I apologize in advance for the headaches that are about to be incurred. This is more of a notice to whoever manages Gatherer and helps Matt Tabak with his job than it is a rules question, although there are some rules bits mixed in here. I have a couple questions about the card Ertai's Meddling

1) In the printed wording of the card, it states “it resolves”. This is functionally different from the Oracle text “puts it onto the stack”. Specifically, in the first case, the spell is uncounterable, while in the second case it is not. Why the functional change, and can it be reversed? My understanding is that “puts it onto the stack, that spell has Split Second” is enough to get the required functionality in >95% of cases.

2) The following Gatherer rulings appear to be contradictory:

a) 10/4/2004 If Ertai's Meddling is used to copy a spell being cast face down due to Morph ability, the spell will create a face up, 2/2, colorless, nameless creature with no text. This may be a little counter-intuitive, because you might expect the card to enter the battlefield face down like it would have when originally cast, but Ertai's Meddling copies only the original spell and not the entire card the spell represented.

b) 1/22/2011 If the spell was cast using flashback, Ertai's Meddling will still exile it with delay counters on it. When the card is returned to the stack, it still “remembers” the flashback cost was originally paid. It'll be exiled when it resolves or otherwise leaves the stack.

Ruling b) appears to be problematic due to the way zone-changing works. Specifically, from the rules for Flashback:

…“If the flashback cost was paid, exile this card instead of putting it anywhere else any time it would leave the stack.”…

Based on the way zone-changing and replacement effects work, the replacement effect of Flashback would not supercede the replacement effect of Ertai's Meddling (APNAP order of replacement effects). Therefore the spell would be exiled by Ertai's Meddling with Delay counters. When it subsequently returns to the stack, it (should) have no memory of the Flashback cost being paid, and be put in its owner's graveyard. Either that, or we assume that the spell is in fact the same spell. In which case, ruling a) should be invalid, because the spell is still the same spell, which is defined as a face-down spell, so at the very least the resulting permanent should be face-down.

Are there some rules holes here that I'm not aware of?

1) Current rules don't support resolving objects from elsewhere than the stack or during the resolution of another object, because it breaks all the machinery needed to check legality of targets. That's why the Oracle text doesn’t try to approximate the original text more. (Note that this is my own opinion and does not reflect the rules manager's)

2) You are correct that the new spell is a separate object from the original spell and doesn’t know anything about it per se. But Ertai's Meddling makes this new spell a copy of the original, so it will know all choices made during casting. Flashback is one of those.

Daniel Kitachewsky
L3, Paris, France
Rules NetRep