Welcome back to the Knowledge Pool! As a quick reminder, Silver scenarios are designed for those working up to a Level 2 degree of IPG knowledge. As such, if you are Level 2 or higher please refrain from responding or guiding others until Friday. This gives enough time for those with a lesser grasp of the IPG to increase their knowledge and understanding. Thanks!

You can find the blog post for this scenario HERE.

You are a floor judge at a Sealed PTQ. During pool verification, Ashley calls you over. There are only two minutes left in verification, and she tells you that there is no way she'll be able to finish in time. You discover that Norbert ignored the head judge's three separate announcements to alphabetize the pool, and in fact didn't even sort it by color when he registered it. How do you handle this situation?

Edited Josh Stansfield (May 1, 2014 03:42:01 PM)

Heh! I won't give my opinion except to say - I LOVE it! I've seen this in tourneys perhaps a dozen times; it definitely can happen! You've put in an interesting twist, though. I am eager to see how the sdiscussion plays out. Just LOVE it!

Eric

Is this Sealed PTQ taking place after this Friday or before? =)

Fair question, though I expect you knew the answer :P

Please answer this question using the newest version of the IPG, which goes into effect May 2

To save you all time, here is a link to that version:
http://www.wizards.com/ContentResources/Wizards/WPN/Main/Documents/Magic_The_Gathering_Infraction_Procedure_Guide_PDF1.pdf

I feel that this falls into the newly renamed Limited Procedure Violation on the part of Norbert. There isn't a direct example in IPG 3.6 but he has clearly caused a disruption to the sealed deck procedure. Norbert has committed a technical error by failing to properly register and organize the pool and receives a Warning.

I feel it's appropriate to give Ashley a time extension to register her pool. While I'd prefer Ashley have called a judge when she received the disorganized mess of a pool, I don't feel that it is fair to punish her the errors of the one that registered her pool. I'm not sure of how long of an extension to give her in order to properly verify her pool but clearly she should be given enough time to verify her pool.

OK, I had forgotten to check out the new IPG, would have given a wrong answer on the infraction (Failure to Follow Official Announcements instead of Limited Procedure Violation).

I do not see any official policy regarding what we do to fix the situation. It seems obvious that the person playing the pool Ashley is verifying should not be penalized for Norbert's error, and neither should Ashley (even though she could have called a judge earlier, I do not think we hold players to quite the same standards for that as for an in-game error). The possible fixes are either allow Ashley some extra time to check her pool, and then both her and whoever receives the pool some extra time to build their deck, or to have a judge check that pool so that Ashley is unaffected, and whenever the player finally playing that pool receives it, give him or her some extra time.

I think the second one is probably better logistically (less people with extra time, no one will have two pools in front of them as the same time), but can only be done if you have a judge to spare, so that depends on how well staffed the event is.

I'm generally in the same camp as Marc. (thus confirming the question =) )

TE-Limited Procedure Violation/Warning for Norbert. No infraction/penalty for Ashley.

I also think we give her an extension (to bring her registration time similar to the first pass), and let everyone else start deck building, allowing her to start building as soon as she's done registering.

When construction time is up, we start collecting decklists from everyone else. If we're lucky, she won't need all of her extension, and the event won't be impacted that much.

Before reading other responses:

ooh, this is an interesting one.
The first priority is keeping the tournament fair, and running smoothly. Ask the head judge for permission to extend verification/deck building as necessary for Ashley, and if possible, have a judge assist in verification to speed the process along, and keep the tournament on track.

Norbert has failed to follow official announcements. However, with recent changes to the IPG, “failure to follow official announcements” isn't a thing any more. It sounds like this does fall under Limited Procedure Violation, though. Like the philosophy says, Norbert's error has disrupted the flow of the tournament. That said, the description on LPV is pretty light, and focuses on draft procedures. If LPV is relevant, Norbert gets a warning. If not, caution him, and make sure to explain why it's important to make verification a smooth procedure for all involved.


after reading other responses:

I forgot about the wrinkle that the PTQ might actually be happening before May 2. :P
It also sounds like I, and some other respondents, were a bit confused on the procedures. I originally assumed Ashley was verifying a pool, then playing with it. After re-reading, my assumption is that Ashley is verifying a pool which will again be passed, and someone else will spot-check, then build with it. I've seen competitive events run either way.

In the latter situation, I think it makes sense to have a judge (or judges) take over verification, and have Ashley proceed with deckbuilding, and give the pool whatever time extension is necessary on deckbuilding. This helps minimize disruption to the tournament.

Most respondents agree that TE-LPV looks applicable, but it's hard to tell.

Edited Talin Salway (April 30, 2014 11:51:55 PM)

Thats a really interesting one indeed.

So if I understand it right, Ashley got the pool from Norbert to verify it, and Norbert didnt follow the announcements from the Head Judge to sort and alphabetize the the pool.

It sounds like a violation to the new TE-LPV infraction, if i remember correctly the infraction was covered by Failure to Follow Official Announcements before May 2nd. So TE-LPV and a Warningto Norbert and no infraction for Ashley. I would remind Norbert that he needs to follow the Announcements for sorting his pool, and also Ashley that she should call a judge immediately if she has a problem with verifying a pool (especially in this particular situation).

Now for the Pool itself: to make things easier and provide the best costumer service I would ask the Head Judge for allowence to do the verification of the pool (assuming I dont have any other duty that needs my attention on the floor, if so i would ask another co-judge). When i'm done with it, i will give the pool to the person who should recieve it (i also assume there will be a deck swap after verification) and give that player a time extension. The amount of the time extension is the time between the official announcement that players can start to build theyr deck and the moment i'm giving the pool to the player.

Edit: if we give Ashley a time extension for verifying her pool and let her do all the work the whole sealed tournament might be delayed until she is finished with checking. If we let the tournanemt go on and do the veryfication yourself no one has to wait.

Edited Auzmyn Oberweger (May 1, 2014 10:33:54 AM)

TE - LPV for Norbert is pretty obvious. I would consider giving Ashley a TE - LPV as well; upon seeing this mess of a pool, she should have called a judge immediately to ask for assistance, and doing so with only 2 minutes left in verification makes the entire tournament wait. However, TE - LPV is a bit vague in application, so I don't know if this is appropriate.

Additional remedy: If I had judge resources available, I would instruct a FJ or 2 to assist Ashley in registering her pool to speed up the process so the tournament doesn't have to wait.

Extra note: This thread doesn't have the difficulty level marked. In addition to being useful to see what the difficulty level is in general, speaking personally it helps me to distinguish KP threads from other threads (I read the forums thread name first and don't usually read the forum location at all). If I see “SILVER” or “BRONZE” or whatnot in the thread name, it's easier to recognize as a KP.

Edited Lyle Waldman (May 1, 2014 01:10:34 PM)

Originally posted by Lyle Waldman:

I would consider giving Ashley a TE - LPV as well

I don't see anything in policy that supports giving Ashley a warning for failing to call a judge to report another player's LPV. She has not “Committed a technical error during Draft or Sealed Deck Build.” unless you count not being able to finish validation in time. There are very few places in the IPG where you can be penalized for failing to call a judge outside of the game you're in and most of those are about gaining an advantage from failing to call a judge.

I'd definitely tell Ashley, “If you get a pool that's a mess like this in the future, please call a judge as soon as possible so we can help out and it doesn't hold up the tournament.”

Easy TE-LPV for Norbert, not much discussion needed there.

As for Ashley, I am making an analogy with FtMGS here. If I bolt a hexproof creature and my opponent lets it resolve and puts the creature in his graveyard, we both get a warning: me for making a mistake and my opponent for letting it happen. My opponent shares my responsibility to maintain a legal game state.

Norbert put Ashley in a difficult position, but Ashley should have pointed this out earlier. She shares Norbert's responsibility to keep the Limited procedures going at a decent pace.

I would tell Ashley to contiinue with verification while I talk to the HJ about it. I see no reason to give Ashley a penalty, but I wouldn't recommend a time extension unless it's quite clear the tournament's planning can easily absorb the delay.

From a tournament viewpoint, I think the first goal has to be: get that pool verified asap.
The responding judge should immediately jump and help verify the pool by sorting or whatever can be done to minimize the interruption. If any backup pools are available (pre-registered/verified pools by judges), the unverified pool can simply be pulled and replaced allowing the tournament to continue with no interruptions.

IMO, while there are procedures involved (and thus the possibility of penalties), verifying a pool is not truly part of playing limited magic at any release level. As long as the pool is registered and verified correctly , it does not matter who does the work. The integrity of the tournament is not compromised by a judge assisting with pool registration or verification.

I would lean towards a verbal caution to Ashley suggesting that she ask for help sooner. I would track down Norbert before round one. If Norbert is apologetic, I would give him only a warning for TE-LPV. If he is not (i.e. this was deliberate), I would issue an additional warning for UC-Minor.

-mf

Good work to everyone this week. This was indeed an example of the new item in our Judge tool-belt that is Limited Procedure Violation.

The philosophy behind IPG 3.6 states

Errors in Limited procedures are disruptive and may become more so if they are not caught quickly.

The head judge announced a few times that players should sort their decks by color and alphabetically and Norbert ignored these instructions. This behavior is quite disruptive and fits quite well under TE-LPV, which carries a Warning.

Some of you suggested that Ashley also committed a Limited Procedure Violation and should be given a Warning as well. While we should certainly encourage her to call a judge earlier in the process once she realized something had gone wrong, it is unreasonable to assess an infraction for Ashley; she may not have noticed right away, or she may not have thought it was a problem until later, but in any case she did the right thing as soon as she realized it needed to happen.

You should immediately help her verify the pool. As Matt Farney mentioned, the pool getting verified is the important detail, not who verifies it.

Thanks to everyone for participating and we'll be back tomorrow with another exciting scenario!