A Grandmaster like him?

Extremely doubtful.

He knew that 27.Rxb6+ was played, and his move in retrospect was a ploy to get a win in an undeserved way.

He plays an illegal move, but points to Carlsen's illegal move as a win for himself?

Why not resume from the position prior to the error?

Because Inarkiev knew he was lost.

Pure and simple.

<He plays an illegal move, but points to Carlsen's illegal move as a win for himself?> The arbiter ruled that.

That's not the opinion of the chief arbiter, nor of the appeals committee.

I have to agree with them, for otherwise blitz players who make (the we can all agree original) illegal moves would be rewarded.

I think an easy fix to this particular situation would be for FIDE to allow the "standard" blitz practice of capturing enemy kings.

That would fix such a situation lickety-split.

His King is checked via 27.Rxb7+ and forgets that he's supposed to move his King, but checks Carlsen's King instead.

<Carlsen knew the rules well enough to know he didn't make an illegal move, and if anyone should be awarded a win, it should have been him> Carlsen signed the scoresheet with 0-1 afaik.

How would he know that Carlsen made the illegal move, if it was Inarkiev's illegal move which prompted Carlsen's reaction?

Then Carlsen complained to the head arbiter and the score was reversed. Inarkiev's protest about that decision was rejected.

It means nothing as concerns approbation. This is similar to signing a traffic citation - there is no implicit acknowledgement of guilt involved.

In both cases, it just establishing a standing and identification - establishing your right to appeal/contest the finding.

All players should be aware of this. If not, here's the rules from the FIDE handbook:

<8.7

At the conclusion of the game both players shall sign both scoresheets, indicating the result of the game. Even if incorrect, this result shall stand, unless the arbiter decides otherwise. >

And also:

<11.10

Unless the rules of the competition specify otherwise, a player may appeal against any decision of the arbiter, even if the player has signed the scoresheet (see Article 8.7).>

I'm unaware of any explicit changes to the rules for this competition.

Interesting thought, although it appears to me that without a recording who can say exactly when the illegal position arose, or who, if anybody, made the illegal move, or even when.

(Of course spectators have been known to be responsible for illegal positions on a board, as anybody who plays chess with a 3-year old in the vicinity can attest)

I still like the idea of capturing the king - why bother summoning an arbiter? Just take the king and be done with it!

Tisdall (who I respect quite a bit, if only for his wonderful little book) has some harsh words via twitter...

<Jonathan Tisdall‏ @GMjtis

Losing all respect for Inarkiev. How on earth can you expect to win like that? #RiyadhChess>

https://twitter.com/GMjtis/status/9...

Since we're in forum land, we can also cite some of the gossipy comments which followed, suggesting Inarkiev might have a "history":

<

<Eivind Salen @EivindSalen 29 Dec 2017

Against the world champion - everyone will know, lots of people will scrutinize your past = bad for your reputation. Strange.>

Jonathan Tisdall @GMjtis 29 Dec 2017

Not if he is a serial offender. Scrutiny will determine that I expect. Rumors already flying about his history.

<Eivind Salen 29 Dec 2017

Yes, I heard Christensen on NRK. I will also check the Russian chess cites.>

...

Jonathan Tisdall @GMjtis 29 Dec 2017

It certainly appears deliberate from the circumstantial evidence.

- Yes, I think so. I talked to others as mentioned that he (Inarkiev, journ.anm) has done this earlier, said Christiansen who won his first party.>

https://www.nrk.no/sport/irritert-c...

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/v...

(Lack of) timing is key!