Since there is money on the line, I assume there one could make an argument for breach of contract, though I agree it’s a bit absurd
Be creative. China should appeal to the UN Human Rights Council to suspend South Korea for violating Ke Jie’s human rights.

I find it hard to see Ke Jie’s point as legitimate… While the rule book doesn’t mention the timing, it seems to me that the referee used the only reasonable interpretation of the rule as written, i.e. that the stone should be put in the lid right after capture.
What would be the other interpretation?
- That the stone can be put in the lid at any time during the game until scoring? That would make the rule meaningless since the whole point is to ensure captured stones are visible during the game.
- That the stone should be in the lid after some arbitrary time following capture, e.g. “after 10 minutes”, or “after 5 moves”? If any such arbitrary period was intended, it would have been specified and certainly cannot be assumed.
Of course they should clarify the rulebook, if only to avoid this kind of arguments in the future, but I don’t think there was any legitimate doubt as to the intended interpration.
Yeah that’s fair. The referee probably wasn’t wrong there. I guess the the tricky thing is they haven’t always applied all rules ruthlessly by the book, so pros might think they could get a slack on this small rule too (especially since timing is not clearly specified).
One example is according to Korean rules, you’re not allowed to hit the clock until you’ve removed all dead stones.
However in reality, at least half of the pros, including Byun, hit the clock first and then take the dead stones off the board.
The referees never interfered to penalize afaik.

One example is according to Korean rules, you’re not allowed to hit the clock until you’ve removed all dead stones.
However in reality, at least half of the pros, including Byun, hit the clock first and then take the dead stones off the board.
The referees never interfered to penalize afaik.
Predicting that Ke Jie will point to Byun hitting the clock and ask for a penalty while smirking.

Predicting that Ke Jie will point to Byun hitting the clock and ask for a penalty while smirking.
Haha that would’ve been an interesting turn of event. And justifiable since Byun called on Ke Jie first.
Until I heard about this scandal I had no interest in the competition. I’d like to thank the referees for their actions, they’ve helped me rediscover a source of quality games. They’ve also reminded us (again) that we are idiots for imagining that we didn’t need proper rules and regulations in place, and that we could just just trust people to do the right thing.
I’ve gone back and forth on who was in the right, but I’m leaning more towards Ke Jie being in the wrong, here. The number of captured stones is publically available information, and it makes sense to write rules which require that this information be clearly presented in the traditional way (placing captured stones in bowl lids)
If I were writing guidelines on when/how to enforce it, I would say that the stones must be placed in your lid before playing your next move, they’re fine on the table until then, even if you hit the clock; you can put them in your lid during the opponent’s turn if you like

I’ve gone back and forth on who was in the right, but I’m leaning more towards Ke Jie being in the wrong, here. The number of captured stones is publically available information, and it makes sense to write rules which require that this information be clearly presented in the traditional way (placing captured stones in bowl lids)
Yeah fundamentally that rule isn’t wrong. It’s more about how/when they enforced it.
All Chinese players have developed the habit of either returning the dead stones to their opponent, or just leaving them randomly on the table. Some pros were explicitly asked by their teacher to return dead stones to their opponent as a child, and this is considered a normal habit, because the Chinese counting method doesn’t factor in dead stones.
They enforced the rule 2 months before the final, and started penalizing ruthlessly all of a sudden. The rule didn’t even exist when the LG cup started, or even at the semi final.
During the first few weeks the rule was added, multiple Chinese players actually made the exact same mistake in the Samsung cup, but the referee didn’t penalize most of them or even warn them. I recall only one penalization on another Chinese pro, when they were playing a Korean pro a few weeks ago, but that was it. (The Chinese pro still won the game with 2 point penalty I believe, so that penalty got very little attention)
Then suddenly in the final, the referee started enforcing the rule ruthlessly on Ke Jie, who hasn’t fully changed his habit (pretty understandably IMO). That combined with the warning process giving Byun free thinking time + Byun using the rule against Ke Jie is probably why there’s so much criticism.
IMHO it makes sense to have that rule, but penalization is too harsh and they shouldn’t enforce it in ongoing tournaments. They should also make a formal announcement ahead of time so Chinese players start to intentionally change their habit.
YES If they are playing politics on this issue, take it to court.
This has nothing to do with human rights. He didn’t accidentally drop the stone. He knows it.
You’re making it politic. In any case, courts are not here to settle political disagreements.
IMO I don’t think it’s in any party’s benefit to go to court. Ke Jie knows he cannot win, and KBA has no reason to sue.
But hypothetically, what would happen? I’m not a lawyer, so just thinking out loud here. The case would either be in the Korean Civil court or the
Court of Arbitration for Sport
The CAS can only come into action if both parties agree. If so, CAS will follow the local rules, so the KBA rules. And those rules were followed, so the outcome won’t change.
The argument that the rules weren’t so strictly enforced in other games can be put forward, but it is very weak. The police also doesn’t catch every criminal, but that doesn’t mean crime is allowed.
The Korean Civil court on the other hand will look at if a breach of contract occurred. The contract is that in exchange for payment of the entry fee, a participant was allowed to participate in tournament. That happened, so this court will also not change the result. And of course, the rules were followed, so no breach there either.
Any Chinese courts have no jurisdiction over events outside China’s borders.
Do you see it differently?

Any Chinese courts have no jurisdiction over events outside China’s borders.
Side note: “X has no jurisdiction over events outside X’s borders” is not always true. South Korea prosecutes its citizens for taking drugs which are illegal in South Korea even if taken in another country where they are legal.
In more general laws about cases concerning foreign countries or citizens, China many times is applying the principle of reciprocity (like for visas, family rights etc …). You can’t just say nothing will happen because it’s outside the boarders

In more general laws about cases concerning foreign countries or citizens, China many times is applying the principle of reciprocity (like for visas, family rights etc …). You can’t just say nothing will happen because it’s outside the boarders
I didn’t say nothing will happen. What I said or meant is that there’s no legal way a Chinese court can order the KBA to change the outcome of the tournament.
The Chinese go federation can implement some reciprocal action / punishment by themselves, they don’t need to go to a court for that.

Side note: “X has no jurisdiction over events outside X’s borders” is not always true. South Korea prosecutes its citizens for taking drugs which are illegal in South Korea even if taken in another country where they are legal.
Interesting, I didn’t know that, that seems a little too proactive.

South Korea prosecutes its citizens for taking drugs which are illegal in South Korea even if taken in another country where they are legal.
True, the US has similar laws as well. But these laws are directed towards the respective country’s own citizens.
Which is vastly different than for example South Korea prosecuting non-citizens for taking drugs which are illegal in South Korea.
No but do you know Chinese? If so, you’ll be happy to hear what I sent to the forum to tell us what they told us.
I don’t know Chinese, but feel free to go ahead and share.