New Posts New Posts RSS Feed: NoR v SIs
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

NoR v SIs
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123>
Author
  Share Topic Share Topic  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Steve411 View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more
Avatar

Joined: 09 Sep 08
Location: Cheddar, Somerset, England
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 705 		Post Options Post Options   Quote Steve411 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: NoR v SIs
    Posted: 04 Dec 14 at 6:02pm
1)  If there is a discrepancy between the notice of race and sailing instructions, which takes precedence?

2)  Is it acceptable to state in the NoR that, in the event of a discrepancy, the NoR takes precedence?
Steve B
RS300 411

RS300 page
Back to Top
JimC View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more
Avatar

Joined: 17 May 04
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6661 		Post Options Post Options   Quote JimC Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 Dec 14 at 7:58pm
63.7 Conflict Between the Notice of Race and the Sailing Instructions

If there is a conflict between a rule in the notice of race and one in the sailing instructions that must be resolved before the protest committee can decide a protest or request for redress, the committee shall apply the rule that it believes will provide the fairest result for all boats affected


I don't see it would be possible to provide a hard and fast rule for which one has precedence. After all in general they should have different things in, and we are dealing with documents that are intrinsically badly written, so if the SI version is permissable and the NOR version not permissable it would be damn silly to say nevertheless the NOR takes precedence. Best to just get 'em right in the first place of course.
Back to Top
Brass View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more


Joined: 24 Mar 08
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1151 		Post Options Post Options   Quote Brass Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 Dec 14 at 9:06pm
Unless you are a really experienced and careful drafter and intend documents to have a precedence, precedence of documents clauses are always a bad idea.

Rule 63.7 provides a much better way of fixing mistakes.

If you intend to change something between the NOR and the SI, then issue an amendment to the document you want overridden.
Back to Top
gordon View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more


Joined: 07 Sep 04
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1037 		Post Options Post Options   Quote gordon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08 Dec 14 at 3:51pm
SIs often include a clause stating that in case of conflict the SIs take precedence. This usually means that either the person writing the SIs was not consulted about the NOR or has not read them (a cynical point of view, almost as cynical as JimC's evaluation of race documents)!

Unless this SI includes the words 'This changes rule 63.7' then it has no value and the PC should ignore the SI and apply rule 63.7.
Gordon
Back to Top
JimC View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more
Avatar

Joined: 17 May 04
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6661 		Post Options Post Options   Quote JimC Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08 Dec 14 at 4:14pm
Oi!
I wasn't saying all race documents are badly written, only those in which there is a conflict...
Back to Top
MikeBz View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more
Avatar

Joined: 21 Apr 04
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 536 		Post Options Post Options   Quote MikeBz Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08 Dec 14 at 4:43pm
I suspect that the clause in SIs about precedence is because in practice they tend to be issued later.  Get the NOR out good and early so people know when the event is and then write/refine the SIs over a period of time.   Not saying this is necessarily best practice but it's often what actually happens.
Back to Top
Rupert View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more


Joined: 11 Aug 04
Location: Whitefriars sc
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8956 		Post Options Post Options   Quote Rupert Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08 Dec 14 at 6:26pm
Keep the NoR simple - what does it actually need? What the event is, where it is, when it is, what time it starts, how much it costs. Anything else needed, as opposed to wanted?
Firefly 2324, Puffin 229, Minisail 3446 Mirror 70686
Back to Top
Brass View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more


Joined: 24 Mar 08
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1151 		Post Options Post Options   Quote Brass Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08 Dec 14 at 8:25pm
Originally posted by MikeBz

I suspect that the clause in SIs about precedence is because in practice they tend to be issued later.  Get the NOR out good and early so people know when the event is and then write/refine the SIs over a period of time.   Not saying this is necessarily best practice but it's often what actually happens.

It's absolutely best practice to get the NOR out early and follow up with SI later (at the time you say you will issue them in the NOR).

It remains poor practice to insert a precedence of documents clause, and may, as Gordon has said, be invalid.

The way to avoid problems of inconsistency is for the organising committee of the Organising Authority to:
  1. review both the Model NOR and Model SI in Appendixes K and L to the RRS, and list all the options they wish to exercise and clauses they wish to change in the Model NOR and Model SI, and note the preferred options and changes;
  2. develop a time schedule, showing Dates for issue of NOR and SI, Entry opening and closing times and the Event Schedule details shown in rule K7 and L5;
  3. document these two and pass to a drafter to draft the NOR based on Appendix K;
  4. circulate the NOR in draft to the Race Officer, Race Committee, and a judge for comment;
  5. review the final draft, finalise the NOR and publish;
  6. determine any further instructions to be issued to the Race Committee;
  7. issue necessary instructions including the updated time schedule, and documented changes to Model NOR/SI to the Race Committee to enable the Race Committee to draft the SI.
The Race Committee should:
  1. review the NOR and the model SI in Appendix L and list all the options they wish to exercise and clauses they wish to change in the Model SI, and note the preferred options and changes and any departures they consider necessary from the NOR;
  2. further develop the time schedule provided by the OA to enable the completion of clause L5;
  3. document these two and pass to a drafter (probably the Race Officer) to draft the SI based on Appendix L;
  4. circulate the SI in draft to a judge for comment;
  5. review the final draft, finalise the SI and publish.
Note, issue drafting instructions and review drafts in committee but do NOT try to draft complex instructions in committee.  It's a one person job.

Originally posted by Rupert

Keep the NoR simple - what does it actually need? What the event is, where it is, when it is, what time it starts, how much it costs. Anything else needed, as opposed to wanted?

By all means keep the NOR simple, but you must comply with the contents required by rule J1.1 and should comply with the requirements of rule J1.2.
Back to Top
Medway Maniac View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more
Avatar

Joined: 13 May 05
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2788 		Post Options Post Options   Quote Medway Maniac Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 Dec 14 at 12:18am
I'm not sure Rule 63.7 would have helped in a race I sailed in last year.  

The NOR and SIs both included the course, but the passing direction of the last mark, which lay effectively in the middle of the proper course, was changed from port in the NOR to starboard in the SIs (the committee was concerned about where to place the committee boat if they decided to shorten).  There was no warning of the change or statement of precedence in the SIs.

Given that the NOR was available weeks before the event, and the SIs only on the morning of the event, it would have been reasonable to put the course on the boat in advance to save time while rushing about before the race.

In the event there were no protests and it's possible everyone passed the same side (it was a long race and the fleet widely spread), but it seems to me that any protest regarding someone who passed according to the NOR would have been tricky to decide.  Any suggestions as to the outcome?
Wilsonian SC
3000 Class
Back to Top
Brass View Drop Down
Really should get out more
Really should get out more


Joined: 24 Mar 08
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1151 		Post Options Post Options   Quote Brass Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 Dec 14 at 8:48am
MM, were you expecting replies to your post?

FWIW, had there been a protest or request for redress, I think, subject to what other judges might argue for, that the course prescribed in the SI was the course required, if only because the SI are the document issued later in time.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.665y
Copyright ©2001-2010 Web Wiz
Change your personal settings, or read our privacy policy