I was fully supportive of MTR 4.8 and was glad to see codification of something judges were already doing, but a recent story I heard has made me question both the policy and my understanding.
At PT Guilds of Ravnica, Alice (on Izzet Phoenix) is playing against Norman (on Mono Red). Norman has an Experimental Frenzy in play and a Mountain untapped. On Alice's main phase, she casts a few spells, then proceeds to attack with a Crackling Drake. Norman does not block, and while counting the power of the Drake, Alice notices an Arclight Phoenix in the graveyard.
“Oh, I guess this is attacking too.”
Norman believes Alice has missed her Arclight Phoenix trigger and a judge is called. The judge rules that because Alice hasn't gained any information, she may reverse her decision, effectively backing up the game to the beginning of combat step. Norman is unsatisfied and appeals, and the head judge initially upholds the ruling. While arguing his case, Norman points out that Alice could have made different decisions if Norman had a Shock on top of his library and eventually overturns the ruling.
I have many questions, comments, and concerns regarding this anecdote (the ending is irrelevant–perhaps assume Norman was tapped out and the ruling was upheld for the following).
1. Assuming the story as told is factually accurate, this is very troubling to me. MTR 4.8 was added to allow for minor and non-disruptive alterations to decisions players make–the examples listed are all things we've seen and have no issues with, and the language used suggests the take-back happened immediately or within a reasonably short period of time. However, although the judges are
technically correct in saying Alice hadn't gained information, I feel like allowing players to the defense of “well, I didn't gain any information” like this creates a slippery slope for players to either play sloppily or take back more meaningful decisions.
E.g. During a Standard event, Nate is tapped out. Albert casts Find, targeting Ravenous Chupacabra and Jadelight Ranger. He casts Chupacabra and destroys one of Nate's creatures. He then realizes he doesn't have mana to cast the Jadelight Ranger, and wishes to reverse his choices of which creatures were Found.
(Obviously?) in this example we would not allow Albert to reverse his choice. However, I thought that it was obvious that the Arclight trigger was missed, but a PT head judge
supposedly thinks otherwise.
2. From
Kevin's article on the subject, we have
Reversing Decisions and Missed Triggers
If a player misses a triggered ability, but reverses the game back to the point prior it was missed (always following the rules on section MTR4.8), triggered can be acknowledged and added to the stack.
This makes sense to me, but my issue is that the game should not have been reversed in the first place.
3. What I would
like to believe (to leave my perception of reality intact =p) is that something in this story was miscommunicated or misinterpreted, and the events didn't happen as told. But after trying to think of a plausible sequence of events, I could not come up with a situation where the Phoenix trigger would be allowed to resolve during the Combat Damage step. Might it be possible for either of the judges involved to comment?
For reference, the anecdote begins at approximately 44:40
here.
I appreciate any help or comments!