penalty question

[rickfx1996]

turn player summons raizza the storm monarch and targets opponets only set monster. player puts monster into hand and shuffles then realizes his mistake. judge is called the player who messed up has one monster in hand and two traps. i can see this going as a pe minor because of only having one monster, and i can see this going as pe major. wanted to know what the others thought. thanks

 

[paulb91085]

Well first I find out if he really didi it on mistake or not. Then after that I would base my penalty off that and off of what kind of touranment it was like SJC it would be a game lose or Regoinals.

 

[Digital Jedi]

I don't see why anyone would be issued a penalty. But one would need all the information to say one way or the other. Like, how many turns had they progressed before they discovered the error? Was it discovered right away, or had several plays been made since then? It all depends on how repairable the game state is at the point the judge is called over. If it's just what you have written here, then I can't imagine anything more then a procedural warning being issued, and a minor one at that.

 

[skey23]

This issue (from the given example) would simply warrant a PE Minor - Warning since the player only had one monster in their hand. It is 'safe' to assume that the card they put into their hand, instead of on the top of the deck is that one monster. That player would simply put that monster on the top of their deck and play would continue from there.

 

[John Danker]

As has been stated, whenever possible and as long as you're not creating additonal problems, always fix the state of play and issue the warning(s) and let the players play on.

 

[roadhouse007]

What about in the case of (and I've been the player on the turn player side) if you NoC a "monster" and it is a spell or trap while your opponent had 2 cards in hand, a sangan and a flip effect? Also note that MoF had brought the NoC back to the hand before the spell was 'accidentally' placed in the monster zone, on the turn before.


I see this as a game loss, as the player could have wanted to know what action the opponent was to take, use the NoC or attack the F/D monster. But when this happened, the judge ruled a warning and let the player replace the card with Sangan. It was in a SJC also.

Point is, the judge has to use many factors to make a decision on what penalty to assign. The players history might play as a factor also. And, sometimes, you will disagree with the decision made or not understand why. But you just have to accept it.

 

[John Danker]

I don't think I'd attempt to rule on this one unless I was there and could talk to the player myself, do some in depth investigation, see his body language, tone of voice, etc. There certainly is potential for the player trying to cheat (gain knowledge) and then "claim" it was a mistake and he 'meant" to set Sangan or the flip effect monster.

I'm afraid this one one I'd just have to be there before I knew how I'd rule it.