Illegal moves

[Stewart Reuben]

E Michael White please do not ascribe motives to me when you have no idea and thus no basis for your strange beliefs.

[MartinCarpenter]

Indeed. The normal principle for a lot of games is that, within reason!, anything the players both accept is OK. Its often more or less the only sane thing to do in a practical sense.

Talking of winding time back, what would happen if - in the 4NCL say - two players somehow managed to have one player resign at the same time as being stalemated? Not terribly plausible with increments/arbiters about I grant you but just about possible. The increments will of course mean full/hopefully accurate records of the games.

When does it get too late to roll the result back? After the signed score sheets go in? After the end of the match? At the extreme, you could even imagine the person doing data entry spotting this on the Sunday after the next days play had been completed.

Personally I'd be worried about anything post the point the score gets posted up, because at that point it starts to affect what everyone in the match does.

[E Michael White]

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?

However later on:-

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.

As my post stated earlier in the thread this approach seems more logical and more in keeping with the FIDE laws.

[Stewart Reuben]

I would be horrified if people always agreed with me. How boring!
I am even more horrified when people ascribe sinister motives to me that have no possible basis in fact.

[Rob Thompson]

Signing the scoresheet implies that you accept the result. I have once declined to sign the scoresheet due to a contentious 10.2 decision.

As an inputter in the 4NCL, I can confirm that some mighty strange stuff happens every now and again.

[Stewart Reuben]

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.

[Ian Thompson]

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.

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.

[Rob Thompson]

I don't know when 11.10 was introduced, but my case was over two years ago now so was quite possibly before this.

[Stewart Reuben]

11.10 the last part, 'even if the player has signed the scoresheet'. was introduced 1 July 2014.
It is possible to sign 'under protest'. It is a good idea to record the problem.