Cyberyeti, on 2018-January-09, 11:38, said:
Yup, it is now.
Also am I right in thinking this is NOT ... relative to the standard of the player concerned ? it's an absolute standard of idiocy.
Yes (and no)
(e) If, subsequent to the irregularity, the non‐offending side has contributed to its own
damage by an extremely serious error (unrelated to the infraction) or by a gambling
action, which if unsuccessful it might have hoped to recover through rectification, then:...
There is no definition as to what an 'extremely serious error is' - so presumably it is up to the RA to issue guidelines for their TDs to implement - which takes us straight back to the White Book.
No matter how well you know the laws, there is always something that you'll forget. That is why we have a book.
Get the facts. No matter what people say, get the facts from both sides BEFORE you make a ruling or leave the table.
Remember - just because a TD is called for one possible infraction, it does not mean that there are no others.
In a judgement case - always refer to other TDs and discuss the situation until they agree your decision is correct.
The hardest rulings are inevitably as a result of failure of being called at the correct time. ALWAYS penalize both sides if this happens.