Cheating or clever use of the rules?

[Norm]

I saw something at a tournament yesterday that rubbed me the wrong way, and I'd like to ask for your opinions on the matter as I may have overreacted.

Jeremia Rudolph (Rock Lee) with 12 post was playing against an opponent with chalice of the void set to one and a liliana of the veil in play. His opponent is almost guaranteed to win the game over the next few turns with his nether spirit when this happened:

Jeremiah: Brainstorm -> reach for deck quickly and pick up his first card without seeing it yet when his opponent stops him.
Opponent: Chalice for once counters it
Jeremiah looks at the judge nearby who was watching and asks "If I picked it up faster would I have resolved the brainstorm?"
Judge looks at him funny as he's clearly in an awkward position and I believe tells him "No, that's not ok"
Jeremiah tosses his brainstorm in the bin and passes

Two turns later Jeremiah rips a Crop Rotation that could potentially save him from immediate death. He casts it, then picks his deck up so fast that nobody could tell him to stop before he was already digging for cards. He clearly did this intentionally and ended up resolving that with (I believe) a warning afterward. He lost the match anyway but I had never seen a situation like this before. At least half of this tournament was aware of what happened and we all kept an eye out for his shenanigans throughout the day but despite him scrubbing out of the event and never actually playing against me, I still felt "cheated" just watching it happen.

Should there be more severe punishment for doing this? Is it cheating or clever use of the rules? How would you feel if someone did this to you in a game?

[birds of paradise2]

Disgusting behaviour Obviously cheating.

[Quasim0ff]

He should have lost the match after he drew the card with brainstorm.

VERY poorly judging, done by that judge!

*I would appeal to the head judge if he got a warning.

[syfilisx]

I myself play cards against chalice, but only resolve them if they make it clear it's ok. But I feel that this is not game of reflexes.
Now when name's have been called, it would be nice to hear Rock Lee's opinion of situations, things tend to get bit onesided. Was name at this point really necessary?

[Kich867]

The speed at which he picks the deck up doesn't matter, even if he fetches the land, if his opponent doesn't saying anything it's explicitly the opponent's fault. At any point in time the opponent could have stopped him and said, "The chalice for one counters it". He would call a judge, the judge would ask about the gamestate, the opponent would indicate he made no motion or verbal agreement that the spell had resolved, and warnings / game losses would be given out appropriately.

It's not resolved because you're going through the motions, there's plenty of times people cast brainstorms through thalia's that they can't cast etc. and then get the game backed up.

[Tormod]

You are no means obligated to inform an opponent about chalice triggers, but rushing the play without giving your chance to react is cheating.

It could be an oddball chance that this guys actually thinks the game is supposed to be played this way. Regardless that only speaks to motive and he needs to be educated.

That being said, Judges don't like to issue game loses. Almost to the point where usually the victim of a cheater has to suffer the results so that Judges don't have to feel as awkward for only issuing a warning on game state or accumulate enough evidence for a disqualification.

[Bed Decks Palyer]

You are no means obligated to inform an opponent about chalice triggers, but rushing the play without giving your chance to react is cheating.

It could be an oddball chance that this guys actually thinks the game is supposed to be played this way. Regardless that only speaks to motive and he needs to be educated.

Yep.

[birds of paradise2]

I myself play cards against chalice, but only resolve them if they make it clear it's ok. But I feel that this is not game of reflexes.
Now when name's have been called, it would be nice to hear Rock Lee's opinion of situations, things tend to get bit onesided. Was name at this point really necessary?

He's obviously cheating with intent, and deserves to be called out. So yes, naming was necessary.

[Dia_Bot]

I agree with the reactions above. It's not a game of whom is the fastest in reacting, you SHOULD give your opponent the opportunity to remind you of the triggered ability when you play spells (like cotv). Picking up your deck at once when casting a crop rotation means you are not even passing priority to your opponent which is against the rules. So it does classify as cheating.
However like it has been said before you have no obligation to remind your opponents of their own triggers, for instance last tournement I played I played a cabal therapy in a chalice on 1 (to empty my hand for an infernal) and my opponent immidiately shows me his hand. This indicates he has forgotten about the triggered ability and the spell will resolve. But not giving your opponent the time to point to the triggered ability should be penalized imo.

Also: you should ALWAYS appeal if you are not agreeing with the ruling of a judge. (this is actually a lesson I myself had to learn the hard way )

[Mr Miagi]

What a douchebag.. Man if that happened to me I'd totaly call judge and request severe actions to be taken vs that player.

Not using stack, priority and clearly playing in a way to bypass that is cheating, with a douchebag icing on top. :we need to have a puke smiley:

And I totaly agree with the revealed identity, why not, maybe he can try to justify it by "telling his side of the story". If all is in order then no prob, if it aint then it's cheating.

[rxavage]

Sadly, this is not the first time I've heard of said player's shenanigans and poor sportsmanship. Judges should be more vigilant about punishing this type of behavior, which, unfortunately, is not all that uncommon.

[Julian23]

If you want to phrase it positively, Jeremiah has always had a reputation for being overly competitive. Still, let's just see what he has to say about the situation.

[birds of paradise2]

If you want to phrase it positively, Jeremiah has always had a reputation for being overly competitive. Still, let's just see what he has to say about the situation.

Overly competetive? I'm sure he has some bullshit excuse. They always do.

[Goaswerfraiejen]

Given the description above, my inclination is to treat it as a shameful (and I guess successful) attempt to cheat.

[Julian23]

Overly competetive? I'm sure he has some bullshit excuse. They always do.

Should have put that part in quotation marks, I guess, to make myself clear.

[Grand Superior]

Certainly cheating. Unlike Reid Duke's similar Chalice situation (where he was able to resolve a Chain Lighting through a Chalice at 1 because his opponent missed the trigger despite him giving ample time and confirming it with the opponent) this is deliberately trying to force a missed trigger and should be punished as cheating.

[Humphrey]

http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/s...the-Cheatering

[socialite]

If you play Legacy or Vintage in New England this guy has been a goon "since like" forever.

[Lemnear]

Jeremiah AND Chalice? That topic is just over the top in regards to the recent discussion in the Turbo Eldrazi Thread XP

[Koby]

I have nothing positive to say about the player in question, nor would this be the first instance of Rock Lee skirting the boundary of fair play in competitive events.

Considering the card in question, the player, and his deck; I would consider this to be intentional cheating.