Having read all posts thus far, I think I lean towards the viewpoint of General Whitehead. The prior agreement of no night melee notwithstanding, the modification suggested by Ken to allow cavalry units to melee seems a sensible compromise and fair solution. Afterall we have, I believe, permitted interpretations regarding other rather unreasonable situations on some maps such as allowing melee in column over bridges and on roads through rough terrain when "Horatio at the Gate" tactics can completely tie up a whole army. Also the tactic of incremental retreating and redeploying with small units as a delaying action is nothing new. The Finnish ski troops employed the very same tactic to great success in the Winter War of WWII. I imagine the Russians felt that was a foul too.
I think the important thing here is that it is a game, not reality. The game is governed by rules; those designed and those house rules sanctioned by the club. But as one wiser member of the club said (more or less)in a post that I read months ago...house rules are not perfect nor can there be one for every continency nor will they always please all players. Since this game was begun with a "gentlemanly agreement" which is itself a compromise in the standing rules, why wouldn't a sensible modification such as suggested by Mr. Whitehead about permitting small cav units to melee be acceptable? And just carry on.
To not ignore the diplomatic process, I must also agree with some of the other comments about refering to higher authority, not letting a game spawn bad blood, and not just "giving up" the game rather than working out a mutually acceptable solution, both parties seemingly having valid viewspoints. I also don't think it is proper for anyone to be speaking about taking advantage of loopholes and accusing one of gamey tactics. For one, having read many posts by General Mishurda; I must say that he has always struck me to be an honorable-sounding and ethical officer. I can see how someone on the receiving end of the tactic might well reel from it and take umbrage at its employment, but it nevertheless is not a tactic that is new under the sun. History of all periods has examples of such delaying tactics, perhaps not typically in the ACW...I wouldn't necessarily say...All is fair in love and war, but one should be able to do what works modified in our case by being "within the rules" or working out wrinkles in a fair way as gentlemen. I don't mean that as high-minded or as corny as it may sound.
That all said, again, I think a "homebrewed" house rule employed is also a candidate for a "homebrewed" modification as well when it is a particularly unique and uncommon situation. This together with the other comments about the built in penalties for night actions AND the suggestion of by-passing the offending unit are also solutions. Many a strongpoint was by-passed in history as well...I recall that being done in the Ardennes...twice!
It is such a great club. Seems to me we ought to strive to simply work these things out nicely...which is what is happening...to wit...these posts.
Colonel Tom Ciampa
2nd Bgde,1st Cav
XIV Corps, AoC
Games: TS/BG: AN, BR, CH, GB, SH - HPS: AT, CTH, GB, OZK, SH, VK