I am referring to a principle used in Law 64 (revokes). It defines a correction period and then requires the TD to restore equity if a revoke is discovered too late as per 64 B.4. So, in a "simple revoke" case, the NOS gets back the trick wrongly won but not a bonus trick.
My suggestion relates to using a similar principle for agreed claims {i.e. when was the objection to the claim raised?}
Law 69 A. states "Agreement is established when a contestant assents to an opponent’s claim or concession, and raises no objection to it before his side makes a call on a subsequent board ...".
Law 69 B. then clarifies that a director can rescore the board even if a prior agreement is withdrawn too late.
Law 69 C. Definition of Normal
1. For the purposes of Laws 70 and 71, "normal" includes play that would be careless or inferior for the class of player involved.
2. However, for the purposes of Law 69 B., "normal" shall include plays that would be reasonable or rational but not careless or inferior.
The wording may need to be tweaked to clarify that the new definition of normal is only when a previous agreement is too late as per Law 69 A.
Views?
This post has been edited by shyams: 2015-November-20, 05:06