player interference

[Jerry]

Warren:
Wow! You Aussies sure do take things personally. My only criticism (if you can call it that; evidently you did)was your solution of invoking 9.01(c) when there are perfectly acceptable rulings which already cover that scenario.

Sorry you took offense at the "Third World" comment. It was meant as . . . "when abnormal situations occur (which are not covered in a rule book), THEN extraordinary solutions should used." I didn't mean to imply that the events cited in the thread were abnormal at all.

The "think it through" admonition was intended as a generality to all officials; not as a reply to your solution.

I've always respected your thoughtful considerations and remarks; but also feel that there are other points of views and alternative rulings that could be acceptable in given circumstances.

Jerry