I'm a stickler for rules at Competitive REL as I don't want cheaters to get away with anything, so I usually call a judge for mostly everything. I do this because I want players to learn how to play right, but also so they don't do it in the future or cheat anyone else. In these scenarios, was the judge ruling correct or should they get a warning?
1. My opponent attacks, I double block, they go to cast an instant before damage. I call a judge since he didn't assign blockers and isn't allowed to cast the spell before doing so. Is this a simple rewind, or a warning. Is he trying to gain an advantage by not assigning order here first? Seems petty to call a judge, but if there is even a slight way they can gain advantage, shouldn't it be a warning?
2. Player forgets his Search for Azcanta trigger, I call a judge since it isn't a may ability. Is this a warning or a simple put it on the stack and let me decide? Since it isn't a detrimental trigger there is no warning giving here?
3. I have Authority of the Consuls in play, opponent plays a haste creature and doesn't tap it. I call a judge since it's both our responsibilities to have a correct game state. Is this a warning? If he does this enough, his opponent might forget and he might get an attack in. It might be 1/1000 chance, but there could still be an intent to cheat. The judge here just said to tap it and gave no warning which i think is wrong.
4. I cast a haste creature, my opponent lets it resolve. He then tries to use a removal spell on it. I call a judge since he doesn't have priority to cast the spell there. Is this a warning? Does he have a way to cheat and gain an advantage here?
5. Player has Glint-Sleeve Siphoner with 2 energy on his upkeep. He draws a card, then writes down the life loss and goes to draw a card, I stop him and call a judge. He never put the trigger on the stack to let me respond, for all i know that could have been his draw step and he didn't realize he missed the trigger till after he drew for turn. Shouldn't he have to announce the trigger here before drawing or he could gain an edge?
1) Yes it's a warning for the infraction "Game Play Error - Game Rules Violation". A backup is possible, but there is a clause in the IPG that allows the judge to simply have the player state what the blocking order is at that point.
2) No warning, no infraction. First it's possible the player had the trigger and choose to keep the card on top, but even if they missed (which they probably did) then it's up to the opponent if they want to have the trigger and if not the game continues. Do note that if you notice your opponent missing one of their triggers, you don't have to call attention to it (this only applies to triggers though, nothing else).
3) It's a warning for the same as #1. If it just occurred the judge will most likely back it up. There may be some investigation on this one if the judge believes the player is cheating.
4) No warning, in fact I don't think I would even call judge on this one unless the player is having an understanding issue. The fact is the player is going to get a chance to cast the spell and acting early like that is really to your advantage. If you want to act before him then just tell the player to hold on you want to take an action first, but either way they'll get a chance to cast their removal spell.
5) This one is a tricky. It's very possible the player remembered the trigger and is drawing and then writing down the life loss and energy loss. However I would definitely call a judge in this case because it's possible the player could draw the card first to see what they would get and then decide whether they want another. Either way I think it needs to be determined what step it's in and whether the player may be cheating. If not, no infraction.
1) Yes it's a warning for the infraction "Game Play Error - Game Rules Violation". A backup is possible, but there is a clause in the IPG that allows the judge to simply have the player state what the blocking order is at that point.
2) No warning, no infraction. First it's possible the player had the trigger and choose to keep the card on top, but even if they missed (which they probably did) then it's up to the opponent if they want to have the trigger and if not the game continues. Do note that if you notice your opponent missing one of their triggers, you don't have to call attention to it (this only applies to triggers though, nothing else).
3) It's a warning for the same as #1. If it just occurred the judge will most likely back it up. There may be some investigation on this one if the judge believes the player is cheating.
4) No warning, in fact I don't think I would even call judge on this one unless the player is having an understanding issue. The fact is the player is going to get a chance to cast the spell and acting early like that is really to your advantage. If you want to act before him then just tell the player to hold on you want to take an action first, but either way they'll get a chance to cast their removal spell.
5) This one is a tricky. It's very possible the player remembered the trigger and is drawing and then writing down the life loss and energy loss. However I would definitely call a judge in this case because it's possible the player could draw the card first to see what they would get and then decide whether they want another. Either way I think it needs to be determined what step it's in and whether the player may be cheating. If not, no infraction.
thanks, those all pretty much aligned with what I thought. #5 is definitely very tricky and has a lot of room for cheating. Just some questions.
- Why isn't #4 handled the same as #1, game play error?
- What if a judge doesn't give a warning? In scenario #1 the judge didn't give a warning. He was laid back and didn't seem to like confrontation. This is my main issue with judges is they all act differently. Most don't like confrontation and eer on the side of not giving a warning. This only leads to cheaters getting away with more infractions since they never get warnings. Like I shouldn't have to ask the judge to give a warning in these scenario's.
Okay let me start with the second part first before I tackle #4. You have to remember judges are not robots, we are people just like the players. Also the level of experience for judges can also vary, many judges at these large events may be doing that for the very first time. So the fact that a judge chooses not to give a warning could be inexperience, laziness, they could be in the middle of another task, or simply a judgement call that they deemed would be better customer service to not give a penalty. I'll admit at the end of the day of a long event I'll be tired, the players will be tired, and I may let a couple of things slide in the top 8 that I wouldn't in swiss (though only to a point, and only if caught right away). As a player I generally don't worry about whether the judge issues a warning or not, I may ask them if my opponent is getting one, but I'd go no further than that unless I really think my opponent is cheating, or doing something really wrong (in which case I'd appeal). So to answer your question, what do you do if you feel your opponent should get a penalty and the judge doesn't give one, well you can appeal to the head judge, unless it's the head judge that took the call in which case you'll have accept the ruling.
As for #4 there are several things to look at, but it really comes down to the fact that it would be nitpicking to give a penalty for something like that. First off there is no way the player could gain an advantage by acting early like that. Second it's not unreasonable that the player is short cutting and basically asking for priority to cast his spell, you can of course decline the shortcut and say you want to do something first (for example activating a PW ability before he can do that). Either way he'll get to respond at some point before your new spells/abilities have a chance to resolve.
Remember judges want players to leave a tournament with a good experience, and nitpicking penalties is probably going to make players upset. For example if a player exiles a card from the graveyard face down, well that is against the rules unless the effect states to do that, but I wouldn't write a penalty for that because there is no advantage gained (both players know what the card is since it was in a public zone). What I would do is educate the player and explain that cards are always exiled face up unless stated otherwise. That player would then leave with a better experience.
1. My opponent attacks, I double block, they go to cast an instant before damage. I call a judge since he didn't assign blockers and isn't allowed to cast the spell before doing so. Is this a simple rewind, or a warning. Is he trying to gain an advantage by not assigning order here first? Seems petty to call a judge, but if there is even a slight way they can gain advantage, shouldn't it be a warning?
2. Player forgets his Search for Azcanta trigger, I call a judge since it isn't a may ability. Is this a warning or a simple put it on the stack and let me decide? Since it isn't a detrimental trigger there is no warning giving here?
3. I have Authority of the Consuls in play, opponent plays a haste creature and doesn't tap it. I call a judge since it's both our responsibilities to have a correct game state. Is this a warning? If he does this enough, his opponent might forget and he might get an attack in. It might be 1/1000 chance, but there could still be an intent to cheat. The judge here just said to tap it and gave no warning which i think is wrong.
4. I cast a haste creature, my opponent lets it resolve. He then tries to use a removal spell on it. I call a judge since he doesn't have priority to cast the spell there. Is this a warning? Does he have a way to cheat and gain an advantage here?
5. Player has Glint-Sleeve Siphoner with 2 energy on his upkeep. He draws a card, then writes down the life loss and goes to draw a card, I stop him and call a judge. He never put the trigger on the stack to let me respond, for all i know that could have been his draw step and he didn't realize he missed the trigger till after he drew for turn. Shouldn't he have to announce the trigger here before drawing or he could gain an edge?
2) No warning, no infraction. First it's possible the player had the trigger and choose to keep the card on top, but even if they missed (which they probably did) then it's up to the opponent if they want to have the trigger and if not the game continues. Do note that if you notice your opponent missing one of their triggers, you don't have to call attention to it (this only applies to triggers though, nothing else).
3) It's a warning for the same as #1. If it just occurred the judge will most likely back it up. There may be some investigation on this one if the judge believes the player is cheating.
4) No warning, in fact I don't think I would even call judge on this one unless the player is having an understanding issue. The fact is the player is going to get a chance to cast the spell and acting early like that is really to your advantage. If you want to act before him then just tell the player to hold on you want to take an action first, but either way they'll get a chance to cast their removal spell.
5) This one is a tricky. It's very possible the player remembered the trigger and is drawing and then writing down the life loss and energy loss. However I would definitely call a judge in this case because it's possible the player could draw the card first to see what they would get and then decide whether they want another. Either way I think it needs to be determined what step it's in and whether the player may be cheating. If not, no infraction.
thanks, those all pretty much aligned with what I thought. #5 is definitely very tricky and has a lot of room for cheating. Just some questions.
- Why isn't #4 handled the same as #1, game play error?
- What if a judge doesn't give a warning? In scenario #1 the judge didn't give a warning. He was laid back and didn't seem to like confrontation. This is my main issue with judges is they all act differently. Most don't like confrontation and eer on the side of not giving a warning. This only leads to cheaters getting away with more infractions since they never get warnings. Like I shouldn't have to ask the judge to give a warning in these scenario's.
As for #4 there are several things to look at, but it really comes down to the fact that it would be nitpicking to give a penalty for something like that. First off there is no way the player could gain an advantage by acting early like that. Second it's not unreasonable that the player is short cutting and basically asking for priority to cast his spell, you can of course decline the shortcut and say you want to do something first (for example activating a PW ability before he can do that). Either way he'll get to respond at some point before your new spells/abilities have a chance to resolve.
Remember judges want players to leave a tournament with a good experience, and nitpicking penalties is probably going to make players upset. For example if a player exiles a card from the graveyard face down, well that is against the rules unless the effect states to do that, but I wouldn't write a penalty for that because there is no advantage gained (both players know what the card is since it was in a public zone). What I would do is educate the player and explain that cards are always exiled face up unless stated otherwise. That player would then leave with a better experience.