Pokémon TCG: Sword and Shield—Brilliant Stars

A Question about a penality situation

D

DrCaterpie

New Member
Hi Prof. I'm a Pokemon's Player and I have a question about a penality situation...

During a match the Player A cut the Player B's deck and see the last card of this. The Player B put hand up and call the judge. The judge after know the situation assign to Player A a Game Loss.
Either player are Junior.

What do you think about this situation ?
 
Assuming there were no prior problems with the player, a game loss is definatly too severe. I would do something similar to a player drawing an extra card. Show the card to both players, then have the card shuffled back into the deck. I would also give the player a Caution.
 
Hold on so just because he saw the bottom card of one of the piles he gets a game loss???

Insane. it's not even worth a prize penalty!
 
Seems harsh, but maybe there was more to it.

Like if the kid does it all the time, or something.
 
If it wasn't on purpose, it should be considered as Gameplay Error - Minor in the Penalty Guidelines, there are some examples which come close to this problem.

Recommended Penalty (when happened first time) is Caution for both Tier 1 and Tier 2 events.
If the Judge gave a gameloss and reported it correctly TPCi will probably tell the reporting TO that it was too harsh, exspecially for Juniors.
 
The main problem here isn't the Game Loss, but how they're driving away Juniors from the game.

From tournaments I go to, I see alot with very little Junior attendence. Most Juniors don't spend hours testing, they may not chose a good deck to play, they don't attend many tournaments. More than anyone, they just play to have fun. This isn't fun to an 8 Year Old who doesn't realise how strict judges can be. They don't want to be penalised over every small incident which a judge is called over for - they play because they enjoy the game
 
Yeah, but some Juniors are really serious and take advantage of judges letting them off so they can cheat. Not saying that is the case here.

It's probably best if they get used to playing properly, but a game loss here seems massively harsh for anyone making a mistake by acident.
 
A lot of people seem to be assuming that the peek at the bottom card was accidental, but the OP never actually said that was the case. Was this perhaps a case where the player was intentionally peeking at the cards? After all, unless Player B is being a major rules-lawyer, it's hard to see a junior even noticing the opponent accidentally see the bottom card during a cut.

Depending on what that card was, significant game advantage can be gained in that way. (Knowing you're going up against Machamp ahead of time changes many people's set-up strategy.)

Also, if there had been major issues with that youth before-hand, I could see the issue being elevated. Though Game Loss is a very heavy penalty that should be avoided when possible, there are times when it has to be given. After all, some players drive you to it.
 
Player A looked at the card on purpose by his own admission, but carelessly. The cause was probably simple child curiosity, because Player A is only six years old and has been playing Pokémon for just a few months. Anyway, this happened in the third out of five Swiss rounds and both players were 3-0 if I remember well, so the match winner would definitely have been in top4. This happened at our Nationals, so invite and trophy were up for grabs, even if Player A is probably still too young to aspire to something different from having fun and Player B already had the invite.

Judges ruled the situation as Unsporting Conduct: Severe even if something like this should be probably be considered Cheating "à la carte"... by the Guidelines, recommended penalty should have been Disqualification, but they lowered to Game Loss because of the young age of Player A and because he didn't actually know he was doing something wrong. I think judges were also worried about not operating double standards inside the same age category and during such an important tournament like Nationals.
 
^
Did the player look at the card after a shuffle and cut.. or did the player just reach over and look at the bottom card of the deck during the game?? Still not enough information on this to really get a feel for the situation.
 
If the Judge felt like this was an intentional cheat, then GL and or DQ would be warranted. That being said, I need more info on the situation. Being the JR division also mitigates this somewhat.

Keith
 
had the player who received the game loss also been penalized in the previous rounds of the tournament? or at previous tourneys?

i'm just finding it hard to wrap my mind around a 6 y/o new player being given a game loss for this, unless there is a lot more information that's been left out of the OP's narrative like a record of penalties for the same thing in previous rounds.

jmho,
'mom
 
The 6 years old player had never done it before and he had never got a penalty during that whole tourneament. In case of lack of fairplay, the ruling speakes about disqualification when willingness is implied... It is obvious that a 6 years old player can not be subject of a litteral interpretation of the ruling, even in a National Championship... Anyway, he has to understand that in such an important tourneament, there are very rigid rules and he can not play just to have fun while he doesn't respect the rules... I agree with a less heavy punishment (prize penalty 1 should be enough) but I agree with the decision of doing something... In this case the judge may have exagerated, but I think and also hope that after this experience P. C. won't make anymistake of that kind that are hard to be judged... The real problem is that the same penalty has been given to a player who has made a much more serious thing, that's to say that he has used 12 longer sleeves for the 1x cards or for the most important cards (Uxie and Power Spray). The HJ and the TO haven't been able to prove the willingness of this player to use different sleeves even if those sleeves had been recognized in the 1st deck check and were present also at the second deck check after having had the player changed them...
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top