Please keep the forum protocol in mind when posting.

Competitive REL » Post: Usage of Video Coverage Material in investigations

Usage of Video Coverage Material in investigations

July 15, 2019 02:34:01 PM [Original Post]

Philip Ockelmann
Judge (Level 2 (International Judge Program)), Scorekeeper, Tournament Organizer, IJP Temporary Regional Advisor

German-speaking countries

Usage of Video Coverage Material in investigations

Posting this in Comp REL since video coverage most likely happens at that - but also applies at regular


During a discussion today, a judge found that the Headjudge cannot use video material in their investigation if such material exists from coverage, bar MCs, according to the annotated MTR (https://blogs.magicjudges.org/rules/mtr2-13/)

Why is that?
I fully understand that we don't use video material in “normal” rulings, as that would make rulings different based on whether or not a player is in the feature match area - same as we don't use judge information when a judge could confirm which card was drawn extra for HCE because they were watching.

But why is that also the case for investigations?

The annotated MTR names two reasons:
“People on camera may get some additional advantage when they are on camera due to the video replay option.”
This doesn't apply in an investigation scenario (or at least I don't see how), as the only goal in an investigation is whether or not tournament integrity has been compromised.
“It adds time to the investigation. The Head Judge needs to head somewhere, have the video team find the video for that match, find the exact spot, and then watch it, possibly multiple times.”
This I understand. But….everything in an investigation adds time. And it is up to the Headjudge to decide how and how much time should be spent on what part of an investigation.
Why is this not the same for video material? Clearly, if it would take 20 minutes for everyone to wait to get the material and another 10 to review it, it's too long…but if it can be collected in 5 minutes while the HJ is talking with the players, and then could be used to pretty easily find out what actually happened, according to the annotated MTR, the HJ cannot do that.


So: Why is it that the Headjudge gets to use all resources avaliable to them in an investigation, and has to make a judgement call on what to use and how long and what to use it for - but (apparently) not video material?

July 15, 2019 05:11:25 PM [Marked as Accepted Answer]

Scott Marshall
Forum Moderator
Judge (Level 4 (Judge Foundry)), Hall of Fame

USA - Southwest

Usage of Video Coverage Material in investigations

Originally posted by Philip Körte:

a judge found that the Headjudge cannot use video material in their investigation
There's some misunderstanding, here; the exact quote from the MTR:
Video replays may also be used for investigative purposes at a later time.
This section (2.13) of the MTR talks about the Head Judge of a World or Mythic Championship being allowed to, at their sole discretion, use coverage to assist with rulings, and that those two types of events are the only ones where video coverage may be consulted for rulings.

Investigations may use video coverage, even at a later date, regardless of the type of event.

d:^D

July 15, 2019 05:14:08 PM

Scott Marshall
Forum Moderator
Judge (Level 4 (Judge Foundry)), Hall of Fame

USA - Southwest

Usage of Video Coverage Material in investigations

Oh, I forgot the part where I expand a bit on why that language in the MTR is so specific. It helps us, as Head Judges, to address situations where players demand that we “look at the video!”; normally, we can't, in any of our events. Further, even at the events where coverage can be used for rulings, only the Head Judge may decide to do so, and:
Players may not request that a judge consult a video replay.
That sentence can be very valuable for us, when confronted by an angry, demanding player.

d:^D

July 15, 2019 10:53:57 PM

Emilien Wild
Forum Moderator
Judge (Level 3 (International Judge Program))

BeNeLux

Usage of Video Coverage Material in investigations

As for why it's allowed at Mythic Championship, it's because these events are very unique regarding the video coverage. They have an apparelled team dedicated to it (usually 4 to 5 judges, including a dedicated burgundy), countless non-judges who are very helpful into handling such investigations, and unique tools that allow us to gain a lot of time when using video coverage to help for a ruling or investigation. Their video coverage is also the most high profile in organized play, which require a spike in demand from the audience for issues to be solved quickly.
The extreme shift in resources available allows us to meet that demand - but even then, we're pretty conservative about it because of how much time and energy it still consume.

It's one of these few situations where we want judges to be aware that what we're able to do at a MC isn't something judges should try to do at their local events, and so it's specifically called out in our documents.

- Emilien

You must be registered in order to post to this forum.