This is something that isn't a rampant problem, but I've seen it come up often enough and I've gotten different answers from other judges and would like to encourage some discussion on the topic.

The basic idea of the scenario is that the AP says something, NAP thinks they said “Go” and begins taking their turn, untaps if necessary and draws a card. So the discussion is… what is this? Is it a DEC Game Loss? Is it a DEC preceded by a GRV? Or is it nothing at all? There are several permutations of the scenario that could have an effect on how you might rule (like nothing to untap, it's the first turn, etc.) and of course there's the possibility of making a judgment call. After all, we are judges, right?

-George FitzGerald
L2, Sarasota, FL

I've seen players get as far as drawing, playing a land, starting to attack before the AP, completely lost in thought looking at his hand, realizes the opponent started a turn when he didn't say “Go”. :-P It perplexes me, but I know it's possible and happens all too often.

I would never rule this DEC, due to the potential for abuse. *Mumble something that sounds like ‘Go’, wait for opponent to draw…* “JUDGE!”

I've pretty much always ruled this as “Nothing at all”, in the vein of communication problems that aren't PCV/CPV. First I make sure that Player A isn't trying to backpedal into his turn because he forgot something, of course. Once I figure out that Player A truly believes he didn't pass turn, and Player B thought he did (because obviously Player B would never just start a turn if he didn't think A passed the turn), I back up to Player A's turn (wherever he was in the turn when B heard what he thought was “go”) by putting a random card from B's hand on top of his library.

Then I make it very clear that the players need to communicate better, and they shouldn't start a turn until they receive confirmation. Then it never happens again (in that tournament). :)

Edited Josh Stansfield (March 7, 2013 03:05:09 PM)

I Agree with Josh on this. As George said, it is not a rampant problem, but it is something that is quite common, more so towards the end of the round when one player realizes that the pace of play has to pick up in order to get a result.

I would also add a check for slow play to Josh's checks. Hard to prove after the fact, but something to be aware of.

Since you guys say “Nothing at all”, is there any situation that you can
imagine where you feel it would be appropriate to give a DEC? Does not
having to untap change your ruling?

Hi George

I can't see DEC if it is a genuine mistake, i.e. he really thought that his opponent had said, “Go” or somehow indicated the end of his turn. If we have to fit this into an infraction (for tracking and upgrade purposes), the one that I see fitting best would be GRV and a Warning. The logic behind this is that he took actions at the wrong time.

Is there any scenario where I would look at DEC? Possibly. For example, if he was trying to rush the AP and jumped the gun on the turn, then that would be a scenario that I would look at DEC, but it would have to be clear cut that was what happened.

This is interesting - in the scenario where nothing was untapped, we've been ruling this as DEC, with the following rationale:

Is there a card in hand that shouldn't be there? Yes
Did another game play error exist before it went there? No
Did a CPV exist before it went there? No

(edit) I'm curious - what part of the current policy supports the position of “nothing at all” under these circumstances?

Edited Michael McCliment (March 7, 2013 04:28:47 PM)

I can't think of a scenario like this where DEC would feel appropriate (to me)… if I have reason to believe the NAP was drawing a card hoping the opponent wasn't watching, with the intent to draw again when the turn passes, that's a wholly different infraction. Even with rushing to the next turn, if I feel it's an honest misunderstanding, DEC doesn't fit.

Sure, if the player doesn't have anything to untap, it's not really possible for the AP to notice the “error” before it's committed, so I can see why DEC seems tempting. But you still run into the potential for abuse, where AP mumbles something to trick B into drawing into a DEC penalty. If I ever thought DEC was right for this kind of thing, I'm pretty sure it would go past that into DQ territory.

EDIT: As for “which part of the policy covers this”, I don't really feel ANY part of the policy specifically covers this, unless you count this part of CPV: “This infraction only applies to violations of that policy and not to general communication confusion.” It's essentially a communication breakdown that isn't covered by MTR 4.1. Since there is no specific guidance, I deal with it like I do any other communication breakdown, with the added complication of backing up through a drawn card.

Edited Josh Stansfield (March 7, 2013 04:36:37 PM)

Michael,

But if they had to untap, then you called it GRV preceding a DEC? Or is it
still DEC for you?

-George

George - we've been treating that as GRV preceding it (untapping when there's no instruction telling you to), therefore not DEC. It at least gives the opponent a chance to catch it before the error is committed, and isn't DEC under the “No prior GPE” condition.

Josh - I always ask a number of questions around the nothing-to-untap scenario - if its mumbled to try and trick the opponent into it, then we've got something more going on, and may be into example B of cheating.

I can see where you're coming from. I just feel like it's more of a disservice to issue DEC to a player who believed the turn was passed than to curb the possibility for a player to get away with mumbling something (which would be pretty tricky to investigate… how hard is it to say “No, I didn't say anything…”?)

In either case, the problem will not happen again, as the players will forever-after be careful to confirm that the turn was truly passed. But it feels very arbitrary to say “well, since you didn't have anything to untap, I'm afraid you lose…” I realize that sometimes the policy has to be arbitrary for consistency. I also understand that it's both players' responsibility to communicate clearly.

But I still think the potential for abuse is very close to zero for the player who thinks the turn was passed and draws (nobody would reasonably expect to get away with that), whereas it's actually measurable for the player who mumbles something.

I can't fault you for strictly reading the DEC policy to apply here, but my personal conviction is that it's not quite appropriate for this particular situation. All said, I could very well be wrong, but I have ruled this way in the past to the satisfaction of both players. This virtually never happens on purpose for either side, and I expect that most players on the winning side of a DEC penalty for their opponent in this situation wouldn't feel like it was justice.

I had a situation at GP Vancouver where another judge and myself were sitting next to the last match that had yet to complete. We were both watching the game intently when one player reached over and drew a card. The other player looked up and said, “Did you just draw a card?”, the other player replied, “Yeah you said go.” He said, “No I didn't.

The other judge and I looked at each other both surprised and stepped aside. We had a conversation over whether we'd seen anything that could possibly have been construed as a ”go" and neither of us saw anything of the sort. No words were spoken, no gestures we noticed. We escalated this to the head judge and all agreed it was a DEC.

This was game 3 of the 9th (or so) round of a side event and we chalked this up to exhaustion on the part of the player who drew. I know board state shouldn't come into play, but we were both watching the game and the board was stalled out. Neither was at a disadvantage so there was no incentive for the player to try to sneak an extra draw in. Not to mention it would be extremely foolish to do so with two judges sitting right next to you.

Hey Adam. I feel like that your situation was also different from most times this happen and being a witness to what happened heightens the ability to say DEC in that situation.

-George FitzGerald

Sent from my iPhone.

Originally posted by George FitzGerald:

Hey Adam. I feel like that your situation was also different from most times this happen and being a witness to what happened heightens the ability to say DEC in that situation.

I agree entirely.

I'd be inclined to go with DEC when there was no untap. Otherwise
you'll always attempt to draw a card when your opponent goes into the
tank and you have nothing tapped and just claim you heard them say
'go' if you get caught and if you don't: profit.

Thus not going for DEC in those situations is highly abusable.

If they untap then draw the opponent has the chance to stop them so
the GRV is correct.

On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 10:02 AM, Adam Zakreski
<forum-3263@apps.magicjudges.org> wrote:
> George FitzGerald
>
> Hey Adam. I feel like that your situation was also different from most times
> this happen and being a witness to what happened heightens the ability to
> say DEC in that situation.
>
>
> I agree entirely.
>
> ——————————————————————————–
> If you want to respond to this thread, simply reply to this e-email. Or view
> and respond to this message on the web at
> http://apps.magicjudges.org/forum/post/16379/
>
>
> Disable all notifications for this topic:
> http://apps.magicjudges.org/forum/noemail/3263/
> Receive on-site notifications only for this topic:
> http://apps.magicjudges.org/foru m/noemail/3263/
>
> You can change your email notification settings at
> http://apps.magicjudges.org/profiles/edit



–
Gareth Pye
Level 2 Judge, Melbourne, Australia
Australian MTG Forum: mtgau.com
gareth@cerberos.id.au - www.rockpaperdynamite.wordpress.com
“Dear God, I would like to file a bug report”

Interesting. So you think players will just move to draw a card, figuring that the opponent may not notice, then when the opponent passes turn, draw again?

And if the opponent does notice, they'll just say they heard “Go”?

Something to think about, but it seems pretty unlikely to me. Sure, cheaters will cheat regardless of the EV, but this would be a rather brazen one that would expose a cheater pretty quickly. There are only so many times you could get away with reaching over and drawing a card during your opponent's turn without them noticing. And the first time you're caught for a premeditated cheat like this is probably going to get you a substantial suspension.

Another consideration, what about sloppy players who draw before they untap? Does that also become DEC because they did it out of order, even if it was clear they were reaching to untap the instant after they drew a card?