If I were an arbiter who was present, I would have involved myself after the clock was pressed after "Ealing player moved the king into check", and probably explained his requirement to move the piece he touched if I could see on the board that he could do so. You'd add two minutes to Harrow player, and reset the board to the position before Ealing player moved.Colin S Crouch wrote:It was in the quickplay finish, with the Ealing player being very short of time. The Ealing player moved the king into check, and his opponent pointed this out. The Ealing player thought for a while - and then moved another piece! The Harrow player did not make a complaint. There were several onlookers on both sides, but of course unlookers must not interfere. If there had been an arbiter present, no doubt that player would have been obliged to intervine.
I don't think there's anything you could have done. Indeed, I don't really see what is wrong with this at all.Colin S Crouch wrote:Anyway, play continued. Ealing was a couple of pawns up in a position of opposite colours, but the Harrow player, strangely enough, had the more dangerous pawn. structure. The Ealing player claimed a draw, with less than two minutes on the clock, but the Harrow player proclaimed that he could still play for a win, Eventually, things got deadlocked, with no more moves being played, and no clear result given. It is now, I guess, up th the league. I do not want to prejudgr thr conclusions given by the league, but how could the watchers present, in luding captains, have handled the position, to give a clear result on the day?
If it was a quickplay finish with no arbiter present, then Ealing player is entitled to claim a draw with less than two minutes on his clock. If the Harrow player disputes a claim made by his opponent, then fine; nevertheless, the game has ended with Ealing player's claim. You should then send off the scoresheets, the position on the board, clock times, and other relevant information (e.g. whose move it is!) to the league to decide on the claim made under Appendix D.
There was no way in this situation to get a clear result on the day if one player made a draw claim that the other player wasn't prepared to accept.
The league could avoid all potential for this to happen in one of at least two ways:
(1) Appoint arbiters to matches, which is likely to be unpopular on cost grounds
(2) Use incremental time controls or perpetual adjournments, the latter of which doesn't solve the problem of getting a result on the night, and the former of which is not practical if you do not have a supply of digital clocks.