Playing in a club heat of the National Pairs, I was nearly on an appeals committee for the following hand:
Game all, matchpoints.
South opened 1D, West overcalled 1NT and North doubled. North then said 'oh sorry, I should have alerted the 1D'. The director was called, and discovered that the 1D could have been a short suit planning to rebid in NT (I assumed better minor, but I didn't get to hear any further details). The director told West he could change his call. West did, and the auction proceded:
S W N E
1D 1S 2H* P
2NT P 3NT all pass
2H was alerted and described as non-forcing. South made 9 tricks in 3NT for 18 mps out of 24. West asked for a ruling, saying that South had made use of the fact he knew his partner had a maximum for the 2H bid because of the withdrawn double of 1NT. The director asked N/S about what sort of hand 2H showed, and eventually decided to let the score stand. West objected, and the director came and discussed the hand with us. When we discovered that she had already given a ruling (rather than was asking before ruling) we said she shouldn't change a ruling just because West doesn't like it; he could appeal if he wanted to. West did not appeal (West was a strong tournament player, the other 3 people at the table were standard club players).
When we got round to looking at a rule book, it seemed to us that the director had been wrong in allowing West to change his 1NT call as it did not seem probable that he made the call as a result of misinformation (21B1). So my question is this: suppose E/W had appealed suggesting the contract should be 2H+2. Suppose that the appeals committee believe that the director had made an incorrect ruling earlier on the auction, even though that ruling is not being appealed. Do we adjust the score to 1NTx-3? East might feel aggrieved at this and say that at pairs he would pull the double of 1NT (or xx for rescue depending on their methods); 2Sx might only lose 500, gaining a few matchpoints over 3NT making.