It's surprising, to put it mildly, that no first name was required in the answer to this question. Particularly in view of what happened a couple of questions later.
This question went to my team. My immediate thought was "Rupert Murdoch", and I confess that it didn't even occur to me that it might have been one of his sons. We answered "Murdoch"; this of course put the question master in a very difficult position.
His only option, IMHO (and what he eventually decided to do) was to give us the points. This would have given the other team every right to feel aggrieved, if they knew it was James and not Rupert; but that, I'm afraid, is the fault of the question setter, and not the question master or the team that's got away with an incomplete answer.
Had the question specified that a forename was required, this would probably have alerted us to the fact that the answer might not be the person we first thought of. Would our team have been able to come up with the correct forename? I suspect we would, but it wouldn't have come from me.
As the question was written, the question master's only other option would have been to say, promptly, "That's not right, passed over" (or something along those lines). But as the question setter didn't specify that a forename was required, I don't believe the QM had the right to do this and (IMHO) it wouldn't have been fair on our team.
This is a classic example of a case in which a forename should have been required.
© Macclesfield Quiz League 2018