The following references might help:

http://www.sailing.org/tools/documents/Judges%20Manual%20Updated%202008-%5b4880%5d.pdf - ISAF Judges Manual Chapter 12

http://www.sailing.org/tools/documents/min_RR_07_11_2006-%5b3055%5d.pdf - Bryan Willis paper at the end of the ISAF RRC Minutes 2006

http://www.rya.org.uk/assets/racing/RYA%20Misconduct%20Guidance.pdf - RYA Misconduct Guidance

Rule 2: FAIR SAILING

A boat and her owner shall compete in compliance with recognized principles of sportsmanship and fair play. A boat may be penalized under this rule only if it is clearly established that these principles have been violated. A disqualification under this rule shall not be excluded from the boat’s series score.

I always get the shivers when people start talking rules 2/69. These are 'thought-crime' rules. We have spent many years developing the RRS so that they depend as much as possible on observable behavior, not on inferred mental states.

Generally rules penalise boats for what they do, not what they were thinking, regardless whether the action is due to bad seamanship, lack of knowledge of the rules, or misjudgment.

To support a rule 2 protest we need to be able to show that some action, even though it may have broken a rule, been unwise, put another competitor at a disadvantage or whatever, broke those unwritten "recognised principles of sportsmanship and fair play" that RRS 2 calls up.

In my opinion rule 2 should only be used in cases where the fairness of the competition, that is the scores or positions of other boats, is affected.  Otherwise, for example for being an 'unpleasant loser', don't be afraid to use rule 69 for what is essentially rudeness and bad manners.  Remember rule 69 can terminate in a mere warning.

If you want a boat penalised for breaking rule 2 you must, as for any other rule:

·         Have a valid protest,

·         present evidence of all relevant facts, and

·         argue your case comprehensively and convincingly.

Don't walk into the protest room and expect the protest committee to agree with you that 'X was jolly unsporting' and impose the serious penalty of non-excludable disqualification without a well argued and evidenced case.

You need to:

·         succinctly state the 'principle of sportsmanship or fair play' that you think was broken;

·         bring evidence that the 'principle' was accepted (Cases, Appeals, Commentaries, testimony of senior/respected people);

·         Identify the specific behaviour that you think broke the principle, and bring evidence that it happened;

·         Be sure that the protestee does not have the effective defence of 'I'm sorry but I just made a mistake'.  You should consider whether this is a fair reason before you even pursue the protest.