But does the move still stand? In a recent conversation someone claimed that an arbiter had told him that two handed castling should result in the player being forced to make a Rook move. This seems wrong to me - the relevant rules are -
From this I infer that only if the player has touched the Rook first is he compelled to make a Rook move. If the King is touched first, or it cannot be determined which piece was touched first, then the castling move, although performed illegally, must stand.4.4 If a player having the move:
4.4.1 touches his king and a rook he must castle on that side if it is legal to do so
4.4.2 deliberately touches a rook and then his king he is not allowed to castle on that side on that move and the situation shall be governed by Article 4.3.1
Is this correct?