[pescetom]

sanst, on 2021-June-07, 01:59, said:

That there was MI and very probably use of the UI, is obvious. But no director could act opun the given information, because an essential element is missing: were EW damaged and, if so, how?

No damage that I can see.
But as mycroft pointed out, Law 73C2 does not require damage for director to act.

[mycroft]

It would depend on whether E-W found the heart lead on the information given, and whether they were more likely to find the heart lead on a "correct" auction with correct explanations (and the one MI one). If they found the heart lead, then there's no damage. If they didn't, then if a heart lead is more likely in the assigned auction and legal explanations, then an assigned score with some fraction of 3NT off however many, to go with 3NT making however many is in order.

But that is independent of whether the deliberate attempt to miminize the damage by the obvious use of UI, failure to Alert as required and failure to correct misinformation when required is worth a score penalty, or whether we think education will suffice for this not to be tried again. My impression from the thread is "he has been told what he has to do and it hasn't worked to stop this."