Opinions please...
Having resolved an MI issue in favour of pair X, I get an email from them saying "I think there was something dodgy about opponents’ bidding so would like an eye kept on them."
This made me uncomfortable for a number of reasons.
What do you think?
Comments
The proper way for this to happen is for the hand to be recorded, which affords the pair in question the right to explain their bidding and the knowledge that it has been noted.
"I think there was something dodgy about opponents’ bidding so would like an eye kept on them."
Players say something like this in various circumstances. For example, the EW players in your thread about negative doubles up to 3S might well say this in confidence to the TD about the NS pair.
If we find out what was going on in the minds of the "offending" pair, and have them understand why they were being ruled against, we can often then assure the "non-offending" pair that there wasn't actually anything "dodgy" in the sense that they might continue to worry about it.
Barrie Partridge - CTD for Bridge Club Live
Is it our job to "keep an eye" on players?
I would have thought that depends on the context. Some clubs have psyche books and some do not, and I imagine some clubs go further and keep a record of director calls that reach an appeal (or similar) stage, like the EBU does. If this same pair then have a relatable TD call within a couple of months, the TD is alerted to previous incidents. In the world of f2f bridge, auctions aren't recorded without relevant TD calls anyway so there shouldn't be an expectation online to scrutinise their results to that extent.