Misconduct/RRS 69 Guidance

OK, so the guidance doesn't create on offence based on the subjective feelings of a race official. The tests remain objective.

I was brought up that the only things I, as a competitor said to a race officer were "Good Morning", "Thank for a nice day on the water", and "Can I buy you a drink?", to which he was duty bound to reply, "No thank, I've got one coming."

As a sensitive new age race officer, I now seek and welcome feedback from competitors.

What i don't welcome is an earful of abuse.   I think "ridiculous" is just over the line. Whether it would bother me would depend on what else was said.

Generally, if anyone has a "complaint" about race management they should either request redress or write a letter to the sailing committee.

I think one has to be very careful of what one could call the "send three and fourpence" effect. Some of the "variations" in rules one hears quoted in low profile club racing must surely be the result of Fred instructing Bill over the generations, resulting in a misinterpreted version of what was in the rules 100 years ago!

Originally posted by Brass OK, so the guidance doesn't create on offence based on the subjective feelings of a race official. The tests remain objective. I was brought up that the only things I, as a competitor said to a race officer were "Good Morning", "Thank for a nice day on the water", and "Can I buy you a drink?", to which he was duty bound to reply, "No thank, I've got one coming." As a sensitive new age race officer, I now seek and welcome feedback from competitors. What i don't welcome is an earful of abuse.   I think "ridiculous" is just over the line. Whether it would bother me would depend on what else was said. Generally, if anyone has a "complaint" about race management they should either request redress or write a letter to the sailing committee.

Much might depend on how the RO decides to hear and understand ‘ridiculous’.

In the first half of the definition ‘deserving or inviting derision or mockery’….probably over the line.

If the second half ‘absurd’….maybe not. I would say that in the circumstances described by the OP (if launch start was controlled by the RC and lateness was not the fault of competitors) then not postponing is ‘adsurd’ - ‘wildly unreasonable, illogical or appropriate.’

The problem may be with the ability of the competitor to express themself….certainly it would be harsh for a competitor able to take advantage of the non-arrival of his rivals to be penalised for using language like ‘ridiculous’ on their behalf!

I was very struck by the guidance for jurors and umpires and its suggestion that sometimes they should turn the deaf ear….

I recently received a warning from an umpire where it was the volume I was making my point at (in the conversation that the guidance says should take place!) not for the manner of it…..why was my volume high? Because the umpires positioning of their RIB was rubbish!

Sarge,

First the guidelines don't expressly provide for justification or the defence of truth, but, of course these could be taken into account.

Second "ridiculous" is insulting on any definition.

Third, in reaching conclusions about ridiculous or not, you'd need to know all the circumstances. Maybe th RO had direction from the OA to start on time, maybe competitors were trying to manipulate the start time, maybe th RO got dud all clear from the beachmaster.

I think its pretty simple: don't backchat or be rude to race officials.

Grf it seems you don’t have much experience of protests, which is a very big surprise considering what I’ve seen of your sailing in videos