Hello judges.

I just wanted some opinion on how to react to a situation that popped up late into a PTQ over the weekend.

We are in round 6/7 and at one of the tables very close to the bottom of the standings I notice a player texting between games. I ask the player to please put his phone away (this was announced at the start that devices can't be used whilst in a match). The player looked up and replied snarkily “oh I was using it to cheat.” The player then put the phone in their pocket and turned back to sideboarding.

I was pretty dumbfounded by this so I just paused and walked away from the table.
How would you have handled this? It was fairly obvious the player was just being an ass, but I felt like his attitude was bordering on USC minor.

Keen to hear opinions!

Stern & respectful: “Sir, I don't appreciate you being disrespectful.”

Let them react to that. If they continue to be an ass, issue a USC. If they apologize and/or improve their behavior, thank them.

Stern with a twinkle in the eye: “Dude, just like bombs at airports,
we don't joke about cheating at tournaments. Do you have another
answer?”

But otherwise what Evan said.

A raised eyebrow and “Excuse me?” is all it usually takes to get them back on track.

Stand your ground. Do not walk away until he gives an acceptable answer.

I'm with Adam. Hold ground. He's being an ass. What we in the ‘ business ’ like to call : Punking you. Manage a straight face and ask him to hold his game while you go get him a piece of paper in order to complete the DQ paperwork.

He'll probably change his tune pretty quick. And once he does, let him know that it's not a jokable topic. He will be les likely to get snarky to another judge in the future.

Originally posted by Darren Horve:

I'm with Adam. Hold ground. He's being an ass. What we in the ‘ business ’ like to call : Punking you. Manage a straight face and ask him to hold his game while you go get him a piece of paper in order to complete the DQ paperwork.

He'll probably change his tune pretty quick. And once he does, let him know that it's not a joke-able topic. He will be les likely to get snarky to another judge in the future.

While I understand the sentiment, please refrain from this particular type of behavior (specifically the punking part). Firmly get an acceptable answer, and let him know that those kinds of comments and behaviors are unacceptable. Threatening to go straight for a DQ (assuming you are a Head Judge, please do NOT do this as a floor judge) is significantly detrimental to the kind of diplomacy and tact we wish to bring to this situation, and may end up simply escalating an inappropriate demeanor to a full-blown argument and, perhaps, a needed investigation for something the judge himself or herself provoked.

Adam and Evan's solutions are much better as a whole for diplomacy with the player and any observers. Be firm with your approach, but avoid being threatening or “that a-hole judge” yourself.

Edited Peter Richmond (Feb. 24, 2015 06:40:05 PM)

Evan, your reply is pretty interesting. Do you think that is is diplomatic? Would you say it is more or less so than Gareth's, and what kind of relationship does it imply between judge and player in this instance?



Essentially my concern would be that your response is more likely to inflame the situation, than it is to foster good communication on the issue. I'm not sure on the cultural differences, but here at least I think a lot of players would feel that that response was needlessly passive aggressive.

Matt

Edited Matthew Light (Feb. 24, 2015 07:12:11 PM)

I believe it is diplomatic. At base, I believe the judge is in a position of authority that should be respected. Also, we are talking about two human beings in an environment where mutual respect is important. I don't appreciate it, and I'm being aggressive (not Passive Aggressive) to assert my displeasure and request a resolution.

In this situation, I believe his behavior is adversarial as well as disruptive and needs to be curtailed before it undermines the integrity of the event and the view of how players and judges can interact.

In essence, I'm taking a confrontational approach here. What does that mean? Read SeaCat's L3 Article on Stress & Conflict Management.

“Good communication” can come later, especially if they soften up and we can switch gears to discuss why it's not acceptable and that there's no bad blood.

Originally posted by Peter Richmond:

While I understand the sentiment, please refrain from this particular type of behavior (specifically the punking part). Firmly get an acceptable answer, and let him know that those kinds of comments and behaviors are unacceptable. Threatening to go straight for a DQ (assuming you are a Head Judge, please do NOT do this as a floor judge) is significantly detrimental to the kind of diplomacy and tact we wish to bring to this situation, and may end up simply escalating an inappropriate demeanor to a full-blown argument and, perhaps, a needed investigation for something the judge himself or herself provoked.

Agreed. Let's not make threats, ever. Penalties and DQs occur when they are warranted, like guns on police officers. We would not use the threat of power for power. /browbeat

Awesome. Cheers for taking the time to reply Evan.

I think it's important to imagine Evan stating his suggested reply in a very calm, non-confrontational tone of voice. How it's said may well be far more important than what's said.

While I agree with Evan (is that three times today, already? heh!), I would be sorely tempted to react differently - even though it's a bit trolling:
him: “oh I was using it to cheat”
me: (surprised look) “are you admitting you were Cheating?”

I think Evan's suggestion has a higher probability of defusing the situation and conveying a clear message (again, with the proper delivery). :)

d:^D

I know you didn't ask me to explain why I'd prefer mine to Evan's but
I felt like elaborating.

While there are many wrong ways to react there is also many correct
ways. Many of those correct ways rely on the judge being able to
deliver them correctly. They also depend on the player you are
interacting with and the cultural norms that are applicable. Mine
would probably work pretty well in most of Australia as it would be
tieing into (not exclusively) our distrust of The Man and his mindless
rules. It's also a response that I'd be able to deliver appropriately,
but I'd probably deliver Evan's with a bit too much aggression to be
100% effective.

It ties into the hardest part* of judging at big events, you can't
know the cultural norms of the players and they can't know yours.
Everything has to be handled in a bit more of a straight down the line
way.

*Well it's one of the hardest parts for me, I've made a few cultural
references that came off as really weird to the players late on Sunday
night.

On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 5:07 AM, Matthew Light
<forum-16443-b7f3@apps.magicjudges.org> wrote:

Originally posted by Gareth Pye:

While there are many wrong ways to react there is also many correct
ways. Many of those correct ways rely on the judge being able to
deliver them correctly. They also depend on the player you are
interacting with and the cultural norms that are applicable. Mine
would probably work pretty well in most of Australia as it would be
tieing into (not exclusively) our distrust of The Man and his mindless
rules. It's also a response that I'd be able to deliver appropriately,
but I'd probably deliver Evan's with a bit too much aggression to be
100% effective.

Thanks Gareth! I think this thread has taken a great turn and become really deep!

Responding in kind: I like Gareth's approach. I appreciate the humor in it and would likely laugh about that kind of retort over beers or when sharing the story with other judges at the event. But in the moment, I don't want this to be a laughing matter and I can't guarantee the humor can diffuse the situation. Delivery is everything, and I'm not always funny when I try to be.

Maybe the player can appreciate being matched wits and we bond. Maybe the player thinks being snarky back is me being an ass. I'd let each individual judge weight that risk and determine whether they're comfortable with that.

Scott Marshall
I think it's important to imagine Evan stating his suggested reply in a very calm, non-confrontational tone of voice. How it's said may well be far more important than what's said.

Gareth and Scott bring up good points about presence. For those that haven't met me, I'm about 6" and only 140 pounds. I'm not a big guy, I can't grow a beard (heh!), and my voice sounds somewhat like Michael Cera and Cid the Sloth combined. I'm not an imposing person by any physical means.

Part of coming across as firm and having presence is learning ways to improve body language and tone of voice to come across as stronger and more confident. I stand with my legs shoulder-width apart, make eye contact, position my body towards them, and speak softly, slowly, & directly.

Try practicing what I recommended saying, then increase and decrease the amount of gruffness in your voice. Look in the mirror and experiment with different body language. It can really make the difference in how you come across!

Edited Evan Cherry (Feb. 24, 2015 11:06:15 PM)

I just look at them like a disappointed parent. Then follow up with “what was that?” So far that method has worked very well. I've not had to remove any players for them being stupid or confrontational with that reply.

To me this is a very clear no infraction, no penalty, move on with your
life.
On Feb 23, 2015 6:06 PM, “Lachlan Saunders” <

Originally posted by Sam Sherman:

To me this is a very clear no infraction, no penalty, move on with your life.

While there's no infraction, it is still behaviour we can't tolerate on tournaments. Some nearby players could not get sarcasm from that guy and gain false assumption from that situation, that we will tolerate some kind of cheating. I would talk to the player, telling him that cheating is no laughing matter for us.

Edited Bartłomiej Wieszok (Feb. 25, 2015 12:33:32 PM)