insufficient bid, multiple corrections
North opens 1D, East overcalls 1S and South bids 1S, his partner says "insufficient" at which time South replaces the 1S with double while the director is being called (ie he doesn't wait for the director to arrive), director starts to adjudicate and as soon as he says double needs to be withdrawn South replaces it with 2C.
Director then explains the options during which South puts 2C bid back and South hearing the options, realising his partner will be silenced bids 3N which is the final contract.
My question is "should the Directo" have ruled that the chosen bid 2C should have stood" since it was made and was sufficient albeit silencing his partner or should South have been allowed to replace that bid too.
Comments
This is an aspect of bidding I regularly use to try to educate players regarding the need to call for the director when something goes awry.
Firstly, West has the right to accept the 1S bid, should he choose to. Assuming the 1S bid has been rejected, then South has already chosen his replacement of Double. If double shows spades by their system then this could be a comparable call, showing the same suit (denomination) as the 1S bid. Otherwise, by 27B3, double is not a permissible replacement call and South must chose again.
So, we now have that South has chosen 2C as his replacement bid. This stands and partner is barred from bidding for the remainder of the auction and there could be lead restrictions during the play.
Had South called the director after making the 1S bid, the director could have explained the options available and 3NT would have been available after West rejects the 1S bid. Of course, if EW bid again then South is free to punt 3NT.
Now, 3NT could be viewed as an attempted replacement call to 2C and then, by 25B1, West may accept the 3NT bid should he wish. Basically, at this point, West may accept either 2C or 3NT. In either case, North may not bid again and there would be lead restrictions if EW get the contract.
Depending on the precise sequence of events and explanations by the director, West can choose to accept 1S, condoning the IB; accept 2C or accept 3NT. In the latter two cases, North may not bid again and there could be lead restrictions to consider if the auction continues.
Once the offender doubles (and double is not a comparable call) then Law 27B4 applies and offender's partner must pass for the rest of the auction.
Even without the double, the correction to 2C stands (if 1S is not accepted), this is Law 27C.