I think that rule was miswritten. Or else Initiating a switch would mean being stuck in a tough spot for 2 rounds <_<;.
I asked on IRC and got this:
<Caffie> Also, question: I heard that the same player can't initiate a switch phase twice in a row, even if said player is the first to move. why is that?
<dogfish44> that sounds wrong to me?
<Objection> i always thought that that wasn't so much a rule as a natural consequence of how the switching system worked
<dogfish44> You can initiate a switch phrase if you are ordering first
<Objection> except actually it's not a natural consequence of how the switching system works
<Caffie> it is on the Referee Resource Thread <_<
<dogfish44> if you switch, AND your opponent doesn't, then you can't initiate another switch phrase
<dogfish44> until the next round
<Caffie> in my match the opponent switched and I started another switch phase. The ref called the rule from referee resource and I have to reorder.
<dogfish44> that rule itself is a load of malarkey then 9.9 (Note from translator: malarkey = nonsense)
<IAR> just like confusion always lasting one action less than advertised... >.<
<Objection> then go with a rule set in which confusion duration is not one action less than advertised
<dogfish44> Looking at that rule, it should probably say "cannot switch multiple times within the same round", to clarify you can't go "Switching to X" --> "I don't conterswitch, your orders" --> "Fine, Switching to Y" --> "WTF how is that legal"
<Caffie> load of malarkey as in "we need to change that eventually" or as in "disregard it"?
<Objection> probably both caffie
<dogfish44> although simply removing it would be better
<dogfish44> Deck_Knight, are you here by any chance?
Any chance you continue to ref with the switch?