So I was judging a competitive event this weekend, a qualifier.
In the semi-finals player A has just defeated player B 2-1. I have been sitting at the table most of this match. Then A drops the bomb. Before we go the main issue, lets give a short testimony of the player in question.


Player A is clearly a casual player. He announces spell, resolves stuff and afterwards handle the mana payment details. At one point B plays his combo piece. A responds with a Force of Negation. B plays Spell Pierce. Player A now cracks two fetches, tapping the lands as they come into play. A plays another Spell Pierce, which seals the deal. A is a bit confused over the second Spell Pierce - It shows that the fetches where to get the mana needed to play the Force of Negation. It does not affect the outcome this time, B demonstrates the combo and wins. I am being quite direct with A that he needs to be more clear, and in order to play spells you actually need to pay the mana right away.

Another example from the same match is B's end of turn, A has five lands untapped and a vial on 2. “I play Harbinger of the Tides.” “Sure”. A taps the vial and places the creature on the battlefield. I educate him that again, he need to be more clear about his communication.

Ok, so the match is just finished. A turns to me. “I did something that will most likely get me punished”. O-K…?

“After game 1, I realized that a sideboard card from previous match was still in main board”

“Why did you not tell me this right away?”
“I was afraid I'd get punished and I wanted to play”

“And you discovered this when sideboarding?”
“Yes”

“Are there copies of this card in the main board?”
“Yes”

“Did you play this card during the game?”
“Yes”

“Remind me, who won the first game?”
“I did”

“Why are you telling me this now?”
“I wanted to play, but I also want it to be fair. I expect to get a game loss but if I had lost it would not have mattered so I waited until it played out”


In conclusion:
- No-one but him knows this has occured
- His reasons not to tell right is because he likes to play
- His reasons to tell now is because now it is played out


What would you have done in this situation?

I don't think this warrants a penalty. When we're in between games, there's no such thing as an illegal deck. We can't verify whether or not the deck used in game 1 was legal or not. If the player had called us straight away, we would have just said “thank you for your honesty, keep playing”.

Even though they played a copy of the card, the fact that there are some in the main deck and some in the sideboard means it's not obvious to anyone that the actual piece of cardboard played was a main deck copy or a sideboard copy.

I would definitely stress to them though that it is a very good idea to alert a judge as soon as an error is noticed. The penalties for deliberately saying nothing are quite severe (DQ for Cheating - not calling attention to an error), while the penalty for calling attention to things as soon as they happen is much less severe. In this case, you could explain how the penalty for Deck Error is a Warning, so if they had noticed during Game 1 that there was a sideboard card (e.g. they drew the 3rd copy when there are only 2 main deck) then they would have gotten a Warning only.

So in summary, stress the benefits of calling a judge immediately, and the dangers in trying to hide things. Stress that Judges are here to ensure that everyone gets to play, and in particular, everyone gets to play fairly. All of the other players must abide by the rules of tournament play, and therefore so should this person. Also, from their comments, it sounds like they wanted to see how well they would do - in that case you can tell them how, if they win a game by hiding an error, then it isn't really a “proper” win is it.

While I agree that I'm not going to do anything in this situation (we don't have a penalty for having played an incorrect deck in game 1 and not realising until sideboarding)

Mark, If you are playing more copies of a maindeck card than is registered in game one (your example) is a Game Loss (quoted below). It's one of the upgrades as it is not instantly noticeable. Any of those cards could have been the wrong one, and now, arguably, it could also fall under the “having taken strategic decision based upon the card's existence” as we don't know which card should have been the sideboarded one.

Upgrade: If an error resulted in more copies of a main deck card being played than were
registered and this was discovered after the game had begun, the penalty is a Game Loss unless
all copies of the card are still in the random portion of the library. For example if the decklist has
two copies of Shock in the main deck and two in the sideboard, but a search finds two copies of
Shock in the library with another already in the graveyard, the penalty is upgraded.

Cheers Guy - good spot. I was only reading half way through the section - a rookie mistake!

Hi Olle,

Thanks for sharing an interesting scenario.

As others have stated, I would focus on education of the player in such situation. Specifically, that players got very close to a cheating territory and we should try to learn about their intentions and mind process - the player knew they did something wrong (“I was afraid I'd get punished”) and they gained an advantage (not receiving the penalty they thought they would receive and were allowed to play).

And no, I do not buy the “I wanted to play, but I also want it to be fair” statement. They would still be playing even after the Game Loss or not? And having a presideboarded game is not my definition of “fair”. That statement looks more like an excuse the player constructed for themselves to make their mind easier ;-)

Edited Milan Majerčík (Aug. 12, 2019 09:29:38 AM)

I agree with Mark and Milan. If the player had noticed this during game 1 and waiting to call attention to it, this would be pretty clear Cheating. However if we believe that they only noticed it after the game was over, there's no infraction at that point, so waiting to call attention to it can't be Cheating.

Isaac:
“If the player had noticed this during game 1 and waiting to call attention to it, this would be pretty clear Cheating.” - Obviously.

"However if we believe that they only noticed it after the game was over, there's no infraction at that point…"

Wait, what?! Of course there is. If an infraction occurs and it is noticed after the game, it is still an infraction. If not, no one would ever be penalized for things caught on camera reviews etc. Let's look at the rule I followed and Guy Baldwin also found and see what it actually means.


Upgrade: If an error resulted in more copies of a main deck card being played than were
registered and this was discovered after the game had begun, the penalty is a Game Loss unless
all copies of the card are still in the random portion of the library. For example if the decklist has
two copies of Shock in the main deck and two in the sideboard, but a search finds two copies of
Shock in the library with another already in the graveyard, the penalty is upgraded.

What you seem to require is that it is discovered during game play. Because it is a main deck card, to discover it would require the player to A) See (draw, scry etc) one more copy than registered in main board or B) During a search notice more copies than are main board. But this is not what the rules say, quite the opposite:

"…unless all copies of the card are still in the random portion of the library".

So if any of those cards are seen, that is enough to warrant the penalty. Reason for the upgrade is of course because it is hard to realize, compared to pure sideboard cards. Once a sideboard card is found and not called attention to, harm is done. But you all seem to disagree on this despite the rules text.

Can you please show me the rule that dictates that infractions expire after the game it committed in?



Also concider these scenarios. That is the rationale for the rulings? When do we fix, and when is the harm already done?

A. A player has been testing different configurations of a deck, swapping two cards between main and sideboard between occasions. This is actually quite common. For this Tournament CARD_M is registered in main deck, CARD_S in sideboard. Player draws CARD_S in game 1, not realizing it should not be there. During sideboarding for G2 he realizes and calls a judge.

B. During game 1 a player draws a Lightning Bolt, a card he only has in his sideboard. He realizes his mistake, but does not say anything.

C. A player is locking down game 1, and need only to find this one artifact he is now tutoring for… Only to realize
it is located in the sideboard (Believe this was Luoise Salvatto, Lantern Control). Instead he has a second copy of Grafdiggers Cage, the first one already on the battlefield.

Edited Olle Liljefeldt (Aug. 19, 2019 01:58:41 AM)

Originally posted by Olle Liljefeldt:

Can you please show me the rule that dictates that infractions expire after the game it committed in?

There isn't one. But that is how we rule, with the exception of USC penalties. If a player comes up to you after their match and says they just realized talking to a friend that they cast a spell into Thalia without paying for it, we do not give them a GRV at that point. We simply say “thank you for your honesty, please be more careful in the future”.

Think about what sort of behavior you incentivize if you penalize players retroactively. You incentivize them to do the exact thing this thread is about, notice a problem and not tell us. If a player knows that they've made an error and honestly feels bad about it, there is no benefit to infracting them, there are only downsides.

Originally posted by Olle Liljefeldt:

If an infraction occurs and it is noticed after the game, it is still an infraction.

No, there was an infraction; at the current moment, there isn't an infraction.

Originally posted by Olle Liljefeldt:

If not, no one would ever be penalized for things caught on camera reviews

That's an investigation which may lead to a retroactive Disqualification (and, often, suspension); that's an entirely different thing.

* * * * *

For your scenarios, Olle:
A - no infraction
B - Cheating
C - one of the examples where we upgrade to Game Loss (additional, s/b copies of a main deck card discovered during game one)

d:^D

Originally posted by Isaac King:

Originally posted by Olle Liljefeldt:

Can you please show me the rule that dictates that infractions expire after the game it committed in?

There isn't one. But that is how we rule, with the exception of USC penalties. If a player comes up to you after their match and says they just realized talking to a friend that they cast a spell into Thalia without paying for it, we do not give them a GRV at that point. We simply say “thank you for your honesty, please be more careful in the future”.

Think about what sort of behavior you incentivize if you penalize players retroactively. You incentivize them to do the exact thing this thread is about, notice a problem and not tell us. If a player knows that they've made an error and honestly feels bad about it, there is no benefit to infracting them, there are only downsides.

After the match, results have been reported etc, I agree. But this is not after the match. This is during the match. Sure, the writing is on the wall and opponent scoops it up. But this happens literary as cards are being picked up from that game.


Also, the downside is that if you do notice an infraction and don't tell that is cheating. Which is puniched much more harshly.

What would you have ruled had me told me when he realized the error, i.e. when sideboarding for game 2?

Oh, one more thing. Since this is not written rules but rather praxis I would really like to know where to draw the line.

Isaac wrote “But that is how we rule, with the exception of USC penalties”.


So if we find out that a player got outside assistance in his previous match, that's fine?

Originally posted by Olle Liljefeldt:

So I was judging a competitive event this weekend, a qualifier.
In the semi-finals player A has just defeated player B 2-1. I have been sitting at the table most of this match. Then A drops the bomb. Before we go the main issue, lets give a short testimony of the player in question.


Player A is clearly a casual player. He announces spell, resolves stuff and afterwards handle the mana payment details. At one point B plays his combo piece. A responds with a Force of Negation. B plays Spell Pierce. Player A now cracks two fetches, tapping the lands as they come into play. A plays another Spell Pierce, which seals the deal. A is a bit confused over the second Spell Pierce - It shows that the fetches where to get the mana needed to play the Force of Negation. It does not affect the outcome this time, B demonstrates the combo and wins. I am being quite direct with A that he needs to be more clear, and in order to play spells you actually need to pay the mana right away.

Another example from the same match is B's end of turn, A has five lands untapped and a vial on 2. “I play Harbinger of the Tides.” “Sure”. A taps the vial and places the creature on the battlefield. I educate him that again, he need to be more clear about his communication.

Ok, so the match is just finished. A turns to me. “I did something that will most likely get me punished”. O-K…?

“After game 1, I realized that a sideboard card from previous match was still in main board”

“Why did you not tell me this right away?”
“I was afraid I'd get punished and I wanted to play”

“And you discovered this when sideboarding?”
“Yes”

“Are there copies of this card in the main board?”
“Yes”

“Did you play this card during the game?”
“Yes”

“Remind me, who won the first game?”
“I did”

“Why are you telling me this now?”
“I wanted to play, but I also want it to be fair. I expect to get a game loss but if I had lost it would not have mattered so I waited until it played out”


In conclusion:
- No-one but him knows this has occured
- His reasons not to tell right is because he likes to play
- His reasons to tell now is because now it is played out


What would you have done in this situation?

Hi Olle, to me this sounds like cheating… Your player knew he was doing something illegal (“I did something that will most likely get me punished” / “I was afraid I'd get punished”) and he didn't say it because he knew he'd get a penalty, because he wanted to gain advantage of it (“I wanted to play”). At least that's how I see it. I thought about it for a day and that's my conclusion. If he wanted the game to be fair, he should've said it when he noticed it.

The bit that’s missing though is that no rule was broken. It’s not against any rule to have your deck not match your decklist when you’re in between games, which is when the person noticed it.

Originally posted by Olle Liljefeldt:

After the match, results have been reported etc, I agree. But this is not after the match. This is during the match.

That is incorrect. The original post clearly states the opposite.

Originally posted by Olle Liljefeldt:

Ok, so the match is just finished. A turns to me. “I did something that will most likely get me punished”.