J24 (Sail No. 4239) Dartmouth |
Laurent Giles 'Jolly Boat' Exeter |
29er GBR 074 Tynemouth |
List classes of boat for sale |
Social Media and Rule 69 |
Post Reply | Page 123 5> |
Author | |||
L123456
Really should get out more Joined: 30 Apr 12 Online Status: Offline Posts: 500 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Topic: Social Media and Rule 69 Posted: 07 Aug 19 at 1:57pm |
||
Rule 69 defines misconduct as acts of bad manors and poor sportsmanship.
How does this translate to social media? Would it be considered bad manners to question the judgement of the PRO or Jury during a championship? |
|||
Brass
Really should get out more Joined: 24 Mar 08 Location: Australia Online Status: Offline Posts: 1146 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 07 Aug 19 at 2:41pm | ||
You might like to look at this old thread
Key things about commenting on a protest committee's decision:
So any reasoned discussion of a protest or appeal committee's decision, even by a party, provided it avoids bad language or abuse, and provided it is not expressed in some inappropriate context, such as allinternationaljudgesareb**tards.com. will not breach rule 69. |
|||
sargesail
Really should get out more Joined: 14 Jan 06 Location: United Kingdom Online Status: Offline Posts: 1459 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 07 Aug 19 at 4:29pm | ||
Initiating thread drift already but in the context of what might be a trend in Race Management/protest/jury behaviour?
Decision from Opi Worlds in which a sailor is doubly rule 2 disqualified (DNE) for knowingly infringing and not taking a penalty and also for telling the other sailor to ‘suck my balls’. http://2019worlds.optiworld.org/en/default/toa/race-privateprotest2pdf/id_protest/1651 I fail to see what the latter has to do with sportsmanship? Brass I think you posted something on this a while ago? Surely should have been dealt with as misconduct under Rule 69? More generally has the lowering of the standard for 69 from gross misconduct to misconduct had an effect? Seems to me there are some indications that it has - eg some of our 49er sailors being denied racing for a post criticising but not abusing the RC/Jury. Edited by sargesail - 07 Aug 19 at 4:33pm |
|||
L123456
Really should get out more Joined: 30 Apr 12 Online Status: Offline Posts: 500 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 07 Aug 19 at 7:21pm | ||
That’s a long thread to read ... I think there may be cultural differences about what is bad manners. I’d say it’s poor form to openly dispute or contradict the actions of the officials.
|
|||
Brass
Really should get out more Joined: 24 Mar 08 Location: Australia Online Status: Offline Posts: 1146 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 08 Aug 19 at 1:00am | ||
That's a pretty hefty International Jury and I'm hesitant to criticise. But I don't think that offensive words have any effect on the fairness of the competition. See Generally, an action by a competitor that directly affects the fairness of the competition or failing to take an appropriate penalty when the competitor is aware of breaking a rule, should be considered under rule 2. Any action, including a serious breach of rule 2 or any other rule, that the committee considers may be an act of misconduct should be considered under rule 69. Dare I say it, perhaps the Jury, having decided that DNE was the appropriate penalty in all the circumstances, was trying to avoid the extra paperwork (and exposure of competitors to further MNA sanctions) of a rule 69 hearing. Edited by Brass - 08 Aug 19 at 1:01am |
|||
Brass
Really should get out more Joined: 24 Mar 08 Location: Australia Online Status: Offline Posts: 1146 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 08 Aug 19 at 1:07am | ||
Might be a little precious, but it would depend on the actual facts. Was this a rule 69 decision after racing had begun, or a rule 76 exclusion? Decision published?
|
|||
sargesail
Really should get out more Joined: 14 Jan 06 Location: United Kingdom Online Status: Offline Posts: 1459 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 08 Aug 19 at 7:13am | ||
Decision was published - I couldn’t find it and will look again. From memory it was not rule 76.
|
|||
sargesail
Really should get out more Joined: 14 Jan 06 Location: United Kingdom Online Status: Offline Posts: 1459 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 08 Aug 19 at 7:22am | ||
Yes that seems a plausible explanation. But it illustrates the issue in terms of no longer ‘gross’ misconduct: ‘suck my balls’ is part of the normal vernacular of 14 year old boys in many cultures. It uses no foul language. Given its everyday normality I find it hard to see it as abusive. It’s merely a colourful way of saying ‘I’m not spinning’. Edited by sargesail - 08 Aug 19 at 9:23am |
|||
JimC
Really should get out more Joined: 17 May 04 Location: United Kingdom Online Status: Offline Posts: 6649 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 08 Aug 19 at 7:31am | ||
I wondered that too. Using RRS2 ensures that the incident ended there. |
|||
Brass
Really should get out more Joined: 24 Mar 08 Location: Australia Online Status: Offline Posts: 1146 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 08 Aug 19 at 7:40am | ||
Few contexts I can think of it's a colourful way of getting a smack in the mouth. I was thinking about this. ISTM that 'suck my balls' is significantly more provocative than Get F***ed or F*** Off. Furthermore, not only is it rude but it's homophobic. I think maybe that this sort of language at a junior event was the very sort of thing that removing 'gross' from rule 69 was aimed at.
Edited by Brass - 08 Aug 19 at 11:02pm |
|||
Post Reply | Page 123 5> |
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |