My friend was playing in the top 8 ok. He has one set s/t opponent a set monster and set s/t. His turn he reveal his facedown card nobleman of crossout opponent one set monster. My friend did not say the target. So opponent calls over the judge and tells them to rewind the play. The judge allowed him to dust tornado the set nobleman and my friend lost!

He should have called a targed for Nobleman Of Crossout....the judge should have just said he wasted the Nobleman Of Crossout and let the opponent keep the Dust Tornado...you HAVE to select a target for cards like Ring Of Destruction and Nobleman Of Crossout.

Oh a roll back woulda occured....all of 3 seconds though. No, this was a bad judge call. What the judge should have done was asked the turn player what his target for nobleman of crossout was and allowed the opponent to respond.

Even if you had to roll it back to before noubleman of crossout was activated The turn player would have had priority to activate nobleman of crossout first anyway.

The only time the situation would have been to a point where the opponent woulda have been able to do that is in a chain before nobleman of crossout was activated, or at the declaration on the end of phases previous (draw standby ect)

Unless that was the situation it was just a bad call.

Also a note. you don't just "lose" or "waste" spell, trap, or monster effects becuase you "forget" to call out the target. We judges call that a procedural error. basically it just means you go back and fix it. NEVER is it acceptable to simply "lose" or "waste" the cards or effects like that.

Of course, Hinky is correct.

What PROBABLY happened was:

Opponent drew a card to start their turn and flipped Nobleman targeting the face-down monster, giving his opponent NO chance to activate their face-down card, Dust Tornado, which they were planning on doing during their opponent's Draw, or Standby Phase. We have to remember that Dust Tornado, a trap, makes up about half of the S/T removal in the average deck.

Maybe you're biased, maybe you're not.

But I'd like to take this chance to ask players to encourage thier Judges and T.O.s to join sites like YuGiOhRealms.com. This is one GREAT site for information and everything I know about this game I learned here.

I encourage all judges and most players I know to join up. This allows us all to stay in touch with the latest rulings, and in cases such as this, allows the p[layers and judges to give us a small detail of what happened and allow us to discuss it.

See, right now, as a judge, I've been trained to try to guess what happened and imagine what SHOULD have happened.

We have all been in this situation where 2 players come hollering and screaming at the judge who was not watching their match, and give you 2 separate scenarios of what happened.




Waldo10032 – The Fiendish Duelist says:
-------------------------------------
"Everything I know, I learned from Novastar, VenomLord, Magicien_Noir, KrazyKillRoy, Pyrofire14, Nataku, Jeff_Mop, Tamahome, mortals, KenjiBlade, Agentmage2012, Hinky and Tyloki. So praise me for learning so well when I'm right and blame THEM for screwing up when I'm wrong. (More people will be added to this list as needed) "

GO Rescue Kitty!!! Claw their eyes out!!!
53 One Turn Kills (Including First Turn Kills)
19 First Turn Kills
65 Sheep Tokens trampled for over 3000 Damage each
10 Black Luster Soldier - Envoy of the Beginning removed from play
1 Black Luster Soldier (Ritual) removed from play
11 Jinzos Removed from play

This doesn't fit in my Sig --> http://www.yugiohrealms.com/forum/sh....php?p=3510793

Seeing I am a judge and have been one for a little while.We all do our best to make the right call. I know that we sometime make mistakes but our goal is to do the best we can with what info we have avaible to us.
If a judge makes a bad call, you need to ask for a head judge or T.O. i HOPE THIS HELPS...


D.D.

If a judge makes a bad call, you ask for the head judge. Period. You do NOT ask for the TO. The TO has no authority (unless he/she happens to also be the head judge).

The TO is there for administration purposes only, not for game play rulings issues.


<wonders if he now owes Terrell Owens royalties or something for using "TO" multiple times without his permission)

"....He has one set s/t opponent a set monster and set s/t...."

ok, so let me get this straight.

the turn player has a face down S/T.

the opponent has a face down S/T AND a face down monster.

no other cards on the field.

the turn player activates Crossout. doesn't declare target.

huh??

isn't there like only ONE face down target on the field??

does he have a choice at this time??

am i just not seeing something here??

Its possibly one of those loop holes in the game that allows someone to cheat their way into winning

Not really.

For a card like Nobleman of Crossout to even activate, a face-down monster must exist on the field at the moment of activation. If that face down monster is the only one on the field than there isn't a problem here and the player is just being a 'rules lawyer.' The target is EXTREMELY and painfully obvious, so a judge is not necessary at this point.

A 'rewind' is NOT necessary in this scenario because there was nothing to rewind as the turn player JUST activated Nobleman of Crossout. All the opponent really needed to do was ask what the target was and let the game continue.

It seems to me that the only reason why he asked for a rewind was to 'rewind' the game back to before the card was even activated so that the opponent can start a chain before they can flip it up. Unfortunately, that couldn't of even happened because the opponent can't place effects on an empty chain due to turn player 'priority.' But now I'm just getting too technical and rambling . . .

V ^_^ V

The way I understand the situation, the opposing player (with DT), wanted the point of rewind to be during the draw phase, after the "Nobleman Player" passed priority. I think that we're overanalyzing the situation a bit.

Based on what I'm reading, the player with Dust Tornado had no intent to activate it, targetting the face-down NoC. The ruling would be based solely on the preference of the judge, although, like Magus said, it was dead obvious what the target was.

Being the crack judge that I am, I'd definitely give a warning to the "Dust Player" for stalling. This whole situation doesn't seem to warrant the assistance of a judge, as somebody else said earlier.

Judges are meant to inform players, not to settle their petty squabbles.

Yes, it does seem like a bad call. The player with the Nobleman, clearly went ahead into his Main Phase 1, while the "Dust" player didn't choose to activate Dust Tornado at either the Draw or Standby phase. Then when the player activated Nobleman, the other realized that he should've used Dust, so he tried to cheat and unfortunately the judge allowed it. Sorry to hear that. It seems that the judge either didn't care, know, or was helping the other player for some reason.

As a judge, I listen to both sides of a duel and then a third witness before I make a ruling. Oftentimes, its just a misunderstanding of cards, but there have been a few cheaters. A player summoning his Cyber Jar and ringing it to get a draw and start a new game to get a better hand was one of the recent ones. Another judge that was playing, said that Blade Knight had to meet his first effect to get his second effect. In other words he had to be the only one on the field and you have to have 1 or less cards in your hand. Reason: He had a Cyber Jar down and knew he was gonna lose. Then a few weeks later, he said just the opposite.

Ok, We don't know exactly why the judge made that call, the DT player could've said he was going to activate dust tornado during the standby phase to destroy the set m/t. And at that point it is a judgement call from the judge.
The other thing that concerns me is that at every major tournament I've judged at the top 8 matches have table judges, sitting and watching the game, as well as keeping track of lifepoints. This can be easily explained that this wasn't a major tournament but from the sounds of it, it was a regionals event.
Also, one point I would like to add about judging, never ask 3rd parties as to what happened. Normally spectators are highly biased to one player (as it is their friend) and have no position to tell a judge what happened, even as to what they saw. Normally what I do is I ask the turn player to explain the situation, then allow the opposing player to explain the disagreement. Normally I don't even have to let the opposing player explain the disagreement because there is no disagreement, they just want a ruling and thankfully players are capable of fairly explaining situations when it is simply a rulings despute on a situation.

Remember, judges make mistakes. All judges make mistakes at one point or another. hopefully it will be on a minor thing that doesn't really matter all that much and not on a finals match at worlds or a nationals. and to add to this, I suggest everyone reads Julia's articles on judging at metagame. They are a godsend to all judges, both experienced and inexperienced judges.

While it does seem to be a bad call on behalf of the judge (unless, like Waldo said, the turn player gave the opponent no chance to respond to, say, the Draw), I'm inclined to also support the view that you should still declare the Target of cards like Nobleman when you play them, even if there only IS one Target. That way, these kind of situations can't occur. None of my Friends or I are fans of 'silent duels' and always announce clearly what we intend to do, for instance, in this case we would have said something like 'Nob your face-down card'.
I've even seen some duelists in our store take it to the extreme and announce they're drawing a card, moving to Main Phase, Battle Phase etc.

That is a good policy and Judges LOVE it when everyone announces phases... makes our job so much easier when rulings happen due to timings. At the very least for top 8 duels you should be announcing all of your phases. At the very least look at announcing your phases as an advantage you have over your opponent. When a timing despute comes up, you clearly announced where you were in the game and thus its going to be harder for your opponent to claim they were going to activate a card during the standby phase after you flipped your set nobleman of crossout. Also think how annoying it would be to have your opponent announce every step and every action, and how annoyed you would get and how many mistakes you would make.... now look at it from the other side of the table and you should see my point.

heh, you might've caught me a bit wrong on that one, Krahe, I don't see anything wrong with announcing phases, I just don't see much point to doing it in the local store where I:

a) know everybody, and am friends with most of them

b) am one of the 3 store judges anyway ^^

Were I to go to an unfamiliar store or a large-scale tournament, though, I would of course make a point of announcing phases, just to avoid any disputes :classic: