Aye, I know. But my point still stands - you need to make a ruling first.

Mark,

There is nothing that says that you can't or shouldn't ever confer with
another judge to make a ruling. I certainly do it when I'm not sure of a
ruling or need a second opinion particularly on a judgment call. I've even
done it as a head judge to make sure that I get the ruling right. If you
think it's DEC, then certainly you have to go to the HJ and they will
decide. However, if your opinion is in the other direction, you're
essentially issuing a downgrade if the HJ believes it should be a DEC. Even
if you go to the head judge and confirm the ruling and go back and give it,
the player still has the right to appeal and present their case to the head
judge.

-George FitzGerald
L2, Sarasota, FL

Also Mark, I would like to point out that just because you go to the head
judge does not remove the players rights to appeal.

I agree with George.

Quick story: during a PTQ I had a possible tardiness penalty which I wasn't comfortable with. I explained the situation to the HJ and he said “ok, but anyway issue the tardiness”. The player appealed, the HJ came and, with player arguments, he decided to remove the penalty.

So, he still have the right to appeal and moreover, to get another ruling :-)

What about an alternate situation where instead of hearing the player say go, there is a hand motion. For example, AP has a habit of making a sweeping motion with his hand that indicates to his opponent that it is the opponent's turn. He is on his turn, he puts the cards in his hand down on the table, and is contemplating attacks. He has both hands on the table touching his creatures, and then decides that he needs to look at the cards in his hand. His opponent thinks that he sees the hand motion indicating his turn, and draws a card. Is this the same sort of thing as before? I see a lot of players simply using these hand motions (especially when I have gone to GP's where one player doesn't speak the same language as their opponent).

Communication problems and misunderstandings are not always verbal (in fact, they are probably more often nonverbal). There's no real difference, and I would treat it the same way, making sure to educate the players to be certain the turn was passed before proceeding no matter what ruling is issued.

Originally posted by Josh Stansfield:

Communication problems and misunderstandings are not always verbal (in fact, they are probably more often nonverbal). There's no real difference, and I would treat it the same way, making sure to educate the players to be certain the turn was passed before proceeding no matter what ruling is issued.

Does the fact that the player doesn't need to untap any permanents during his untap step relevant in this situation as well (if it is at all?) to whether it should be considered a GRV or DEC? It's still not entirely clear to me.

That seems to be a difference of opinion. The act of drawing a card before the opponent has a chance to notice an error fits the definition of the DEC infraction, so if you feel that's appropriate, treat this the same way.

Whether a player hears something he thinks means “Go” or sees a gesture he thinks means “Go” makes no difference in my ruling. Different players communicate differently, and if I feel it was a problem of honest miscommunication, I will rule accordingly, whether verbal or nonverbal.

Edited Josh Stansfield (March 12, 2013 03:52:58 PM)