There was an argument among 3 judges at a local tournement 3 weeks ago.
Player A, plays Snatch Steal, taking control of Five Headed Dragon from Player B
When his turn comes, Player B plays Snatch Steal to take back control of Five Headed Dragon from Player A.
This was when the judge was called and the argument ensued.
One argument was that that was acceptable and Player A had a dead Snatch Steal taking up a spell/trap card slot till Five Headed Dragon died, or it was killed with MST/Heavy or some such.
Another judge that was there argued that when Player B's snatch steal resolved, the effect of Player A's Snatch Steal would kick back in and the card would revert back to Player A.
A 3rd judge who was present supplied what all considered to be an unlikely but maybe possible 3rd option, where both Snatch Steals go into an endless cycle of trying to resolve and never being able to. This would result in the game being stopped at that point waiting for the resolution to occur and since it never does, the duel would be a draw, as even when time was called, that turn was still stalled, and you could not even go into the 4 turn overtime. Needless to say, everyone decided to let that idea slide.
My question is, how does this resolve?
Answer:
The most recent of the two "Snatch Steal" copies will be dominant. (Player B's "Snatch Steal")
Player A's "Snatch Steal" remains equipped to the "Five-Headed Dragon", and it will cause Player B to gain Life Points even though Player A does not currently have control of the equipped monster. If Player B's "Snatch Steal" is removed from the field or negated, Player A will regain control of the "Five-Headed Dragon" because the "Five-Headed Dragon" is still equipped with Player A's "Snatch Steal".
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------
Curtis Schultz
Official UDE Rules Dude
CurtisSchultz_Netrep@Hotmail.com
