Wilnecote and the points.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Next leg to start at
Willington
HOLD
What do the rules say about how matters like this should be dealt with ... and any striking-through?
A new leg having been started, the rules state that the previous leg cannot be edited.
However, the leg that ended (erroneously) at Wilnecote will be subject to a 25 point deduction - i.e. in this case it will score no points at all.
Having (presumably) posted Derby as a reply to fishquinn's post #83547 Birmingham New Street, Tim subsequently struck-through the post. By coincidence, however, Derby was a valid post in response to the new starting station of Willington. Fishquinn quoted and responded to it in post #83553 before Tim had struck it through, and play continued on the new leg. At 1725 Tim reinstated Derby as it was valid. By the time I rejoined the thread at around 1730, having reviewed what had happened, it was clear to me that it was too late to bring the leg to a halt.
There have been several instances recently of players claiming the points and starting a new leg precipitately. The rules are clear at the consequences of this: a 25 point deduction from that leg.
However, if players left a reasonable time for queries to be raised before posting a new starting station, this would not keep happening. In this specific case, less than two minutes elapsed between the points being wrongly claimed and a new leg being started. I would suggest this is NOT long enough. Even if someone had played Water Orton immediately after Wilnecote had been posted, a new leg would already have been started.
I appreciate that players are keen to move the game forward quickly, especially when there are several people making posts in quick succession as was the case this evening. However, I think it is not unreasonable to ask that players wait a few minutes before starting a new leg, or to seek confirmation that they have won, as Paul Sidorczuk did earlier this afternoon.