[arepo24]

Playing in a bridge tournament, the dealer had a 6 and a K of clubs in dummy.
Dealer calls for the K, but her partner picks up the 6 instead. So I ask the dealer,"didn't you say K?" She says, "oh yes I did but never mind, forget it, just leave it as it is." To which I replied, "well you can take it back" and she said, "no, that's okay. Leave it."
Having no clubs, I place down a small heart. Dealer plays an 8 of clubs and my partner plays a 9 of clubs and takes the trick.
As my partner starts to play the next card the dealer says, "oh! wait a minute, I thought the 9 was out. Okay, play the King on the board."

At this point the director was called.

After explaining the situation, the director asks, "what was the first card asked for in dummy?" We all answered the K of Clubs. He said, "then that is the card in play -- the first card called for."
We were astounded because my partner and I would have won if the call had not been changed to the K.

I have asked other directors and some agree with that answer and others say absolutely not.

So what's the definitive answer?

[FelicityR]

I'm no director but Dealer called for the King and having made that decision it should precedent over any other action that happens after the call, in my opinion. By the way, if Dealer called for the King, why did you then ask "Didn't you say 6"? 'King' and 'six' are hardly similar tonally.

[KingCovert]

I'm sure a director can come through and cite you the proper section of the laws, but, it's quite clear that the K♣ is the correct card to be played. Declarer called for the K♣, such that you all agreed, dummy's actions are irrelevant. As you've described it, declarer clearly did not misspeak, nor did you play to the trick prior to asking for clarification. So, there aren't really any complex considerations here.

After the irregularity was raised by you, every player at the table was wrong for allowing the 6 to be played, and for not calling the director. The fact that your partner won this botched trick is really not relevant. Sorry

[arepo24]

FelicityR, on 2020-April-20, 12:37, said:

I'm no director but Dealer called for the King and having made that decision it should precedent over any other action that happens after the call, in my opinion. By the way, if Dealer called for the King, why did you then ask "Didn't you say 6"? 'King' and 'six' are hardly similar tonally.

I think you misunderstood what I wrote.
Only after the dummy player picked up the 6 of C and put it down did I THEN say, "excuse me but didn't you call for the K of C?"
Where did I go wrong in asking that? I even offered to have her change it back and she refused.

[KingCovert]

arepo24, on 2020-April-20, 12:23, said:

So I ask the dealer,"didn't you say 6?"

arepo24, on 2020-April-20, 14:07, said:

"excuse me but didn't you call for the K of C?"

I think this is the source of the confusion. That's clearly what you meant to write in your original post, but, not what you wrote.

arepo24, on 2020-April-20, 14:07, said:

Where did I go wrong in asking that? I even offered to have her change it back and she refused.

I think what you're not understanding is that you don't get to "offer" to change it back. It must be corrected. There is no choice in the matter, not from any player, assuming that nobody contests which card was called.

[AL78]

arepo24, on 2020-April-20, 14:07, said:

I think you misunderstood what I wrote.
Only after the dummy player picked up the 6 of C and put it down did I THEN say, "excuse me but didn't you call for the K of C?"
Where did I go wrong in asking that? I even offered to have her change it back and she refused.

Once she refused to change it you should have called the director, not let her change it. The king was called for and the king should be played. As for saying "Oh I thought the nine was out, ok put the king on the board", that beggers belief, it sounds like she was unlawfully trying to gain an advantage from the misplayed card by dummy.

[arepo24]

KingCovert, on 2020-April-20, 14:28, said:

I think this is the source of the confusion. That's clearly what you meant to write in your original post, but, not what you wrote.



I think what you're not understanding is that you don't get to "offer" to change it back. It must be corrected. There is no choice in the matter, not from any player, assuming that nobody contests which card was called.

Aha!! You are so correct!! Mea Culpa. (The brain cells are failing me)

[arepo24]

I corrected the above error of mine.

[blackshoe]

Quote

Law 45:
B. Play of Card from Dummy
Declarer plays a card from dummy by naming the card, after which dummy picks up the card and faces it on the table. In playing from dummy’s hand declarer may, if necessary, pick up the desired card himself.
C. Card Deemed to be Played
…
4.(a) A card is played if a player names or otherwise designates it as the card he proposes to play (but see Law 47).
(b) Declarer may correct an unintended designation of a card from dummy until he next plays a card from either his own hand or from dummy.
D. Dummy Picks up a Non-designated Card
1. If dummy places in the played position a card that declarer did not name, the card must be withdrawn if attention is drawn to it before each side has played to the next trick, and a defender may withdraw and return to his hand a card played after the error but before attention was drawn to it; if declarer’s RHO changes his play, declarer may withdraw a card he had subsequently played to that trick. (See Law 16C.)

Quote

Law 47F. Other Retraction
…
2. Except as this Law specifies, a card once played may not be withdrawn.

Per Law 45B, given the OP scenario, the ♣K was played when declarer called for it.

"So I ask the dealer..."

You called attention to dummy's irregularity placing the wrong card in the played position. Now Law 9B applies.

Quote

Law 9B. After Attention Is Drawn to an Irregularity
1.(a) The Director should be summoned at once when attention is drawn to an irregularity.
(b) Any player, including dummy, may summon the Director after attention has been drawn to an irregularity.
© Summoning the Director does not cause a player to forfeit any rights to which he might otherwise be entitled.
(d) The fact that a player draws attention to an irregularity committed by his side does not affect the rights of the opponents.
2. No player shall take any action until the Director has explained all matters in regard to rectification.

Note particularly Laws 9B1(a) and 9B2, which I have highlighted. BTW "should" in 9B1(a) does not mean it's optional. It means it's an infraction which is "not often penalized". But the director will still apply the rectification specified in the laws. So the ♣K is played. There was no unintended designation, so no cards can be changed. The trick stands with declarer's RHO playing the heart, and his LHO playing the ♣9.

Sometimes there are hard feelings when something like this happens. Best way to avoid that is to refrain from making your own rulings at the table. Just call the director.