I'm sure everyone has dealt with this before. Someone at a tournament you've played in has a unique perspective on the rules, and some serious cognitive dissonance.

“Since I have a Imposing Sovereign in play, my opponent's Brimaz tokens aren't attacking when they enter the battlefield.”

“Fated Retribution can target my opponent since he is a Planeswalker.”

“Temple of Triumph is Red, so it's a Mountain I can target with my Chained to the Rocks.”

“Gods Willing my Polukranos in response to save it from Supreme Verdict.”

Normally a simple explanation of the rules will resolve things, but every once in a while you meet someone who lives to be the last man arguing. This seems to be more common if the judge (or more often store manager) has a timid demeanor.

“Can you see if there's a Gatherer ruling on that?”

“You're friends with my opponent, can we get somebody impartial to come in.”

“According to the dictionary, <keyword> means… ”

“I know a judge, and he said… ”

Obviously it's a bad scenario when the player was told the correct ruling, given an explanation, and they still have no confidence in what has been conveyed. I'm convinced that way to proceed from here is to give a definitive statement rather than getting entangled in an argument.

Below are some of the boilerplate statements I've been kicking around. I'd like to hear what your way of handling it is when you just need to tell a player “I hear what you're saying, but it doesn't make you right. We're not going to have an argument.”

“I'm completely certain on the ruling here. Please finish your match. We can look at the relevant section of the rulebook between rounds if there is time.”

“Even though Magic Cards are written in English, there's a precise meaning to every line of text on a card. That precise meaning is given by the rulebook and isn't a matter of interpretation.”

“The text on cards is applied very literally. Sometimes this produces unusual results, but that's okay. There's no such thing as ‘what a card was meant to do,’ there's just what it does. In this case, that means <insert ruling here>.”

Edited Glenn Fisher (March 31, 2014 09:36:35 PM)

I like #2 and #3. They implicitly say “I'm sure I'm right” without saying so literally. I think that explicitly saying “I'm sure I am right” has a huge potential to be perceived as arrogant by players.

As an eighteen years-old judge, this almost always happens to me when I make a play my opponent finds awkward or give out a ruling that people doesn't see often.

To begin, I tell them the short ruling reworded so they can easily understand it. If they still don't believe me, I simply ask them to verify with the TO (which they trust more even if he's not even a RA).

I don't want to argue with any player or sound arrogant so asking someone in which they trust, even if he/she's not a certified judge or anything will solve the problem, given that that person says something correct, of course.

If that person gives the wrong ruling, then I'd start pulling out C.R. quotes and arguing a little (always politely, of course).

Edited Samuel Tremblay (March 31, 2014 10:10:38 PM)

I also quite like #s 2 and 3. Sprinkle in a healthy dose of elements from
#1 where necessary without ever just saying you're right. Offer to educate
the player - later. Offer to show the player - later. If they continue to
run in circles, remind the player you're the head judge (assuming you are)
and that while they may disagree with you, someone (you) has to make the
final decision.


On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 8:46 PM, Paul Baranay <
forum-9331-e8bf@apps.magicjudges.org> wrote:

> I like #2 and #3. They implicitly say “I'm sure I'm right” without saying
> so literally. I think that explicitly saying “I'm sure I am right” has a
> huge potential to be perceived as arrogant by players.
>
> —————————————————–
> If you want to respond to this thread, simply reply to this email. Or view
> and respond to this message on the web at
> http://apps.magicjudges.org/forum/post/57514/
>
>
> Disable all notifications for this topic:
> http://apps.magicjudges.org/forum/noemail/9331/
> Receive on-site notifications only for this topic:
> http://apps.magicjudges.org/forum/noemail/9331/?onsite=yes
>
> You can change your email notification settings at
> http://apps.magicjudges.org/profiles/edit
>
>


–
-Eric Levine
Level 3 Judge
Amherst, MA

Expanding on Eric's comment, perhaps emphasize why you can't just dive into the rulebook with them right now: this is a tournament, we need to keep it moving so everyone can get out of here on time, and opening up the rules to answer this will end up keeping everyone late.

If I'm a floor judge, I can say the following:

“That is my ruling. You have the right to appeal. If you don't want to appeal, then please continue playing.”

This is good because in my experience, many players feel better knowing they can appeal even if they don't want to. Furthermore, if they really think I'm wrong then they should appeal, and me reminding them helps speed the process along.

If I'm the only judge at tournament, then sometimes I can take a quick second to pull up the card on Gatherer and show them relevant rulings if there is one that applies. I should empahsize I only do this if there is time and I think pulling up the card would not take long. If it is the end of round or if my mobile is running a little slow, then I don't show it to them.

I disagree with my colleagues, #2 sounds a little condescending, though it is a matter of preference. I like #1, but I agree that you don't have to ever say “I am right.” I really like discussing things between rounds as it allows me to give more direct answers and gives me time to show the relevant text in the rulebook. Of course, again, time is a constraint, and any rulings that need to happen take priority.

Originally posted by Samuel Nathanson:

“That is my ruling. You have the right to appeal. If you don't want to appeal, then please continue playing.”

I wouldn't use that statement to finish giving rulings because it implies that I could be wrong and the player should speak to the head judge if he agrees.

I always give my rulings with 100% confidence no matter what and therefore I don't reming players of their right to appeal.

Originally posted by Samuel Nathanson:

#2 sounds a little condescending

It only sounds condescending when a judge makes it sound that way. I would suggest to try that statement out with players at a local game store or even rehearse it alone to fine tune how you would say it so that statement sounds gentle yet convincing.

Edited Eric Paré (April 1, 2014 12:41:51 PM)

While I often teach judges not to throw “you can appeal” into every ruling, there are times when I find it's appropriate - and this situation may be one of those. Hopefully, the Head Judge can get Obstinate Oscar to return to the match in progress, and divert his arguing until later.

(Another appropriate time to suggest an appeal - when you sense that the player is unhappy/unclear with that ruling, AND that they may not understand their right to appeal - i.e., to help educate players new to Comp REL & big events.)

d:^D

Originally posted by Eric Paré:

I wouldn't use that statement to finish giving rulings because it implies that I could be wrong and the player should speak to the head judge if he agrees.

I must say I have to disagree with you Eric. While I agree that you should give all your calls with confidence and that if you do not know the answer with enough confidence that the best practice would be to consult with another judge before giving your ruling. However, I am a human and I have made errors on my calls and while not every call needs a ‘you can appeal’ clause it does serve to get the point across that you have made your ruling and the players need to either continue playing or appeal and not just argue with the judge for the sake of being argumentative.

To imply that I could not be wrong strikes me as being extremely arrogant. I'd rather have a player appeal and me be wrong and get it corrected than have the player not appeal because he/she was pretty sure, but did not appeal because I told with 100% confidence that I was right. This has even happened, and then after the match they looked it up and I was indeed wrong. I felt bad that I could not go back and fix the error, but I am thankful that they did show me because I learned something and I am pretty sure I will never forget it or get that call wrong again.

Originally posted by Nicholas Brown:

if you do not know the answer with enough confidence that the best practice would be to consult with another judge before giving your ruling

I agree with that. I always double check my rulings when I'm in doubt before I give them. On the other hand, when the time comes for me to give a ruling, I always issue it while demonstrating the confidence that it is the correct ruling.

Originally posted by Nicholas Brown:

To imply that I could not be wrong strikes me as being extremely arrogant.

Arrogance and confidence are two different things. Arrogance will make a ruling sound like, “I am right. This is why I am right. That is my ruling.” (Notice the many uses of “my” or “I” to refer to oneself.) Confidence will make a ruling sound like, “Now that we have worked through this problem together, this is my ruling because of (insert reference here).”

Whether a ruling is given with confidence or arrogance will be determined by the way the judge delivers that ruling. Using an optimal choice of words and body language in rulings, the judge can demonstrate confidence and show him or herself as a valuable resource to the players and not demonstrate arrogance and appear as an individual who's there to police the games.

Edited Eric Paré (April 1, 2014 02:18:27 PM)

Originally posted by Eric Paré:

Whether a ruling is given with confidence or arrogance will be determined by the way the judge delivers that ruling.

I tend to agree - but remember that a lot also depends on the frame of mind of the player receiving the ruling. We often hear what we expect to hear - i.e., arrogance where only confidence was intended. We can only do our best to project confidence, some players - esp. Obstinate Oscar - will read arrogance and a dismissive tone into it, if they expect that from us.

d:^D

I like using 2 and 3 here. If the player still has objections I would suggest they appeal the ruling. If there is no higher power, I would use an example to show how their logic is flawed using something they are more likely to be familiar.

For example, with the player who wants to enchant Temple of Triumph with Chained to the Rocks, I would remind them that controlling a Temple of Deceit doesn't make you unable to block creatures with Islandwalk or some variation thereof that I thought the player would be more familiar with.

I find that if the player is unsatisfied with the ruling to pull another judge into it. Confirm the ruling with the other judge and then deliver the ruling as “we have discussed blah blah blah and decided on blah blah blah” If it’s coming from two people it might be easier to swallow. This only works for larger events where there are multiple judges, but it has saved me some time when I first started out judging. It also never hurts to have a second opinion.

Eric and Scott, I agree, with you, the “Right to appeal” assertion is not something that shoulde be handed out every time. This is something I say when a player seems to have doubts or disagreements with my ruling. I say “That is my ruling” with certainty, implying that my ruling will not change. After all, my ruling for that particular encounter will never change. Whether I would do something different in the future or if it is overturned is another matter. As Scott pointed out, not all players realize that for a ruling to change the head judge needs to be involved. It's a waste of everyone's time for them to debate the floor judge.

As with so many things in judging, each of these approaches can take on many different tones depending on the delivery.

I just want to add to part of Eric's first answer -

At Regular REL, there's a fairly good chance that you're the head judge, or the only judge.

After walking through the basic explanation and education of why a ruling is the way it is, if a player still doesn't accept a ruling, I'd probably add something like:

A decision needs to be made to resolve disagreements/rules situations in tournaments, and as a/the judge, that responsibility falls to me. To resolve this situation, we're going to do <X>. Please continue playing and finish your match. Afterwards, I'd be happy to discuss this at length and in detail

Edited Talin Salway (April 15, 2014 05:09:08 PM)