, as much information as possible, and in a concerned but level headed writing tone is, at this point, your only and best recourse. I wouldn't expect a reversal of ruling by any means but correcting judging assignments for future tournaments is a possibility.

*EDIT*

I understand you've taught your son to respect his elders and authority. It is policy though that every player has a right to appeal to the head judge and every player needs to understand that and use it when they feel the current judge is in error. This is the course of checks and balances that has been set up in this game to help insure fairness. I've had to teach my own son this painful lesson numerous times.

 

[squid]

I seem to recall there was a big controversy over a family somewhere up in the Northwest (Van something) in which the store owner acted as the judge for the tournaments in which his two sone were repeatedly the winners, to the extent that their ratings were the highest in their state.

Its definitely not something to take lightly. But its on that procedure that I would concentrate, if I were in your position.

 

[kansashoops]

Thanks for your perspective, John.

I did take the opportunity to explain to my son that he should have appealed the decision to the head judge. Although he has heard the head judge's initial instructions telling him that, several times, it never sunk in. Now he knows.

I misspoke when I said that he "chained Return" to the attack. I meant that he "responded to the attack by playing Return," and I am quite certain that that is how he would have explained it to the judge. When I was quizzing him about the situation, he kept saying that he knew the ruling was wrong because "we weren't in the damage step." I feel quite certain that my son said nothing to make the judge think the situation had anything to do with the damage step.

I know it's a fact of life in this game that the judges are often friends or relatives of the players, but I think it is incumbent upon the judges to step aside whenever possible in situations where questions of bias might arise. If you are the head judge, there's no way out, but in a case like the one in question, where one floor judge had been uncertain and the second one was biased, I think the proper thing to do would have been to ask the head judge to make the ruiling.

>>I wouldn't expect a reversal of ruling by any means but correcting judging assignments for future tournaments is a possibility.

I wouldn't expect them to change the outcome of the match. My son said he thinks he probably would have lost anyway, even if the judge had ruled correctly. I'm questioning the judge's behavior and/or competence.

 

[John Danker]

I don't blame you for questioning the judge's competance. It's by (as I described) level headed e-mail and speaking in a tone of genuine concern with an eye on improvement of the game and / or local tournaments and speaking to the TO and UDE that changes will come about. If you appear a hot headed parent then it will likely be chaulked up to just that. Please don't think I'm inferring that you're a hot headed parent <laffin> I'm merely stating thats what you don't want to APPEAR as.

 

[Tkwiget]

I came across a situation or two similar to this at the regional on the 11th. Luckily the situation I ruled correctly on and before I allowed the players to argue with me about it, I reminded them calmly that they still have the right to appeal to the Head Judge (who happens to be John Danker in my case) and in those situations I've so far been backed up by John. However, I don't expect this it happen all the time. The players have to wait to appeal before I make my ruling. After that, they can.

How John has taught me to judge a situation at an event is ask the first question, "Who's Turn Player?" and work from there. If the players automatically rewind gameplay to the beginning of the Turn Player's turn, then it shows me that they're experienced players and can understand more technical terms (which I use a lot of).

From the way the situation is discribed, it looks more like RFTDD is activated in response to the declared attack. However, I can't tell since I wasn't physically there at the event to make the judge call.

"What's the situation?"
"Who's Turn Player?"
"Could you guys please rewind gameplay to the beginning of the Turn Player's turn?"
"Please continue gameplay slowly from start to finish in a step by step fashion so I can see what exactly happened."

Those questions are generally the first four that I can clear away and other questons come up based off those answers. Like John said, never make a judge call if a situation involves someone you know - a tiny exception would be if you know both players; which happened at the regional.

I've only judged four events, but I've learned a great deal from working in them, from John, and from other judges. I'm just sorry you went through such an experience.

 

[kansashoops]

Well, I sent my email to UDE, cc'ing the TO, and I probably did come off a bit hot-headed in my initial email. But the TO replied, and I turned down the heat a couple of notches when I responded to him. He and I are in agreement that that judge shouldn't have been ruling on that match, and he's going to discuss the situation with the head judge and get back to me. He's a good guy and I think he'll do the right things here. I have little faith in UDE. The only reason I even contacted them was in case there had been other complaints against this judge, complaints that the TO might not even be aware of.