Re: Illegal moves
Posted: Mon Mar 31, 2014 1:13 am
E Michael White please do not ascribe motives to me when you have no idea and thus no basis for your strange beliefs.
The independent home for discussions on the English Chess scene.
https://www.ecforum.org.uk/
However later on:-Stewart Reuben wrote:A player makes an illegal move. His opponent responds without correcting the error. The game continue and then it is discovered.
Surely both players are at fault and one should not be singled out just because he was the first?
As my post stated earlier in the thread this approach seems more logical and more in keeping with the FIDE laws.Geurt Gijssen via Chess Café Sep 2014 wrote: Question One
Hello Geurt.
Please help me to decide on the this question. In a game between A and B, Player A completed an illegal move. Player B, on his turn made an illegal move also, and thereafter could identify the illegal move of Player A. Player B stopped the chess clock and called the arbiter.
What should the arbiter do:-
Penalize Player A by adding two minutes with Player B since first illegal move stands; rectify the illegal position and continue the game.
Penalize Player B by adding two minutes to Player A since by making a move Player B accepted the illegal move of Player A (and therefore,
illegal move of Player B stands); rectify the illegal position and continue the game.
-
-
Answer One
I assume that your question refers to a standard game, and, based on the fact that you mention that the arbiter stopped the chess clock, I also assume that the illegal move was found during the game.
It is clear that the arbiter has to reinstate the position before the first illegal move was completed. And therefore he should penalise Player A by adding two minutes to Player B's time.
All that happened after the first illegal move was completed is irrelevant. Therefore, there is no reason to penalise Player B.
Not withstanding this, I would still say it would be inadvisable to sign the scoresheet with a result you do not agree with, as in Rob's case (under the rules that now apply). 11.10 should be reserved for situations where you don't realise anything is amiss until after you've signed the scoresheet.Stewart Reuben wrote:Rob >Signing the scoresheet implies that you accept the result. I have once declined to sign the scoresheet due to a contentious 10.2 decision.<
Appeals are now allowed even in Quickplay Finishes, Appendix G.
The Laws now state:
8.7. At the conclusion of the game both players shall sign both scoreshets, indicating the result of the game.
Even if incorrect, the result shall stand, unless the arbiter decides otherwise.
11.10 Unless the rules of the ompetition specify otherwise, a player may appeal against any decision of the arbiter, even if the player has signed the scoresheet.
The last clause was added at the behest of Igor Vereschagin. It wouldn't have to be a quickplay finish decision.
Say a player delivered checkmate and then his flag fell. So the player concedes the game. Both players sign both scoresheets. The player would be entitled to appeal and, if his appeal was in good time (perhas less than an hour), he would probably win. Two days later. Most unlikely.