History Main / ThatOneRule

** The second is about how the judges determine a complete response based on timing and how the contestants move their pens. The pens stop working once the final note of the iconic think music plays, so a response is considered incorrect if it's incomplete. While not tested to the extent of spelling, this rule has also led to accusations of it being haphazardly applied. Two separate Final Jeopardy! clues had "Clint Eastwood" as the correct response; "Who is Clint E" was accepted, but "Who is Clint Eastwoo" was not[[note]]The "Clint E" decision affected a Tournament of Champions placement; the contestant who wrote it won four games and beat out another four-time winner for a qualifying spot by $201[[/note]]. Two separate rulings in Season 38 brought this rule to the social media age. On June 17, 2022, a contestant squeezed the correct response of "Harriet Tubman", but host Mayim Bialik announced that it was not finished in time. On July 18, a contestant scribbled "Waiting for Godot?" before time expired, and it was accepted. Fans argued the latter ruling because the final word looked just as illegible. A compilation of other decisions and the impact they had on some games can be seen [[https://imgur.com/a/RX2pBLI?fbclid=IwAR30ybNnGeTIGM2DtYQOj8J89f3D8VT2eRo5FNWVZaa2UGeTShga-PnyPH8 here]].
* An incident similar to the "Berry"/"Barry" one on ''Jeopardy!'' happened on a 1982 episode of ''[[Series/{{Password}} Password Plus]]''. Marcia Wallace contested a judgment call where her contestant's guess of "Hairy" was determined to be phonetically dissimilar to the password of "Harry". The staff not only maintained their ruling against her, they also rolled out a chalkboard which explained the pronunciation difference.

* The board game of TabletopGame/{{Go}} has extremely simple rules...

* ''VideoGame/FinalFantasyVIII'' has two rules in its card minigame, Plus and Random. Random is straightforward - your hand is randomized (instead of choosing 5 cards you want), which usually means having to play with sub-par cards. Plus, however, looks straight (if a card is adjacent to two cards, and you can add a single number to card's stats to match the stats of those two cards, both cards are flipped), but ends up being a huge pain in the neck, since it also triggers Combo (cards flipped by Plus, Same or Combo will also flip all adjacent cards with lower stats), allowing the AI to possibly flip the entire table in one move. Not to mention, unlike Same, Plus opportunities are ''very'' easy to overlook, resulting in the AI abusing the rule for all its' worth to pull off wins out of pretty much thin air.

** Layers, the incredibly granular method of determining how ongoing effects are applied and interact. 99% of players could go their entire lives never needing to know they exist. 0.99% are tournament players and [=TO's=] who have to comb over the layers step by step to resolve and edge case. The remaining 0.01% are people frustrated that alterations to a creature's stats are applied in a completely unintuitive way that makes a lot of clever power/toughness switching not work for arbitrary reasons.

** The second is about how the judges determine a complete response based on timing and how the contestants move their pens. The pens stop working once the final note of the iconic think music plays, so a response is considered incorrect if it's incomplete. While not tested to the extent of spelling, this rule has also led to accusations of it being haphazardly applied. Two separate Final Jeopardy! clues had "Clint Eastwood" as the correct response; "Who is Clint E" was accepted, but "Who is Clint Eastwoo" was not. Two separate rulings in Season 38 brought this rule to the social media age. On June 17, 2022, a contestant squeezed the correct response of "Harriet Tubman", but host Mayim Bialik announced that it was not finished in time. On July 18, a contestant scribbled "Waiting for Godot?" before time expired, and it was accepted. Fans argued the latter ruling because the final word looked just as illegible. A compilation of other decisions and the impact they had on some games can be seen [[https://imgur.com/a/RX2pBLI?fbclid=IwAR30ybNnGeTIGM2DtYQOj8J89f3D8VT2eRo5FNWVZaa2UGeTShga-PnyPH8 here]].

** The second is about how the judges determine a complete response based on timing and how the contestants move their pens. The pens stop working once the final note of the iconic think music plays, so a response is considered incorrect if it's incomplete. While not tested to the extent of spelling, this rule has also led to accusations of haphazard applications. Two separate Final Jeopardy! clues had "Clint Eastwood" as the correct response; "Who is Clint E" was accepted, but "Who is Clint Eastwoo" was not. Two separate rulings in Season 38 brought this rule to the social media age. On June 17, 2022, a contestant squeezed the correct response of "Harriet Tubman", but host Mayim Bialik announced that it was not finished in time. On July 18, a contestant scribbled "Waiting for Godot?" before time expired, and it was accepted. Fans argued the latter ruling because the final word looked just as illegible. A compilation of other decisions and the impact they had on some games can be seen [[https://imgur.com/a/RX2pBLI?fbclid=IwAR30ybNnGeTIGM2DtYQOj8J89f3D8VT2eRo5FNWVZaa2UGeTShga-PnyPH8 here]].

* In Final Jeopardy!, the last round in ''Series/{{Jeopardy}}'', contestants use electronic pens to write down what they think is the correct response. One rule is straightforward at first glance: spelling doesn't count as long as it doesn't affect any pronunciation. Any moment where a contestant is ruled incorrect on even a slight pronunciation difference usually results in angry tweets or Facebook posts, even if it doesn't affect the outcome. The first viral case of this was on July 31, 2013, when the judges ruled against twelve-year old Thomas Hurley for misspelling the first word of "Emancipation Proclamation" as "Emanciptation". Another one happened a few months later when a defending champion was penalized for misspelling "Kazakhstan" as "Kazakhistan". On September 15, 2020, Berry Gordy was the subject to a clue and a contestant was denied credit for "Who is Barry Gordy?". That one caused debates in different American dialects pronouncing both names. A compilation of other decisions and the impact they had on some games can be seen [[https://imgur.com/a/RX2pBLI?fbclid=IwAR30ybNnGeTIGM2DtYQOj8J89f3D8VT2eRo5FNWVZaa2UGeTShga-PnyPH8 here]].

* Starting in 2011, the NFL changed its postseason overtime rules. The winner of the coin toss can win the game by scoring a touchdown on an opening drive as opposed to straight sudden death. Any other result means the opposing team gets possession of the ball. Thanks to the coin toss, an otherwise exciting game can wind up being a LuckBasedMission in overtime. If a team wins because of an opening drive touchdown, then this means the opposition never got a chance to possess the ball. Overall, this has happened seven times[[note]]a 2012 AFC Wild Card game, the 2015 NFC Conference Championship, a 2016 Divisional playoff, Super Bowl LI, the 2019 AFC Conference Championship, a 2020 Wild Card game and a 2022 AFC Divisional playoff[[/note]] and each call to fix the current overtime rules becomes louder than the last.

* Starting in 2011, the NFL changed its overtime rules. The winner of the coin toss can win the game by scoring a touchdown on an opening drive as opposed to straight sudden death. Any other result means the opposing team gets possession of the ball. Thanks to the coin toss, an otherwise exciting game can wind up being a LuckBasedMission in overtime. If a team wins because of an opening drive touchdown, then this means the opposition never got a chance to possess the ball. Overall, this has happened seven times[[note]]a 2012 AFC Wild Card game, the 2015 NFC Conference Championship, a 2016 Divisional playoff, Super Bowl LI, the 2019 AFC Conference Championship, a 2020 Wild Card game and a 2022 AFC Divisional playoff[[/note]] and each call to fix the current overtime rules becomes louder than the last.

* Determining if a pitcher is intentionally hitting or trying to hit a batter. For obvious reasons intentionally hitting an opponent with a 95-mph[[labelnote:*]]153 km/h[[/note]] projectile is against the rules, but at the same time the whole point of the game IS to throw said 95-mph ball NEAR your opponent, meaning that they sometimes ''do'' get hit by accident. Pitches "getting away" does happen, and some pitchers have even been ejected [[CassandraTruth after losing balance on the mound]]. When the rule isn't enforced, pitchers who escape punishment on the field sometimes push their luck by taunting their opponents or casually admitting intent in post-game interviews. Then there's the option to warn the benches if the umpire isn't convinced, which usually translates to [[KarmaHoudini the pitching team getting away with a free shot]]. Warnings are assured to result in arguments [[MisplacedRetribution from the team whose player got hit, leading to managerial and coach ejections in most cases]]. Even still, with teams facing suspensions for hitting a batter with warnings in place, an umpire can still declare no intent even if it's blatant. It got worse in 2020 after MLB feared retaliation against players who took part in the Astros' sign-stealing scandal. Decisions now require a crew conference, further hampering the league's attempts to improve the pace of play.

* Determining if a pitcher is intentionally hitting or trying to hit a batter. For obvious reasons intentionally hitting an opponent with a 95-MPH projectile is against the rules, but at the same time the whole point of the game IS to throw a 95-MPH NEAR your opponent, meaning that they do get hit on accident sometimes. Pitches "getting away" does happen, and some pitchers have even been ejected [[CassandraTruth after losing balance on the mound]]. When the rule isn't enforced, pitchers who escape punishment on the field sometimes push their luck by taunting their opponents or casually admitting intent in post-game interviews. Then there's the option to warn the benches if the umpire isn't convinced, which usually translates to [[KarmaHoudini the pitching team getting away with a free shot]]. Warnings are assured to result in arguments [[MisplacedRetribution from the team whose player got hit, leading to managerial and coach ejections in most cases]]. Even still, with teams facing suspensions for hitting a batter with warnings in place, an umpire can still declare no intent even if it's blatant. It got worse in 2020 after MLB feared retaliation against players who took part in the Astros' sign-stealing scandal. Decisions now require a crew conference, further hampering the league's attempts to improve the pace of play.
* The runner's lane interference rule. The batter-runner can be called out if he interferes with a throw that would have resulted in a play at first base. First base is in fair grounds, and the runner's lane leading there from home plate is in foul territory. The runner has to divert from the lane to step on the bag by avoiding contact with a fielder while not straying from the base path too much. The most common complaint about this rule is that if a throw is wild or at least uncatchable, then it rewards bad defense by turning an error into an out. It also invites a situation where the fielder can induce an unavoidable collision at first if he sets up to catch the ball in foul territory. In this case, the umpire could overrule an obstruction call in favor of runner's lane interference if the fielder was in a position to catch the ball regardless of the throw's accuracy. Fans have offered suggestions on how to improve this rule, such as putting another base adjacent to the one already there in foul territory as seen in softball.

* Traveling comes up a lot, both among casual and dedicated fans. Essentially a player is only allowed two steps after they stop dribbling, or it is a Travel. If they come to a complete stop, one of their feet must remain planted while the other can move. Of course when exactly a dribble is over and what counts as the players two steps immediately becomes quite subjective and hard to call. In recent years the NBA and International Basketball Federation have changed their travel rules to allow for a "Gather Step", which is it's own can of worms, especially since many other leagues like the NCAA (college basketball) don't allow for this additional step, meaning that a travel in one league isn't in another.

* For a solid 62 years (1943-2005), the NHL had a "Two-Line Pass" rule, stating that teams could not pass across more than two solid lines at a time (e.g. a blue line and the halfway line), so as to prevent home-run passes out of the defensive zone to a player breaking behind the defense. While teams learned to play around it, it ultimately led to more stagnant games, as defenses would clutter up the areas these passes needed to go through, forcibly preventing goal-scoring opportunities in a tactic known as the "neutral-zone trap". Fans hated it, and it would result in low-scoring, boring hockey games. Once the rule was ditched, allowing passes to come from any part of the ice, defenses had to account for all parts of the ice, making the sport more dynamic and far more interesting to watch.

* In Final Jeopardy!, the last round in ''Series/{{Jeopardy}}'', contestants use electronic pens to write down what they think is the correct response. One rule is straightforward at first glance: spelling doesn't count as long as it doesn't affect any pronunciation. Any moment where a contestant is ruled incorrect on even a slight pronunciation difference usually results in angry tweets or Facebook posts, even if it doesn't affect the outcome. The first viral case of this was on July 31, 2013, where the judges ruled against twelve-year old Thomas Hurley for misspelling the first word of "Emancipation Proclamation" as "Emanciptation". Another one happened a few months later when a defending champion was penalized for misspelling "Kazakhstan" as "Kazakhistan". On September 15, 2020, Berry Gordy was the subject to a clue and a contestant was denied credit for "Who is Barry Gordy?". That one caused debates in different American dialects pronouncing both names. A compilation of other decisions and the impact they had on some games can be seen [[https://imgur.com/a/RX2pBLI?fbclid=IwAR30ybNnGeTIGM2DtYQOj8J89f3D8VT2eRo5FNWVZaa2UGeTShga-PnyPH8 here]].

* [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castling Castling]] for new players and ''[[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/En_passant en passant]]'' capture, often times even for more experienced TabletopGame/{{Chess}} players.
** Castling is moving both the king and one of his rooks, the only move allowed in chess where two pieces are moved in the same move. The list of circumstances that must be met is rather long, but it's easy to determine whether all of them have been met or not. The simple version is: Neither the king nor the rook can have been moved at all, at any point earlier in the game. All the intervening squares in the home row must be vacant. The king cannot move through a square where he would be under attack if he were to stop there. You cannot castle to escape check. You cannot castle into check (though you can ''deliver'' check or even checkmate). You cannot capture in the course of castling. You cannot un-castle or re-castle.
** The en passant ("in passing") capture is -- Well, it's this: "It can only occur when a player exercises his option to move his pawn two squares on its initial movement and that move places his pawn next to the opponent's pawn. When this happens, the opposing player has the option to use his pawn to take the moved pawn "en passant" or "in passing" as if the pawn had only moved one square. This option, though, only stays open for one move." The biggest point of confusion for lower and mid-level players is that it's not the player who moves forward two squares which can capture en passant, it's the opponent, on their next move (if you need it simplified it's as easy as this: "you can't use the two-square move to dodge an enemy pawn's capture zone"). The move it's self is actually quite well defined, the big issue with it is that unlike castling, it happens quite rarely. Most new players will simply not know it exists, and even some relatively experience players will forget about it.

* The LBW (Leg Before Wicket) rule: "A batsman is out if he is hit by a legal delivery, which is not pitched outside the line of leg-stump, has not hit the bat and is going on to hit the stumps. If it strikes the batsman outside the line of off-stump he is not-out PROVIDED he was playing a shot at the time." Simple, no? ...No, not in practice. Recent use of infrared and computerised video replays to follow the line and trajectory of the ball has made it much easier for spectators to see if the decision is in fact out. [[note]]In many games of informal (backyard, beach, street, etc) cricket, the LBW rule is ignored. One informal form of the game, known as "French cricket" (though its ties to that country are dubious at best) dispenses with stumps, and the batsman is out if the ball hits him on the leg.[[/note]]

** In third edition [=DnD=], (and, by extension ''TabletopGame/{{Pathfinder}}'') most [=DMs=] just have monsters and [=NPCs=] die when they reach 0 hp or lower rather than tracking their hp (the rules officially state that characters don't die till they reach -10 hp or the negative of whatever their constitution score is in Pathfinder), mainly because it is both a hassle and creates some moral quandaries, as killing an opponent who is already unconscious and bleeding to death doesn't seem very heroic. The big exception being monsters in Pathfinder with the Ferocity ability (which lets them [[TheDeterminator remain conscious and keep fighting till they are reduced to negative con hp]]). Pathfinder second edition (which removes negative hp and just has a character fall unconscious and have to make saving throws to avoid dying) explicitly says that monsters and [=NPCs=] should just die when brought to 0 hp, unless it was due to a non-lethal attack.

Most such rules are buried in the rulebook until a controversy uncovers it (e.g., [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuck_rule the Tuck rule]], the "ineligible receiver" rule), or through subjective over-enforcement (e.g., "Defenseless Player" or "Roughing the Passer" rulings).

* The "targeting" rule recently added in college football. If a defensive player hits an offensive player in the head or neck area and is deemed to have been "targeting" a player (i.e. having intended to hit him in the head or neck area), a 15-yard penalty is assessed, and the player is ejected from the game (and suspended for the first half of his next game if the infraction occurred in the 2nd half). One problem is that this call is always reviewed, and if overturned, doesn't involve any penalty at all, even if the hit was still clearly unnecessary roughness. Then there are the borderline hits where a player was launching himself at another player's midsection, often in an attempt to ''avoid'' this very penalty, but that player ducked or dove and got hit in the head instead. While the NFL does have a similar penalty, officials can use their judgement to not eject defensive players when the contact was clearly incidental, and can flag offensive players for lowering their heads into contact, unlike in the NCAA where the foul carries an automatic ejection regardless of how unintentional the contact was and there is no offensive equivalent.

* The increased quarterback protection rules have come under intense scrutiny in recent years, in the same vein as the targeting rule. The idea of it is to protect quarterbacks from unnecessary late hits by ensuring players can only hit the quarterback before he throws the football on a passing play, or immediately after the quarterback releases, when the defender is already in the process of the tackle. However, "immediately after the quarterback releases" is subject to the judgement of the officials. This leads to instances where [[https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/chiefs-linebacker-explains-why-he-didnt-sack-tom-brady-on-qbs-touchdown-run/ defenders didn't make an attempt to tackle a quarterback, believing he had thrown the football, only for the quarterback to make a large gain,]] as well as [[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xn83NcpAQsg defenders getting flagged on what many found to be clean, legal hits]], culminating in a pair of "Roughing the Passer" penalties in the AFC Championship game, in which Brady had his shoulder dusted and Mahomes was grazed below the knees by their would-be tacklers.
* Defensive pass interference rules have been contentious for many years. If a defender interferes with a receiver trying to catch a pass, the ball is placed at the spot of the foul (or the one-yard line if it happens in the defending team's endzone) and the offense is given an automatic first down. This can, and with some frequency does, become the most lethal penalty in the entire game, as DPI on a long pass play may produce penalties in upwards of 30 yards. Even a personal foul (which is handed out for dangerous or overly aggressive behavior) is a mere 15 yards and fresh downs. Fans tend to hate the severity of the penalty, and some voices are always calling to make it a set penalty of 15-20 yards, but even those who hate it tend to admit there is a good reason for it being severe (without it, defensive backs would have little incentive to *not* interfere with passes longer than 15 yards). There are also more than a few fans who are okay with the penalty if the interference is blatant, but feel that given the severity of the penalty, the referees need to be very selective about ''when'' to call it, and will get upset if the penalty is called in a situation where the offense is minor or questionable.

** The the offside rule in AssociationFootball can be considered an artifact from the older Football codes it evolved from where there exists a well defined line of scrimmage. The problem came with attempting to adapt the same concept to a free flowing sport with no stoppage of play. The more common solution is to use fixed "zone" based offside system.

* The Duckworth-Lewis Method was devised as a totally fair way to decide matches affected by rain. Unfortunately it's an extremely complex mathematical formula the results of which change every time a ball is bowled, a run is scored, basically every time anything at all happens. Since its introduction, matches (one of them famously a World Cup semifinal) have been decided by one team's players and/or coach misinterpreting the results table and settling for fewer runs than they in fact needed. There are those, of course, who argue that the whole of cricket is in fact a case of LoadsAndLoadsOfRules and it's difficult to deny... but Duckworth-Lewis is infamous even among those who understand everything else perfectly.

* In Final Jeopardy!, the last round in ''Series/{{Jeopardy}}'', contestants use electronic pens to write down what they think is the correct response. One rule is straightforward at first glance: spelling doesn't count as long as it doesn't affect any pronunciation. Any moment where a contestant is ruled incorrect on even a slight pronunciation difference usually results in angry tweets or Facebook posts, even if it doesn't affect the outcome. The first viral case of this was on July 31, 2013, where the judges ruled against twelve-year old Thomas Hurley for misspelling "Emancipation" as part of "Emancipation Proclamation". Another one happened a few months later when a defending champion was penalized for misspelling "Kazakhstan" as "Kazakhistan". On September 15, 2020, Berry Gordy was the subject to a clue and a contestant was denied credit for "Who is Barry Gordy?". That one caused debates in different American dialects pronouncing both names. A compilation of other decisions and the impact they had on some games can be seen [[https://imgur.com/a/RX2pBLI?fbclid=IwAR30ybNnGeTIGM2DtYQOj8J89f3D8VT2eRo5FNWVZaa2UGeTShga-PnyPH8 here]].

* Defensive pass interference rules have been contentious for many years. If a defender interferes with a receiver trying to catch a pass, the ball is placed at the spot of the foul (or the one-yard line if it happens in the end zone) and the offense is given an automatic first down. This can, and with some frequency does, become the most lethal penalty in the entire game, as DPI on a long pass play may produce penalties in upwards of 30 yards. Even a personal foul (which is handed out for dangerous or overly aggressive behavior) is a mere 15 yards and fresh downs. Fans tend to hate the severity of the penalty, and some voices are always calling to make it a set penalty of 15-20 yards, but even those who hate it tend to admit there is a good reason for it being severe (without it, defensive backs would have little incentive to *not* interfere with passes longer than 15 yards). There are also more than a few fans who are okay with the penalty if the interference is blatant, but feel that given the severity of the penalty, the referees need to be very selective about ''when'' to call it, and will get upset if the penalty is called in a situation where the offense is minor or questionable.

* Defensive pass interference rules have been contentious for many years. If a defender interferes with a receiver trying to catch a pass, the ball is placed at the spot of the foul and the offense is given an automatic first down. This can, and with some frequency does, become the most lethal penalty in the entire game, as DPI on a long pass play may produce penalties in upwards of 30 yards. Even a personal foul (which is handed out for dangerous or overly aggressive behavior) is a mere 15 yards and fresh downs. Fans tend to hate the severity of the penalty, and some voices are always calling to make it a set penalty of 15-20 yards, but even those who hate it tend to admit there is a good reason for it being severe (without it, defensive backs would have little incentive to *not* interfere with passes longer than 15 yards). There are also more than a few fans who are okay with the penalty if the interference is blatant, but feel that given the severity of the penalty, the referees need to be very selective about ''when'' to call it, and will get upset if the penalty is called in a situation where the offense is minor or questionable.

* Starting in 2011, the NFL changed its overtime rules. The winner of the coin toss can win the game by scoring a touchdown on an opening drive as opposed to straight sudden death. Any other result means the opposing team gets possession of the ball. Thanks to the coin toss, an otherwise exciting game can instantly turn into LuckBasedMission in overtime. If a team wins because of an opening drive touchdown, then this means the opposition never got a chance to possess the ball. Overall, this has happened seven times[[note]]a 2012 AFC Wild Card Game, the 2015 NFC Conference Championship, a 2016 Divisional playoff, Super Bowl LI, the 2019 AFC Conference Championship, a 2020 Wild Card game and a 2022 AFC Divisional playoff[[/note]] and each call to fix the current overtime rules becomes louder than the last.

* A similar ruling happened on a 1982 episode of ''[[Series/{{Password}} Password Plus]]'' where a guess of "Hairy" was upheld as phonetically dissimilar to the password of "Harry" after Marcia Wallace contested.

Most such rules are buried in the rulebook until a controversy uncovers it (e.g., [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuck_rule the Tuck rule]], the "ineligible receiver" rule), or through subjective over-enforcement (e.g., "Defenseless Player" rulings).

* However, epée fencing averts this situation entirely—it has NO priority rule at all. If each fencer records a hit within the margin of error in electronic scorekeeping (40 milliseconds), ''both'' earn a point.

* "Right-Of-Way": Another of those rules that are simple to explain, but complex to deal with. Simply put, you cannot score a point unless you are the one attack, you must stop an incoming attack or remove the threat first to gain right-of-way, then you can counter-attack. Of course considering how fast fencing is, it's far, far more complicated in practice, involving as it does questions like "What constitutes an existing attack?", "What constitutes "stopping the existing attack"?" "What qualifies as "removing the threat"?" and "What the hell just happened, it was all so fast..."

* Stop hits and time hits in fencing are in theory incredibly simple, as they are counterattacks which obtain priority over the initial attack (Thus escaping falling afoul of right-of-way) because the initial attack is too "long-winded" and so it was interrupted. For example, if A's attack is legal, but consists of four movements, B can stop hit A by counterattacking during that fancy, silly wind-up. Good luck with getting fencers and judges to agree on what is a stop-hit and what doesn't count in the heat of swift-moving competition.

* In Final Jeopardy!, the last round in ''Series/{{Jeopardy}}'', contestants use electronic pens to write down what they think is the correct response. One rule is straightforward at first glance: spelling doesn't count as long as it doesn't affect the pronunciation. Any moment where a contestant is ruled incorrect on even a slight pronunciation difference usually results in angry tweets or Facebook posts, even if it doesn't affect the outcome. The first viral case of this was on July 31, 2013, where the judges ruled against twelve-year old Thomas Hurley for misspelling "Emancipation" as part of "Emancipation Proclamation". Another one happened a few months later when a defending champion was penalized for misspelling "Kazakhstan" as "Kazakhistan". On September 15, 2020, Berry Gordy was the subject to a clue and a contestant was denied credit for "Who is Barry Gordy?". That one caused debates in different American dialects pronouncing both names. A compilation of other decisions and the impact they had on some games can be seen [[https://imgur.com/a/RX2pBLI?fbclid=IwAR30ybNnGeTIGM2DtYQOj8J89f3D8VT2eRo5FNWVZaa2UGeTShga-PnyPH8 here]].