[Al_Capone_Junior]

As soon as player A said "I call," that's a call. The fact he incorrectly stated that put him all-in is irrelevant at that point. For good measure I'd go ahead and kick both players in the nuts, player A for stating a supposed fact that was in fact bull-pucky, and player B for trying to nit an extra $41 out of an opponent that B is not entitled to. If the dealer knew that A was $241 behind then a KITN for him too.


Al


EDIT: I believe I misread the OP to be on the river. Things are more dicey if this happened on the turn. "I call" still stands as the turn action. The dealer gets a KITN for not knowing or not stating the truthful amount of how far behind A was. The problem is that no river betting actually happened, even tho it was as a result of bogus info and a slacking dealer. However, it is reasonable to assume that with all that went into the pot before, that the last $41 would have been bet on the river.


This is a difficult situation for the floor. Forcing someone to put money in the pot that was not actually bet is difficult to justify, even if it was due to dealer error and bogus info given by player A. However it does quite clearly seem the right ruling in the interest of maintaining the fairness and integrity of the game. Prevention of angle shots should also be top priority, again backing the idea of forcing the $41 to be paid to B. I'm quite interested to see other responses from experienced floors, and what actually happened.