I'm sure that somebody asked this in the past, but the search engine is not working for me =/ sorry.

Today a TO called me because he had a complicated scenario in his LGS.

In the final round of a small tournament, 2 players (table 1) ended their games, but didn't give their results officially. They were friends (probably teammates), and wanted to watch another game nearby (table 2), where another friend (most likely teammate) was playing. They needed to know the result of table 2 to decide if they should concede to each other in order to get the best prizes (for the team, I guess). So, the players on table 1 just keep playing for fun, and when players in table 2 ended their match, the player who had won (in table 1) conceded. Assume there wasn't an prize incentive for conceding, they just share their prizes (MTR 5.2).

So, this doesn't fall under any description of SP in the JAR; and MTR 2.4. says: “If a game or match is not completed, players may concede or mutually agree to a draw in that game or match. A match is considered complete once the result slip is filled out or, if match slips are not being used, a player leaves the table after game play is finished. Until that point, either player may concede to or draw with the other, though if the conceding player won a game in the match, the match must be reported as 2-1”

So, ¿no sanction no penalty?

It's slow play, the same as at Competitive REL. The players should be instructed that the match is over and that they need to enter a result.

Then the TO should change his prize structure to pay out on record, to avoid this in the future.

You also have the last line from Section 2.4 of the Magic Tournament Rules:

If a player refuses to play, it is assumed that he or she has conceded the
match.

Nathan Long

Nathan, they actually played their “best-out -of-three” games, just didn't inform the TO they had ended, because they wanted to see if they should concede. So they didn't refuse to play.

Sean, MTR 5.5 (Slow Play) states: “Players must take their turns in a timely fashion regardless of the complexity of the play situation and adhere to time limits specified for the tournament. Players must maintain a pace to allow the match to be finished in the announced time limit. Stalling is not acceptable.”
If this is slow play, under what part of the description do you assign this? I mean, they took their turns in a timely fashion, they adhere to the time limits specified for the tournament (they reported within time limits, just not when the match actually ended), and they maintained a pace until the end of the match, allowing it to be finished in the announced limit time. Is this Stalling?

Thanks for the quick responses, you are awesome :)

The pace that we expect players to play at does not depend on the state of the game/match. If a player in a Modern event is comboing off in game 3 with 20 minutes left on the clock, and has resolved a Pact of Negation with no way to pay for it next upkeep, then, barring extremely unusual circumstances such as a double Game Loss, the match will be over by the time the active player's turn comes around again. Nonetheless, we expect the player to continue play at a reasonable pace; he doesn't get to “stretch out” the remaining turn. Similarly, it's not an issue if a player has been playing at a reasonable pace and, as time approaches, she continues to play at this pace in order to ensure that her plays are thought out. While some players will play faster in hopes of concluding the game, it's not a requirement.

We consider the players waiting to come up with their match result part of the match, because we also need this to conclude in a timely fashion. The players can't wait 10 minutes to give a match result, because that violates the pace of play. The players can't argue that they aren't holding up the tournament: imagine if two matches were both trying to wait on each other to give a result! If push comes to shove, you can definitely apply the rule that Nathan cited, but I'd only do this in a very extreme circumstance, although if the players are refusing to provide a result when you instruct them to, you have a bigger problem on hand.

As for stalling, this is not Stalling because that specifically requires taking advantage of the time limit. The time limit isn't the issue here, so it's (thankfully) not a DQ offense.

If we watch the match that has ended, and then we urge the player to fill in the result slip, but they ignore the request, (probably still discussing if one of them should concede to the other player), should we give them Slow Play?

or is it USC - Minor? in example F it says.

A player fails to follow the request of a tournament official

Maykel - this is the Regular REL forum, so the situation is at Regular REL. Please do not give the players either of those penalties from the IPG!

Also, please do not tell them that they have conceded! I see where Nathan is coming from, but I think that is really super hard line for a Regular REL event.

I don't know about you, but at FNMs and Prereleases I have often continued to play a friendly game after the match is finished (especially if one of us was screwed or won in two games or something) in order to keep trying our decks, to try new builds and just to be social. As long as players are not holding up the tournament I don't see this as a problem - and I make a point of going around a few minutes before the end of the round when I am judging at Regular REL to investigate whether there are matches finished where the players just haven't thought to give the result in yet.

As such, I would probably explain to these players how their behaviour could be perceived negatively, but I think that it would be very hard to draw a line to take actions against these guys, but not the guys across the room playing a friendly before giving their result. If they refuse to give a result when asked, then you could maybe enter the territory of explaining the issues with potentially holding up the tournament.