ruling on this please?

[Wacho]

Yesterday I was reading my latest MECCG-related purchase and found something interesting regarding the issue:

Detainment Attacks (clarification) - Automatic-attacks are not detainment attacks unless specifically stated on the site card

Which should definitely settle the whole debate. According with this clarification, those Nazgul automatic attacks are not detainment.

I'm not sure this settles the debate, but I does think it opens the debate. Up until now there wasn't any known rule to suggest that the Nazgul auto-attacks would be non-detainment. Now we have two conflicting rules so there is a serious question. I'll bring this up to the NetRep team.

[Bruce]

IMO the point about necessary and sufficient conditions that I stated a couple of posts ago shows how the two rules only apparently conflict. Anyway, I hope the NetRep team will eventually find a solution.
It's crazy how the least used cards raise the most twisted and complicated rules questions...