[VixTD]

..1♦......P......1♠........P
.1NT.....P....2♣(A)..2♣/X

2♣ (the first 2♣, that is) was some sort of checkback / Crowhurst enquiry. The next player bid 2♣, then immediately removed it and replaced it with a double. The director was called.

The director took the offender away from the table and asked what had occasioned the change of call. Offender said he had intended to double 2♣ for the lead, but had absent-mindedly withdrawn the call he had been intending to double instead.

Should the director allow the change of call?

[Lanor Fow]

Yes, in my opinion. All parts of 25A seem to be satisfied. The 2♣ as descibed seems unintended to me, and it was substituted without pause for thought