Disposal of a minor penalty card
I understood that if an offender holds a major card, he can play that rather than a minor penalty card when that suit is led. However in discussions with several Directors we have conflicting views. So as West I had a minor penalty card of the 3 of clubs, but held the Ace of clubs in my hand. The queen was on table in dummy. When East led clubs, the Director was called and ruled that I should play the 3 allowing a discard from Declarer (south) and the queen to win. Any clarification please.
Comments
This seems incorrect - holding a minor penalty card the rules are:
50C
Disposition of Minor Penalty Card
When a defender has a minor penalty card, he may not play any other card of the same suit below
the rank of an honour until he has first played the penalty card, but he is entitled to play an
honour card instead. Offender’s partner is not subject to lead restriction, but see E following.
However I am a bit concerned with your description. Law 50B defines penalty cards as such
"A single card below the rank of an honour exposed unintentionally (as in playing two cards to a
trick, or in dropping a card accidentally) becomes a minor penalty card. Any card of honour rank,
or any card exposed through deliberate play (for example in leading out of turn, or in revoking
and then correcting), becomes a major penalty card; when one defender has two or more penalty
cards, all such cards become major penalty cards."
So the 3 of clubs could be either a minor or a major penalty card depending on the circumstances that led to it being exposed. If a major penalty card then the director is correct.
I am also concerned with "When East led clubs". if the card was a major penalty card (as seems likely if being compelled to play it) I asume that declarer had instructed East to lead what they liked since East cannot lead until the declarer tells him which of the three options is required. (If a club was demanded or forbidden then the 3 of clubs is picked up and is no longer a penalty card.)
All this should have been explained when the director was called when the card was first explosed.
Hi Cobweb, on this occasion your understanding seems better than that of the TD who gave the ruling. It should be said that minor penalty cards do not occur very often, so perhaps not so surprising that not everyone is clear about their disposition.
EDIT: reading other responses, it seems we need clarification from the original poster in order to be sure we have answered correctly.
Just a thought, though...
It's not clear, but from your use of the word "major" to describe an ace, I wonder whether you have misunderstood what is meant by a "minor" penalty card. (See law 50B)
The distinction between "Major" and "Minor" is not the same as the distinction between "honour" and a non-honour.
(Weejonnie appears to have just edited his post to take into account this possible misunderstanding)
(My very first post was based partly on the assumption that the OP thought they had a 'major' AND a 'minor' penalty card - such of course being impossible. It was on re-reading that I sought to clear up the possibilities)
the penalty card was as a result of a revoke
Assuming the C3 was the only penalty card - the only card on the table as the result of an earlier infraction.
1. If the C3 was a penalty card because it was played to an earlier trick and was a revoke, then the C3 is a major penalty card and must be played on the lead of the CQ.
2. If the C3 was a penalty card because it had been dropped on the table (floor?), then the C3 is a minor penalty card and does not have to be played, instead the player can play any club honour on the lead of CQ.
In that case it wasn't a minor penalty card, but a major penalty card (and thus had to be played as soon as possible).
The terms "minor" and "major" for penalty cards are based on how the penalty came about, not (usually) on the value of the card in question. In general, if a defender intentionally but irregularly tried to play a card (e.g. if they revoked using it but caught the revoke in time), it's a major penalty card; if the defender's partner came to find out about the card as a result of an accident (typically dropping cards), it's a minor penalty card (although if the card's an honour, or there's more than one, it becomes major anyway). Here's Law 50B explaining it in detail:
"Minor" for a penalty card thus means "low-valued and dropped accidentally", "Major" means "intentionally played or high-valued". Penalty cards normally come about through intentional play, so are usually major even if small-valued (or even if they're a club or diamond, the terminology has no connection to "major suits").
the penalty card was as a result of a revoke
thank you all for your input
So as I said, since East led clubs then either South said "Lead anything", or else the card should have been picked up. Can you clarify what East was told at that point when he led a club? (If South said 'Lead anything' presumably East must not have understood the implications or was club flush.
Note also that, for purposes of distinguishing between minor and major, the ten of any suit is considered an honour. An accidentally dropped 10 would always be a major penalty card.
It is of course fundamental that E, on lead, knows the consequences of partner having a major penalty card. When a revoke is caught in time and a major penalty card arises, players are apt just to leave the penalty card face up and get on with things without calling the TD. Most people who have played a bit know that the card must be played at the first legal opportunity, but an awful lot of people are very hazy (or completely unaware) about lead penalties.
This case illustrates why the TD should be called at the stage when the revoke is corrected. Players are entitled to know the consequences of what may unfold in the play while the penalty card is still exposed.
In this case it seems fairly clear to me that E was unlikely to have led a club when later on lead if he had realised that partner would be forced to duck it to dummy's Q (and if declarer required him to play a club, then W was not forced to duck it as the penalty card would have been picked up; only if declarer say "lead what you like" and E was out of non-clubs, would he have had to do so).
Of course, when East is on lead, there are also potential lead penalties - again a reason for the director to be called
Hi
to close the discussion and again thank you all for your helpful comments. The TD wasn't called when the revoke occurred which was remiss. East chose to lead the suit.
Re. a penalty card. It was really helpful to know the explanation re. unintentional exposure of a card and deliberate exposure.
As a final point - consider law 11
A. Action by Non‐Offending Side
The right to rectification of an irregularity may be forfeited if either member of the non‐offending
side takes any action before summoning the Director. If a side has gained through subsequent
action taken by an opponent in ignorance of the relevant provisions of the law, the Director
adjusts only that side’s score by taking away any accrued advantage. The other side retains the
score achieved at the table.