Late in the round, you're called over to a table where the players are in disagreement over a trigger being missed. Anderson controls a Monastery Mentor and is attacking with a Brimaz, King of Oreskos and the Cat token it makes. Nishikori, who is tapped out and hellbent, blocks Brimaz with Siege Rhino. Anderson taps Brimaz and his remaining untapped lands to cast the last card in his hand, Stoke the Flames, targeting the Rhino. Anderson moves his Stoke and Brimaz to his graveyard, then reaches for his deckbox, pulls out a Monk token and puts it into play, which is where their stories diverge. Anderson claims that he did all this in one motion, that the clock is running low, and he is trying to play quickly to finish the match on time. Nishikori claims combat damage has already happened because there was a pause, then they both placed their creatures in graveyards and he wrote and announced his new life total before Anderson made any indication that the Mentor triggered.

You weren't there when this happened, the tables next to them are empty, and this would be the first time this match that Monastery Mentor triggered. How would you answer this call? What questions would you ask which player? Does something else about the situation (round number, table number, exact time on the clock, sleeve color, cards in hard, lands untapped, spectators present) change how you would handle this?

All of the various factors that you list could influence what you believe actually happened - and that's what you do, you listen to both players, then decide what you believe, and rule accordingly.

Originally posted by David Incorvati:

You weren't there when this happened

and that's what makes it so tough - and also makes it tough for us to offer much help, now. We weren't there, at all…

From what you say, I'm inclined to think that Anderson did not miss nor even forget his Monk trigger; he just did things in what he felt was the most expedient / efficient manner. Nishikori, who really doesn't want that Monk token to compound the problems he's already trying to solve, probably has a different perspective.

One important concept to keep in mind, in such situations: both players can be telling the truth (as they know/believe it to be), yet disagree significantly on that truth. Don't get stuck on the idea that someone must be lying; it's far more common that the two players have different but honest understandings of what's happened.

d:^D

There is nothing in your summary that would lead me to believe that this wasn't a case of Out of Order Sequencing. However, many of the factors you have listed may change that view. In the end, it comes down to what you think is most likely to be true based on the player's answers to your questions.

I believe that, based on what information you gave us, I would assume Out of Order Sequencing. I know that, if I were in this position, I would do something similar. I would resolve all that I can on the board, then grab the token afterwards, though I play almost exclusively at Regular REL.