Originally Posted by pfapfap
We can nit over the rules all you like. I agree, this should probably be a check. But the floor can rule however the floor sees fit. In this case, the floor ruled it dead. Anybody else may make a different ruling. Protect your hand.
The title is a bit misleading. The dealer didn't make the decision to kill the hand.
I think the real question now is, if we can nit over the rules, can we nit over the title of the thread too?
Honestly, I think both 'sides' of this ruling have some validity to their point, so I think either ruling is alright, but as a player (even not in this specific hand) I would like to see the hand declared dead, because I think the floor declaring an action is playing for the player and would actually be surprised if I was the player letting the clock expire if it was not.
Last Point: If we're going to 'nit on the rules', when the player loses the ability to act, then the player following them cannot legally act, because they would technically be acting out of turn since the player before them in the hand had not acted yet, wouldn't they?
Added: I keep getting back to...
If the player was in the restroom, his hand would be dead, because we cannot know what his action would be (check, bet, fold).
In this case, we also cannot know what the player's action would be (check, bet, fold) because he's refusing to tell us, so if we cannot make a decision for the player in the restroom, because we do not know what his action would be, how can we make a decision for a player who refuses to tell us their action?
Cliffs: We don't know this player's action, because he's refusing to tell us, so how can anyone decide his action for him any more than they could for a player in the restroom?
I think we'll probably just have to agree to disagree on this one and know there will be different rulings by different people should we ever decide to be completely rude and refuse to act during the time allowed for our turn.