Judge Corruption Series: Player1

[GayNProud]

https://www.duelingbook.com/replay?id=623896-55246648

Posting this in-spite of all the DB judge apologists and ass kissers. DB judges are nothing but human beings, so get over yourself. I say let's make the "Judge Corruption" series a thing! Post your replays.

This is in game 3. Player1 starts coaching my opponent on a gamestate and a set of rulings that were never brought up to the match between my opponent and I at any point. Although I still ended up clapping my opponent's cheeks, this could very well have helped my opponent beat me.

The only question I will leave you with: How would you rate the appropriateness of what took place, if it had happened in real life? Once you answer that, you can think about the appropriateness of what actually happened.

[Staga_Det]

Ok so I don't even know why I ended up here, but since I'm here let's make the most out of this reply.

First of all, I can see why you're defensive anytime someone mentions something even remotely related to your username (and this was not remote at all), but tbf I think your opponent could've at least been given the benefit of the doubt - his explanation for the reference might have seemed far-fetched to you, and it could seem sus, but it was a reasonable explanation.

But that's not the point here. Point is, judge has ruled in your favour and then proceeded to explained a rule/game mechanic to the opponent. It's been a while since I've been to a sanctioned tournament, but if I remember correctly this is not only something a judge can do, but something you can specifically ask the judge to do. It does not matter that the call was for something else because, as the judge is there, either player can have follow-up. So, I wouldn't consider it "coaching", much less "corruption"

TLDR: I understand your frustration but I think you jumped to the gun a little too quickly

[ominous]

This sounds like a "no true scottsman" post.

The rules around explaining rulings to players has recently changed to allow judges to explain ruling for situations including hypothetical rulings as they relate to the current game state to players. Distant coder made a video on this policy change, go watch it for more details.

[Christen57]

https://www.duelingbook.com/replay?id=623896-55246648

Posting this in-spite of all the DB judge apologists and ass kissers. DB judges are nothing but human beings, so get over yourself. I say let's make the "Judge Corruption" series a thing! Post your replays.

This is in game 3. Player1 starts coaching my opponent on a gamestate and a set of rulings that were never brought up to the match between my opponent and I at any point. Although I still ended up clapping my opponent's cheeks, this could very well have helped my opponent beat me.

The only question I will leave you with: How would you rate the appropriateness of what took place, if it had happened in real life? Once you answer that, you can think about the appropriateness of what actually happened.

Here's the current coaching policy (page 9-12):
https://img.yugioh-card.com/ygo_cms/ygo/all/uploads/KDE-E_TCG_Tournament_Policy_2_1.pdf

It explicitly says a player is allowed to ask questions about things he or she must know in order to maintain a proper game state. This is not coaching.

The example Konami gives is: a player is allowed to ask a judge if Sky Striker Mecha - Widow Anchor can target a monster, whose effects are already being negated by Infinite Impermanence.

The judge is not only allowed, but required, to answer this question in order to help maintain a proper game state. Otherwise that player will attempt to activate Widow Anchor targeting an already-negated monster, leading to the game state being damaged due to an illegal activation occuring.

The example Konami gives, of what would be considered coaching, is: telling a player whether his Ash Blossom & Joyous Spring's effect or Infinite Impermanence's effect would stop an opponent's Trickstar Candina if said opponent also had Trickstar Lycoris in hand — a card that can be used to help dodge certain interruptions.

Answering this question would be considered coaching, because it's not a question that needs to be answered in order to maintain a proper game state. This is because it's perfectly legal for either Ash Blossom or Impermanence to activate in response to Trickstar Candina's effect, even if Trickstar Lycoris would end up helping dodge one of them. Activating the "wrong" response to Lycoris in this scenario would lead to a misplay, sure, but it wouldn't lead to the game state being damaged, since that misplay was still legal; so as a judge, all I would tell these players is that either of those can be chained to Trickstar Candina. I wouldn't provide any further information than that, such as which of those effects would stop her effect from going through.

Player1 did nothing wrong in my opinion. The game state at the time involved your opponent having a "Danger!" monster in his hand, meaning your opponent's "Danger!" ruling question was in fact related to the game state. Also, since knowing under which conditions a "Danger!" monster in the hand can and can't activate its effect is necessary to help maintain a proper game state and to help prevent any illegal monster effect activations, your opponent had every right to ask that question in that duel.

[Genexwrecker]

https://www.duelingbook.com/replay?id=623896-55246648

Posting this in-spite of all the DB judge apologists and ass kissers. DB judges are nothing but human beings, so get over yourself. I say let's make the "Judge Corruption" series a thing! Post your replays.

This is in game 3. Player1 starts coaching my opponent on a gamestate and a set of rulings that were never brought up to the match between my opponent and I at any point. Although I still ended up clapping my opponent's cheeks, this could very well have helped my opponent beat me.

The only question I will leave you with: How would you rate the appropriateness of what took place, if it had happened in real life? Once you answer that, you can think about the appropriateness of what actually happened.

I strongly advise you read up on kde policy before making baseless accusations of a judge who is in fact following kde policy.

Player1 handled that call appropriately 10/10 5 gold stars and a free puppy

[Player1]

This is the kind of thanks I get...? A private message informing me of your wonderful post...

I guess I can get into this a tiny bit on here.

So...
A slow play call that wouldnt happen IRL since they wouldnt be looking into rulings behind a computer screen.
Assuming a slow play call was in fact made, he'd have his opportunity to just ask his activation legality question then, during a gamestate that matters. In fact, he'd likely just have called for a judge at the time right away, so there wouldnt be slow play at all. just straight up ask about the activation legality of the danger monsters.

This is a DB only scenario, and you're hyper-focused on how things would play out IRL. That's a pointless rabbit hole to get yourself stuck in.

Enough has been said about answering things about activation legality in the previous posts. He plays dangers, even if it's unrelated to the current gamestate he should know his rulings. Especially when it could mean illegal activations in the duel. Ruling knowledge like this isn't something that someone should gate-keep. The only reason it was being asked in game 3 is due to the online nature of the platform. It was directly related to the slow play call I was handling in any case.

Your opponent had issues bringing up his problem in the first place. He was "Thinking", and causing issues as a result. So, a bit of behavioral treatment by prolonging his rant and encouraging him to bring up his issues to their opponent. Add in some comments to show him some empathy, get him to follow along and acknowledge the errors of his ways... While behavioral changes can take time and effort, hopefully he wont waste time in this manner again in the near future. At least, not when he plays against you.

This is an online platform, and I'm here to help players learn and grow. Hopefully you can learn to take things less seriously as well. Life is more fun that way.

[MarshieDemon]

The whole purpose of this topic is inappropriate. If you have an issue with one of my judges, just file an abuse report and a higher judge will look into it.

This isn't Zodiac Duelist, and we are not making the Judge Corruption Series a thing on here.