Was this ruling correct? (Eternal Weekend, round 7)

[fsecco]

So, I finally had time to watch the Vintage Eternal Weekend featured matches and I was very unsatisfied about a judge ruling in the game featured on round 7 - between Gerard Fabiano and Stephen Houdlette.

Here's the video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_HcyUmZM6gM

So on the exact 40 min mark, Stephen drops a 2nd Confidant. He now has 2 Confidants and a Jace TMS on the table. He "jacestorms" and puts two 0CC cards on top, then passes. Gerard plays his turn and passes. Then the strange thing happens (Stephen's turn begins at 41:10): Stephen untaps and draws 2 from the Confidants and 1 for the turn. He then Ancestral Recalls, drawing 3 and... puts 2 back on top. Then he passes the turn (without using any of Jace's abilities).

Than they stop and realize that Stephen shouldn't have returned 2 cards for Ancestral. After more than 15 minutes of ruling, the judges decide to simply unwind and go back to Stephen's turn, allowing him to use's Jace and do a lot of stuff that basically won him the game.

The importance here is that, if hadn't he put those two cards back (which he knew had 0 CC) he could lose the game to the double Confidant activation next turn, since he was with 8 life and his opponent had a live Deathrite Shaman on the table. In my view, he knew that and returned those cards on purpose, even though he knew he had cast Ancestral, just so he couldn't lose to the Confidants (probably mistakenly thinking he'd already used Jace that turn).

I don't know, how do you guys view the rulings the judge chose? Is that correct? In my view I think they should continue Gerard's turn and return the 2 cards Stephen put on top of his library to his hand, essentially saying that if he forgot to Jace, that's his problem.

Does any one have any rules backup to this ruling?

[Shock Wave]

I called the judge as soon as I saw what happened.

I was absolutely baffled at the decision. Ancestral Recall resolved as if it were a Brainstorm, and then the turn was passed. The game was returned to the point where Ancestral Recall resolved, so the player could resolve it properly and activate Jace. Truly bizarre.

[Varal]

It seems like a Game Play Error — Game Rule Violation in the Infraction Procedure Guide.

If the error was discovered within a time frame in which a player could reasonably be expected to notice the error and the situation is simple enough to safely back up without too much disruption to the course of the game, the judge may get permission from the Head Judge to back up the game to the point of the error. Each action taken is undone until the game reaches the point immediately prior to the error. Cards incorrectly placed in hand are returned to the location in the zone from which they were moved (if the identity of the incorrectly drawn card is not known to all players, a random card is returned instead). Once the game is backed up, it continues from that point.

It seems like the rule was followed, the backing up was fairly simple. No relevant information was gained, I don't see why backing up isn't relevant.

EDIT: I thought they found the mistake at the end of the turn where the mistake was done not two turns later as was the case. Anyway, Abe has the best explanation.

[fsecco]

It seems like a Game Play Error — Game Rule Violation in the Infraction Procedure Guide.

If the error was discovered within a time frame in which a player could reasonably be expected to notice the error and the situation is simple enough to safely back up without too much disruption to the course of the game, the judge may get permission from the Head Judge to back up the game to the point of the error. Each action taken is undone until the game reaches the point immediately prior to the error. Cards incorrectly placed in hand are returned to the location in the zone from which they were moved (if the identity of the incorrectly drawn card is not known to all players, a random card is returned instead). Once the game is backed up, it continues from that point.

It seems like the rule was followed, the backing up was fairly simple. No relevant information was gained, I don't see why backing up isn't relevant.

The thing is I agree with you only in part. If he didn't have 2 Confidants and 8 life (6, actually, if you count another Deathrite activation) I would mind that they did what they did. But with the game state as it was, he probably returned those cards to the top on purpose, knowing he made a mistake that could cost him the game and hoping no one would notice. I think it's very similar to a situation where a player "forgets" Confidants trigger in order not to die.

But well, I ain't no judge so I actually don't know what is the correct call...

[Clariax]

The thing is I agree with you only in part. If he didn't have 2 Confidants and 8 life (6, actually, if you count another Deathrite activation) I would mind that they did what they did. But with the game state as it was, he probably returned those cards to the top on purpose, knowing he made a mistake that could cost him the game and hoping no one would notice. I think it's very similar to a situation where a player "forgets" Confidants trigger in order not to die.

What you're suggesting here is that he was cheating.  While it is possible that this was the case, of course (but given that he could've just activated Jace after the Ancestral resolved, seems unlikely), it was clearly not the determination of the judges.  And determining cheating based on just a video without any clear evidence in pretty much impossible.

The suggestion that others seem to be making that the 2 cards should've been put from library to hand where they belonged and everything else remain the same is not the proper way to fix it.  You either back up completely (as was done) or leave things as they are (meaning turn stays over, cards stay on top of library).  You don't mix the two.

[fsecco]

The thing is I agree with you only in part. If he didn't have 2 Confidants and 8 life (6, actually, if you count another Deathrite activation) I would mind that they did what they did. But with the game state as it was, he probably returned those cards to the top on purpose, knowing he made a mistake that could cost him the game and hoping no one would notice. I think it's very similar to a situation where a player "forgets" Confidants trigger in order not to die.

What you're suggesting here is that he was cheating.  While it is possible that this was the case, of course (but given that he could've just activated Jace after the Ancestral resolved, seems unlikely), it was clearly not the determination of the judges.  And determining cheating based on just a video without any clear evidence in pretty much impossible.

The suggestion that others seem to be making that the 2 cards should've been put from library to hand where they belonged and everything else remain the same is not the proper way to fix it.  You either back up completely (as was done) or leave things as they are (meaning turn stays over, cards stay on top of library).  You don't mix the two.

Nice! Thanks for clarifying.

[Shock Wave]

Why could they have not returned to Stephen's turn, resolved the Ancestral, and then proceed to his end of turn?

After all, he did pass the turn after casting Ancestral. I'm not sure why he gets the opportunity to continue his turn after rewinding.

[fsecco]

Why could they have not returned to Stephen's turn, resolved the Ancestral, and then proceed to his end of turn?

After all, he did pass the turn after casting Ancestral. I'm not sure why he gets the opportunity to continue his turn after rewinding.

Probably because he casts the Ancestral during his main phase. So when the game rewinds, it rewinds to the that phase...

[Shock Wave]

Why could they have not returned to Stephen's turn, resolved the Ancestral, and then proceed to his end of turn?

After all, he did pass the turn after casting Ancestral. I'm not sure why he gets the opportunity to continue his turn after rewinding.

Probably because he casts the Ancestral during his main phase. So when the game rewinds, it rewinds to the that phase...

I get that --- I just don't see why, as the result of having played a card improperly and passing the turn, you should be provided the opportunity to make additional plays after having corrected the original mistake.

[Samoht]

Why could they have not returned to Stephen's turn, resolved the Ancestral, and then proceed to his end of turn?

After all, he did pass the turn after casting Ancestral. I'm not sure why he gets the opportunity to continue his turn after rewinding.

Probably because he casts the Ancestral during his main phase. So when the game rewinds, it rewinds to the that phase...

I get that --- I just don't see why, as the result of having played a card improperly and passing the turn, you should be provided the opportunity to make additional plays after having corrected the original mistake.

That's because it's the rules?

[Shock Wave]

Why could they have not returned to Stephen's turn, resolved the Ancestral, and then proceed to his end of turn?

After all, he did pass the turn after casting Ancestral. I'm not sure why he gets the opportunity to continue his turn after rewinding.

Probably because he casts the Ancestral during his main phase. So when the game rewinds, it rewinds to the that phase...

I get that --- I just don't see why, as the result of having played a card improperly and passing the turn, you should be provided the opportunity to make additional plays after having corrected the original mistake.

That's because it's the rules?

That doesn't mean the rule makes sense.

[Godder]

I understand the frustration, but the Rules Forum is for Q&A on the rules as written, not discussion on whether or not the rules themselves are fair/right/decent. The best place to discuss this further is either Community or Vintage Issues.

Locked.

Edit: Unlocked at Katzby's request.

[Katzby]

My name's Abe and I was the head judge of Vintage champs at Eternal Weekend.  I handled the ruling you are talking about on appeal.

I haven't watched the video, but the infraction is described in this thread more-or-less as I heard it, if not for missing a few details.  The players told me that after Stephen put two cards on top of his library he also played a land and cast a Mox before passing the turn.  Then, during Stephen's end step, Gerard used his Deathrite Shaman to exile Stephen's Ancestral Recall and have him lose 2 life, which resolved.  Then, Gerard untapped and drew for the turn before a spectator notified the table judge of the issue.

Clariax is absolutely right.  Generally speaking, there are only two options when dealing with this type of problem: either rewind everything or leave everything as is.

When I got to the table, after hearing both sides of the story, I knew there was no way I would be rewinding this.  While it's not the only consideration to make, the sheer number of things that happened in between the error and when it was caught meant that we were well past the point of being able to rewind easily and without causing more disruption than it would be worth.  A lot of choices had been made in that short time with information revealed to each player's opponent about the choices they would each make.  Simply snapping my fingers and putting the game back to where it was wouldn't undo the knowledge that each player gained, here- you can't "unring" a bell, as they say.

So, that's the thing- I'm not sure where people are getting the idea that this game was rewound, because it wasn't.  It's possible that the players themselves decided to re-enact the last few plays that they made on their own, but this had nothing to do with the ruling or my directive.

Thanks.


Katzby

[Shock Wave]

Thanks for clarifying that Abe. The ruling you chose makes a lot more sense than rewinding. Now that you mention it, I recall the conversation about the situation being very difficult if not impossible to rewind properly.

Just wondering, do judges have the authority to deviate from the "rewind everything or leave everything as is" options?

[Grand Inquisitor]

But with the game state as it was, he probably returned those cards to the top on purpose, knowing he made a mistake that could cost him the game and hoping no one would notice.

I'm the player in question.  Most of the comments in here are representative, but I wanted to inform this claim.  It was near the end of a very long day and I had been Jace-storming for multiple terms beforehand when I cast Ancestral Recall.  You're right that I was very sensitive to keeping my library maintained for my Bob flips, but there was nothing underhanded about trying to avoid +2 cards.  It was just a mental error.  As was pointed out above, there was no incentive for me to turn Ancestral Recall into Brainstorm, since I was just going to Jace afterwards.

It was a really bone-headed move, but there was certainly nothing disingenuous about it.

I also think the judge ruling makes more sense in light of the descriptions above.

edit: @Shockwave, the game state was not returned to ancestral so I could Jace, it was just maintained at the point in the game when the judge was called.  So I didn't 'gain' from the ruling either.

[Shock Wave]

edit: @Shockwave, the game state was not returned to ancestral so I could Jace, it was just maintained at the point in the game when the judge was called.  So I didn't 'gain' from the ruling either.

Well, to me it was clear that there was no intent --- but it also seems clear to me that you did "gain" from the mistake, since you would have taken 4 damage from Bob on your next turn if the two cards put on top of your library had instead been in your hand.

[Samoht]

edit: @Shockwave, the game state was not returned to ancestral so I could Jace, it was just maintained at the point in the game when the judge was called.  So I didn't 'gain' from the ruling either.

Well, to me it was clear that there was no intent --- but it also seems clear to me that you did "gain" from the mistake, since you would have taken 4 damage from Bob on your next turn if the two cards put on top of your library had instead been in your hand.

If he gets backed up, he remembers his Jace and is +3 cards. If they leave it, he is -3 cards but still takes no damage. There is no middle ground of you take back your cards but immediately end the turn. There is no way that the cards on top of his library aren't two Moxes.

[TheWhiteDragon]

It doesn't seem to me that anyone has any issue with the rule or how it was implemented.  It seems Shockwave is of the opinion that a mistake should only harm the one who made it while the opponent might stand to benefit.  Therefore, whatever action would result in the misplayer taking maximum pain for his error (a game loss in this case) is "justice". 

Basically, GI messed up, and SW would like to see the opponent get a win off his play error.  Neglected is the fact that BOTH players erred as play was allowed to continue with nobody noticing except SW.

To apply the rule of "whomever makes a mistake pays for it", then play could have continued on as only an observer noticed and both players were in error at that point.  To apply actual rules, rewinding to a point and continuing onward from there makes sense.  It seems SW wants the rewind to only undo a mistake, but then GI forfeit the rest of his turn because "he would have ended it anyways."  What SW is forgetting is that GI probably would not have ended his turn there had he seen 2 moxes in his hand, and thus probably would have jaced after the AR.  Having drawn 3 and thought he was jacing when he in fact ancestralled led GI mentally to believe he had already jaced which would have been his last play of the turn.  The turn never would have ended in any way, shape, or form without Jace being the final effect for GI.

[Shock Wave]

It doesn't seem to me that anyone has any issue with the rule or how it was implemented.  It seems Shockwave is of the opinion that a mistake should only harm the one who made it while the opponent might stand to benefit.  Therefore, whatever action would result in the misplayer taking maximum pain for his error (a game loss in this case) is "justice".

That's close to what I was implying --- but not quite. I was just a neutral spectator, and I wasn't arguing for a game loss. I just don't think the "Rewind or Keep Going" options are the best solution here. Of the two options, to move on was definitely the best choice --- but putting the two cards into Stephen's hand would have most fairly repaired the game state (in my opinion).

To apply the rule of "whomever makes a mistake pays for it", then play could have continued on as only an observer noticed and both players were in error at that point.  To apply actual rules, rewinding to a point and continuing onward from there makes sense.  It seems SW wants the rewind to only undo a mistake, but then GI forfeit the rest of his turn because "he would have ended it anyways."  What SW is forgetting is that GI probably would not have ended his turn there had he seen 2 moxes in his hand, and thus probably would have jaced after the AR.  Having drawn 3 and thought he was jacing when he in fact ancestralled led GI mentally to believe he had already jaced which would have been his last play of the turn.  The turn never would have ended in any way, shape, or form without Jace being the final effect for GI.

Well, both players should be equally penalized in the sense that they would both get warnings for failing to maintain game state (or whatever the rule is) --- I'm perfectly fine with that. It's just my opinion that to continue the game with those 2 cards on top of the library isn't correct since the Ancestral resolved and (also my opinion), the state of the game can be repaired to put those cards into this hand without affecting anything else.

I'm not suggesting that Stephen "would have ended the turn anyways". Surely, if the game were rewound, he would activate Jace and do things differently. Ultimately, however, he cast Ancestral and passed the turn --- and to return to that state seems reasonable to me. *shrug*

[Samoht]

It doesn't seem to me that anyone has any issue with the rule or how it was implemented.  It seems Shockwave is of the opinion that a mistake should only harm the one who made it while the opponent might stand to benefit.  Therefore, whatever action would result in the misplayer taking maximum pain for his error (a game loss in this case) is "justice".

That's close to what I was implying --- but not quite. I was just a neutral spectator, and I wasn't arguing for a game loss. I just don't think the "Rewind or Keep Going" options are the best solution here. Of the two options, to move on was definitely the best choice --- but putting the two cards into Stephen's hand would have most fairly repaired the game state (in my opinion).

To apply the rule of "whomever makes a mistake pays for it", then play could have continued on as only an observer noticed and both players were in error at that point.  To apply actual rules, rewinding to a point and continuing onward from there makes sense.  It seems SW wants the rewind to only undo a mistake, but then GI forfeit the rest of his turn because "he would have ended it anyways."  What SW is forgetting is that GI probably would not have ended his turn there had he seen 2 moxes in his hand, and thus probably would have jaced after the AR.  Having drawn 3 and thought he was jacing when he in fact ancestralled led GI mentally to believe he had already jaced which would have been his last play of the turn.  The turn never would have ended in any way, shape, or form without Jace being the final effect for GI.

...Ultimately, however, he cast Ancestral and passed the turn --- and to return to that state seems reasonable to me. *shrug*

Right, he cast Ancestral and passed the turn. But it was resolved incorrectly. They have to back up to the improper resolution in order to fix it, and that would allow the player to do anything before passing the turn. I'm pretty sure he wasn't trying to lose 3 cards when he started casting Ancestral. It was an honest mistake that hurt him significantly already.

[Shock Wave]

They have to back up to the improper resolution in order to fix it...

No, they don't, and that's not what they chose to do. The judge chose to "fix it" by leaving the cards on top of the library, which actually doesn't fix anything at all as far as the game state is concerned, since the cards aren't supposed to be there.

I'm pretty sure he wasn't trying to lose 3 cards when he started casting Ancestral. It was an honest mistake that hurt him significantly already.

Again, the honesty of the mistake was never in question. It is definitely arguable as to whether or not the mistake hurt him at all.

[Godder]

They have to back up to the improper resolution in order to fix it...

No, they don't, and that's not what they chose to do. The judge chose to "fix it" by leaving the cards on top of the library, which actually doesn't fix anything at all as far as the game state is concerned, since the cards aren't supposed to be there.

From what has been said earlier in this thread by Clariax and Katzby, the options were to rewind to the illegal play, undo it, and play on from there, or leave the game as is. The Rules don't offer the option to correct the illegal play (in this case, return the 2 cards on top of library to hand) and then fast forward again making all the same plays.

[Shock Wave]

From what has been said earlier in this thread by Clariax and Katzby, the options were to rewind to the illegal play, undo it, and play on from there, or leave the game as is. The Rules don't offer the option to correct the illegal play (in this case, return the 2 cards on top of library to hand) and then fast forward again making all the same plays.

I'm clear on the ruling. Abe also offered this:

Generally speaking, there are only two options when dealing with this type of problem: either rewind everything or leave everything as is.

Does that mean that sometimes there are other options?

[tribet]

You can't really rewind anymore because a lot of thing were revealed and most importantly Gerard DREW A CARD for his turn! Nobody can rewind the game where it was with 100% certainty because we now rely on Gerard's honesty. People could also start arguing about which duals were untapped, etc... as it was more than 15 min ago.

Then, I'm thinking the same than the OP and the commentators, I would have corrected the game state as much as possible by asking to resolve ACall properly (i.e. returning the 2 cards brainstormed away back into Stephen's hand) and then return to where the game was in Gerard's turn.

I don't really know how that fits within the rules, but it's clearly about the Spirit more than anything else!

[Clariax]

Partial rewinds are a problem.  Many posting here like to look at it as "simple" to just put the 2 cards from library into hand.  But this really makes for more of a mess of things than they already are.  Decisions are made based on the game state as it is.  After the cards were put back both players passed priority multiple times (including ending the turn).  Given that the player wanted those 2 cards on top and hadn't activated Jace yet that turn it seems pretty likely if those 2 cards were in his hand he would've made different decisions after the Ancestral.

Some people think that it's OK because this is just "punishment" for making the Game Play Error.  Any attempt at punitive game fixes will certainly create situations that might benefit the player instead of hurting them.  Here we're talking about putting more cards in the players hand as a way to fix things by not letting him benefit.  99% of the time, just putting more cards in someone's hand is going to be a huge benefit to them.  It may seem obvious to everyone that this would be OK here and won't be a benefit to the player, but that isn't necessarily the case, and it's a really dangerous idea to leave it up to the judge to determine how to twist around the game state to make things "fair" for everyone.  It's hard enough (and certainly sometimes messed up) trying to determine whether to backup or leave things as they are in borderline cases.  It's even harder and almost certain to be messed up if the judge is going to try to modify things as he sees fit to make it all fair.

[tribet]

I don't think we are trying to "punish" anybody here. If you add a sentimental component to the issue then yes it becomes a judge's nightmare and that's why the Head Judge had to be involve here.

The main point is that both players didn't pick-up that ACall wasn't resolved properly. The fact that Stephen forgot his Jace activation should be out of the equation. Was it a trivial mistake? We don't want to know. It could have been a strategic move, it could have been bluffing, baiting, or some dark combo that you and I are not aware of yet,... who cares? Jace, Bobs, Deathrite, the life totals, etc... should be left out of the equation and fixing the game state as far as we can with 100% certainty should be the ultimate goal. So it would involve resolving Acall properly and then go back to Gerard's turn since he already drew an unknown card.

To me, a Head Judge is not somebody who knows the rule book better than others. Ground Judges should stick to "rewind all or rewind nothing" if that's what the book tells them. When the game has gone beyond the rules, the Head Judge is here to make judgment calls. So yes, past that point, it most probably involves subjectivity and either way, you'll never please both players. That's the power a Head Judge should be given and both players should accept for messing it beyond the rules.

[TheWhiteDragon]

I don't think we are trying to "punish" anybody here. If you add a sentimental component to the issue then yes it becomes a judge's nightmare and that's why the Head Judge had to be involve here.

...fixing the game state as far as we can with 100% certainty should be the ultimate goal. So it would involve resolving Acall properly and then go back to Gerard's turn since he already drew an unknown card.

But SW actually IS suggesting punishing Stephen for his play error.  By putting two cards back, we have to assume (it only logically follows) that GI thought he was resolving jace, when in fact he was resolving recall. It only makes sense that his intention was to have jace do his thing to put those 2 cards back before ending the turn.  If you make him take those 2 cards in hand and then NOT allow him to resolve Jace, then you ARE punishing him because you are making him take damage on bob flips and denying him the opportunity to activate Jace (which is what he thought he had done anyway).  To assume he misplayed ancestral as a brainstorm and "forgot" to activate jace is silly.  Clearly he WAS activating Jace by putting the 2 cards back.  What he forgot to do was draw 3 on the ancestral he had cast first.  It's like he cast ancestral, skipped drawing 3, then activated Jace by drawing 3 and putting back 2.  If you want to actually get at the intent of the play and rewind to as pure a state as possible, you let him draw the 3 and then resolve jace...you don't make him draw the 3 and then deny him the ability to activate Jace, which was clearly the intentional play since he put back his 0cc cards purposefully.  It would make MORE sense to just untap a blue and put ancestral back in his hand because he had completely forgotten to resolve AR (he didn't improperly resolve it and then forget Jace, as some are implying).

[Shock Wave]

I don't think we are trying to "punish" anybody here. If you add a sentimental component to the issue then yes it becomes a judge's nightmare and that's why the Head Judge had to be involve here.

...fixing the game state as far as we can with 100% certainty should be the ultimate goal. So it would involve resolving Acall properly and then go back to Gerard's turn since he already drew an unknown card.

But SW actually IS suggesting punishing Stephen for his play error.  By putting two cards back, we have to assume (it only logically follows) that GI thought he was resolving jace, when in fact he was resolving recall. It only makes sense that his intention was to have jace do his thing to put those 2 cards back before ending the turn.  If you make him take those 2 cards in hand and then NOT allow him to resolve Jace, then you ARE punishing him because you are making him take damage on bob flips and denying him the opportunity to activate Jace (which is what he thought he had done anyway).  To assume he misplayed ancestral as a brainstorm and "forgot" to activate jace is silly.  Clearly he WAS activating Jace by putting the 2 cards back.  What he forgot to do was draw 3 on the ancestral he had cast first.  It's like he cast ancestral, skipped drawing 3, then activated Jace by drawing 3 and putting back 2.  If you want to actually get at the intent of the play and rewind to as pure a state as possible, you let him draw the 3 and then resolve jace...you don't make him draw the 3 and then deny him the ability to activate Jace, which was clearly the intentional play since he put back his 0cc cards purposefully.  It would make MORE sense to just untap a blue and put ancestral back in his hand because he had completely forgotten to resolve AR (he didn't improperly resolve it and then forget Jace, as some are implying).

Yeah, see --- I can't get behind that approach. What a player does is what is important. What they intended to do, not so much.

Important: Steve improperly resolved Ancestral Recall.
Not Important: Steve had planned on activating Jace, but never did.

What needs to be fixed is the improper resolution of Ancestral Recall, not anything else.

This isn't about searching for a way to punish Steve and/or benefit the other player. It's about fixing the state of the game, as it currently is. The fact that it ends up benefitting the other player and "hurting" Steve is incidental.

[TheWhiteDragon]

But to say what he did, devoid of intention, also fails.  You can't say what he did was improperly resolve ancestral and then forget to activate jace (I think it's fairly clear what he WAS doing when he put back 2 cards). If anything, you could say he incorrectly resolved recall (didn't draw 3) and then proceeded to correctly resolve Jace's +0 but neglected to announce the activation.  Same exact actions.  By making him draw 2 and not activate jace, you force the assumption that the ONLY play error was AR inappropriately resolving (as a brainstorm) and then saying he didn't activate Jace.  By the same actions though, you could argue that what he did was fail to resolve AR at all (not draw 3) and then activate jace, but fail to announce the activation (the same way people just flip a card to bob without actually announcing they are revealing for bob).  If you want to cut intent out of the equation, you also can't force the assumption that the player skipped using jace as opposed to using him without announcing it.  Given the types of effects involved (draw 3 from AR/brainstorm from jace), it actually points to the 2nd scenario (unresolved AR and unannounced jace) rather than AR being morphed into some type of card (brainstorm) that wasn't even involved in the gamestate.  No matter how you dice it, giving GI the opportunity to activate jace (orr announce what he actually did) is the only reasonable action if it were decided to force the ancestral to resolve properly.

[Shock Wave]

But to say what he did, devoid of intention, also fails.

Why does it fail? I'm not making things up. These are facts:

• Ancestral Recall was cast and did not resolve properly
• At no point during Steve's turn was Jace's ability announced

You can't say what he did was improperly resolve ancestral and then forget to activate jace (I think it's fairly clear what he WAS doing when he put back 2 cards).

That's actually not what I said at all. Notice that I am leaving Jace completely out of the equation? That's because Jace was never activated. What he intended to do doesn't matter. All that matters is what was actually done.

If anything, you could say he incorrectly resolved recall (didn't draw 3) and then proceeded to correctly resolve Jace's +0 but neglected to announce the activation.  Same exact actions.

... except for the fact that this is not what happened, since Ancestral Recall was announced and incorrectly resolved, and the Jace ability was never announced.

If you want to cut intent out of the equation, you also can't force the assumption that the player skipped using jace as opposed to using him without announcing it.

He can't just start drawing cards from Jace without actually announcing the ability. It has to go on the stack, there's a priority pass involved --- these things need to happen. Jace wasn't announced because it *wasn't activated*. You seem to be implying that because the method by which Ancestral Recall was misplayed resembled a Jace activation, that this somehow means that the intent to activate Jace needs to be taken into consideration.

If that is correct, then there's really no point in continuing this conversation, because we're at completely opposite ends of the opinion spectrum.