Flying Fifteen Worlds

Jim. "44.1((b) if the boat caused injury or serious damage or, despite taking a penalty, gained a significant advantage in the race or series by her breach her penalty shall be to retire."

Is a "small hole" serious damage? Finishing 20th did not give Mr G any advantage over Jerwood who finished 4th.   Maybe the Protest Committee decided that the luff was so sharp as to give Goacher no time to keep clear? Anyway this is all pure speculation.

Edited by NickM - 03 Mar 17 at 9:41pm

However apparently the Jury disagreed... I suppose because they've split the incident in two and found GBR 4021 didn't break a rule in the second half.

Decision of International Jury Protest Number:5 Regatta Lexus of Hawke's Bay 21st Flying Fifteen World Championship Date of Hearing: 3rd March 2017 Date of Incident:3rd March 2017 Race Number:7 Boat Protesting GBR 4021 Boat(s) Protested:AUS 3986 Representatives:Protestor: Steve Goacher Protestee: Nick Jerwood Witnesses: Charles Apthorp (GBR 4004); Konrad Weaver (GBR 3092); Alisdair Daines (jury)           Validity/Procedural:Valid Facts Found: 1.AUS 3986 and GBR 4021 were sailing downwind on starboard tack, overlapped, with AUS 3986 to leeward. 2.AUS 3986 luffed toward GBR 4021. GBR luffed but the courses continued to converge. 3.When they were very close AUS 3986 luffed a second time. GBR 4021 put the tiller down. 4.There was contact between the port quarter of GBR 4021 and the starboard forward gunnel of AUS 3986, causing damage to AUS 3986. 5.GBR 4021 took a two-turn-penalty. Conclusions/Rules: 1.Initially, GBR 4021 to windward failed to keep clear of AUS 3986 as required by rule 11.2. Subsequently, AUS 3986, the right of way boat, changed her course and failed to give GBR 4021 room to keep clear as required by rule 16.1. Decision:AUS 3986 is DSQ under rule 16.1. GBR broke rule 11 but she is not to be penalised because she took a two-turn penalty. Protest Committee:Peter Scheuerl (chair), John Bullot, Alisdair Daines, Michele Governale, Peter Johnson Chairman’s Signature: Date and Time Decision Advised:    3rd March 2017 at 16:12 3rd March 2017 at 16:12

http://ff15worlds2017.juryboard.org/hearingschedule/index.php

No, if I were going to DSQ GBR it would be under 44.1b. It could be argued that if GBR had kept clear in the first place the second luff would not have occurred and so they bore a share of responsibility for an incident in which there was serious damage. I suspect it all would have depended on the nuances of what was heard from all parties.

But the moral of the story is "don't play bumper boats", and I really don't have a problem with that. AUS lost the champs when they initiated a collision causing damage, and they were always going to be DSQ for that: doing turns wouldn't have helped.

Originally posted by JimC No, if I were going to DSQ GBR it would be under 44.1b. It could be argued that if GBR had kept clear in the first place the second luff would not have occurred and so they bore a share of responsibility for an incident in which there was serious damage. I suspect it all would have depended on the nuances of what was heard from all parties. But the moral of the story is "don't play bumper boats", and I really don't have a problem with that. AUS lost the champs when they initiated a collision causing damage, and they were always going to be DSQ for that: doing turns wouldn't have helped.

Okay, thanks, that makes sense.