Print Page | Close Window

Sailing Instructions interpretation...

Printed From: Yachts and Yachting Online
Category: General
Forum Name: Racing Rules
Forum Discription: Discuss the rules and your interpretations here
URL: http://www.yachtsandyachting.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=9629
Printed Date: 29 Mar 24 at 1:03pm
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 9.665y - http://www.webwizforums.com


Topic: Sailing Instructions interpretation...
Posted By: Bootscooter
Subject: Sailing Instructions interpretation...
Date Posted: 25 Jul 12 at 11:41pm
Here's one for you Rules gods....
This from a Junior Class Champs..
 
SI. 9.4 - The sustitute mark will be black cylindrical
 
SI. 11 - Change of Course After Start
SI. 11.1 - Moving a mark: When it is necessary and posible, the Race Committee will either move the position of the mark, or lay a substitute mark.
 
Scenario;
Penultimate race of a champioship, the leading group of around 10-14 boats round the leeward mark (olympic course) and all the correct flags/signals are made to indicate that the windward mark has been moved or replaced.  At this point, the black cylindrical mark had not been layed, and was being towed by a rib.
This leading group sail the course and round the original orange windward mark, are not given a finish and are made to sail another lap, pushing them to the bottom of the results.
Apllications for redress are entered, as the sailors interpretation was that as the black mark had not been dropped, their assumpion was that the original mark had been moved (hence the signals).
 
Allegedly, boats further down the fleet were given the nod that they had to round the black mark.
 
No redress was given to any of the applicants, as apparently a) they were not made in time (they were as we had a stop watch running from the last competitor coming ashore), b) it was admitted that the SIs were confusing, but the RC were within their rights to specify a substitute mark that had not yet been layed/was still being moved.  Should I mention that the protest forms went in after sailing on the last day of the champs, with the Club/Assc wanting to get on with prizegiving?
 
My question is; How is a sailor to know whether the original mark has been moved, or if the RC actually want you to use a substitute mark that is not yet stationary?
 



Replies:
Posted By: Brass
Date Posted: 26 Jul 12 at 2:42am
The race committee, by their sailing instruction providing for either/or use of a substitute mark has achieved exactly the confusion that was predictable by not following the model SI in RRS Appendix L
 
12 CHANGE OF THE NEXT LEG OF THE COURSE
12.1 To change the next leg of the course, the race committee will move the original mark (or the finishing line) to a new position.
(OR)
12.1 To change the next leg of the course, the race committee will lay a new mark (or move the finishing line) and remove the original mark as soon as practicable. When in a subsequent change a new mark is replaced, it will be replaced by an original mark.
 
Rule 33 provides that the changed mark need not be in position when the change of course signal is given before boats begin the changed leg.  This extends some little way into the changed leg, but desirably the moved mark or the new substitute mark should be laid as soon as possible so as to enable competitors to adopt appropriate tactics and strategy to deal with the change in the leg.
 
HOWEVER, the change in course signals required by rule 33 given before any boats begin the changed leg told them the direction and the distance of the change, so the competitors are able to know the position where the changed mark will be.
 
If the original mark never moved, then in hearing a protest, I would not accept that an assumption that the original mark had been moved to the position signalled, when there was a substitute mark laid in that position (i.e. further out in the direction signalled), was reasonable.
 
So, if competitors did not sail the new leg in the signalled direction and distance, and round whatever mark was in the signalled position, then, I would be minded to conclude that they were, in part, at fault for any failure to round the signalled mark, and thus not entitled to redress, even though the race committee has published a confusing SI.
 
Possibly competitors would have a better case if the wind had flicked back away from the changed direction so that the original mark once again became dead to windward, or more truly to windward than the substiute mark, but you haven't suggested that that happened.
 
If the race committee 'coached' some boats in the fleet to go to the substitute mark and did not do the same for other boats in the fleet, then that's looking pretty unfair, but it only goes anywhere if there is a valid request for redress.
 
If the protest committee decided that requests for redress were invalid because they were not deliverd within the time limit in accordance with rule 62.2, that pretty much wraps it up:  there will be an unappealable fact found in there.
 
But I can't see what having 'a stop watch running from the last competitor coming ashore' would prove.  In normal SI, the Protest Time Limit is usually calculated based on the time boats finish.  How would a race committee or protest committee know when a 'last competitor came ashore', and wouldn't that time 1) be open to manipulation by competitors and 2)  get ridiculous if there was a blow-out or one boat sank and never came ashore at all.
 
If I were you, I wouldn't go alleging that the protest committee fudged its decisions because the organising authority wanted to get on with the prize-giving.  That would be a bloody rude insult to the protest committee.
 
In answer to your last question:  a sailor is supposed to know whether the original mark has been moved by observing whether or not it is in its original position or in the position signalled in the change leg signals.  The mark, whether the original one or a substitute need not be stationary when the change leg signals are given, or at the beginning of the leg, but it should, desirably be down and firm when boats start shaping their approach to it.
 
Bottom line:
  • Yes, race committee caused a problem by writing confusion into their SI;
  • Yes, if boats had been paying attention to the course they would have readily identified where to go to round the changed mark.


Posted By: sargesail
Date Posted: 26 Jul 12 at 7:25am
Brass - SIs here often define Protest Limits by the time of the last boat coming ashore since 1 hour sail ins are not uncommon.


Posted By: Bootscooter
Date Posted: 26 Jul 12 at 12:00pm

If I were you, I wouldn't go alleging that the protest committee fudged its decisions because the organising authority wanted to get on with the prize-giving.  That would be a bloody rude insult to the protest committee.

 

In answer to your last question:  a sailor is supposed to know whether the original mark has been moved by observing whether or not it is in its original position or in the position signalled in the change leg signals.  The mark, whether the original one or a substitute need not be stationary when the change leg signals are given, or at the beginning of the leg, but it should, desirably be down and firm when boats start shaping their approach to it.

 


.
Bottom line:


  • Yes, race committee caused a problem by writing confusion into their SI;

  • Yes, if boats had been paying attention to the course they would have readily identified where to go to round the changed mark.
[/QUOTE]

I'm not suggesting that the decision was fudged in this way - that's just how a number of the sailors felt after the hearing. Bear in mind that this is a Junior Class within a larger Class association, and because of the way this was done, a number of other issues with the RC earlier in the week, and some decisions that were made at last years Nationals, there is an element of "Inferiority Complex" going on.
Also bear in mind that as a Junior Class, most of the competitors were racing without using compasses, so a bearing is of little practical use.
The race in question was race one of two on the day, so time limit on protests was 20 mins of the last boat coming ashore.

As the confusion (interpretation) arose in this case from the poorly written SIs, is it right that the "correct" interpretation should be that of the RC (who knew what they meant), or the 14 sailors at the front of the Champs fleet (who knew what made practical sense, and hadn't been advised otherwise by RIBS on the course)?



-------------


Posted By: Brass
Date Posted: 26 Jul 12 at 2:59pm
Originally posted by Bootscooter

Originally posted by Brass

If I were you, I wouldn't go alleging that the protest committee fudged its decisions because the organising authority wanted to get on with the prize-giving.  That would be a bloody rude insult to the protest committee.
 
In answer to your last question:  a sailor is supposed to know whether the original mark has been moved by observing whether or not it is in its original position or in the position signalled in the change leg signals.  The mark, whether the original one or a substitute need not be stationary when the change leg signals are given, or at the beginning of the leg, but it should, desirably be down and firm when boats start shaping their approach to it.
Bottom line:
  • Yes, race committee caused a problem by writing confusion into their SI;
  • Yes, if boats had been paying attention to the course they would have readily identified where to go to round the changed mark.

I'm not suggesting that the decision was fudged in this way - that's just how a number of the sailors felt after the hearing.  Bear in mind that this is a Junior Class within a larger Class association, and because of the way this was done, a number of other issues with the RC earlier in the week, and some decisions that were made at last years Nationals, there is an element of "Inferiority Complex" going on.
Also bear in mind that as a Junior Class, most of the competitors were racing without using compasses, so a bearing is of little practical use.
The race in question was race one of two on the day, so time limit on protests was 20 mins of the last boat coming ashore.

As the confusion (interpretation) arose in this case from the poorly written SIs, is it right that the "correct" interpretation should be that of the RC (who knew what they meant), or the 14 sailors at the front of the Champs fleet (who knew what made practical sense, and hadn't been advised otherwise by RIBS on the course)?
 
Sounds like you had a disappointing championship regatta.  I'm sorry to hear that.
 
Also sounds like you have reasons to think that the race committee that your Class Association appointed has let you down.  I'm also sorry to hear that, but apart from promising yourself that you will take a more active part in the organisation next year and prevent bad things happening, there doesn't seem to be much to be done about it at this point.
 
OK, I understand about the protest time limit running from when last boat comes ashore (thanks Sargesail).  I'm also pleased to hear that you don't really think that the protest committee flicked your competitors off.
 
I understand the difficulty about compasses, but I wonder why the race committee, who should have known that many boats didn't have compasses, signalled the change with a compass bearing instead of the green triangle, red rectangle signals for right and left provided in rule 33(a)(2).  Maybe just another little thing that the race committee didn't do very well.
 
Hoooowever, you are saying that the top dozen boats in the fleet, presumably containing the best and brightest of your juniors, at least some of whom should have had compasses and known how to use them, all sheep-followed one another to the wrong mark.  At least some of those competitors should be kicking themselves.
 
As I said before, because the protest committee never heard the requests for redress, we will never know how they would have decided them, but this is not a matter of 'interpretation', rather it's a matter of the requrements of the rules regarding the giving of redress.
 
Rule 62.1 requires that for redress to be given for a race committee action or inaction:
  • there must be an improper action or omission of the race committee (62.1(a));
  • a boat being considered for redress must have had her score made significantly worse by that improper action or omission (62.1 stem);  and
  • there must have been no fault of the boat's own that also contributed to her score being made worse (62.1 stem).
Firstly, it is arguable that because the race committee didn't actually break any part of rule 33, then their SI and their actions on the water don't constitute an improper action.
 
Secondly, supposing that the protest committee did find that there was an improper action of the race committee, it may seem harsh, but any action of the boat that contributed to causing her score to be made worse rules out the giving of redress.
 
In this case, with the top flight of sailors in a national championship, I (from 10,000 miles away, and not having heard all the evidence) am inclined to think that going back to the original mark that had not been moved at all was a fault of the boat's own, and that redress should not be given.
 
Later Addition:
 
You earlier mentioned that the boats were 'not given a finish'.  Depending on the SI about boats being 'given a finish' and 'how many laps they were required to do', you might have had a better grounds for redress for the race committee not recording and scoring the finish (Case 80).
 
There might have been fault on the boat's part in rounding the wrong mark, but there was no apparent fault on the boats when they crossed the finishing line.
 
But it's rather water under the bridge
 


Posted By: GarethT
Date Posted: 27 Jul 12 at 11:26am
The relevance of the stop watch is that the sailors knew they were within the time limit for their class. I suspect (but don't know for sure) that the time limit the protest committee chose to apply was for when the last radial had come ashore.
 
As to the signalling of the mark being moved, I understand that there was nio bearing shown, just a green flag to indicate it had been moved to the right.
 
Regardless of any rights and wrongs, the sailors in question felt that they had been 'dismissed' because they were just children, and the grown-ups wanted to get on with their prize giving.
 
Add to this that the first race of the championship was abandoned due to confusion about marks, and the second race had to be re-run because the race committee lost the results, it really left some of the kids feeling like they were second class competitors despite paying the same entry fee as the grown-ups.


Posted By: RS400atC
Date Posted: 27 Jul 12 at 1:02pm
Originally posted by GarethT

...
 
Add to this that the first race of the championship was abandoned due to confusion about marks, and the second race had to be re-run because the race committee lost the results, it really left some of the kids feeling like they were second class competitors despite paying the same entry fee as the grown-ups.



That sounds absolutely shameful.
When clubs take an entry fee, they should be expected to provide a reasonable quality of service.

I would write formally to complain and copy the RYA.

Too many clubs treat open events purely as am income stream with too little thought to delivery of quality racing.


Posted By: Bootscooter
Date Posted: 27 Jul 12 at 6:58pm
That's what I was trying to say, without actually saying it as straight as Gareth did (and I thought I was the blunt-talking one of the family )

-------------


Posted By: SoggyBadger
Date Posted: 27 Jul 12 at 8:56pm
The hosting club sound like a load of incompetent buffoons. Perhaps you should name and shame?



-------------
Best wishes from deep in the woods

SB



Posted By: gordon
Date Posted: 02 Aug 12 at 10:52pm
One word answer - APPEAL

-------------
Gordon


Posted By: sargesail
Date Posted: 03 Aug 12 at 12:08am
Agreed Gordon - meant to say that earlier.

I did an appeal (similar wrongly applied out of time issue) as a youngster, with similar pressures.  Didn't benefit me...but changed the Nats result, and I am proud that I did it.  It changed my approach to and understanding of the rules.

BTW 20 minutes of coming ashore is not long.  If SIs said that I think I would have waterproof paper and a pencil in my BA, and write it before coming ashore!  Certainly the same in  plastic bag on the boat.  To me 20 minutes smacks of comedy event management.


Posted By: Strawberry
Date Posted: 03 Aug 12 at 4:19pm

63.1 Requirement for a Hearing

A boat or competitor shall not be penalized without a protest hearing,

except as provided in rules 30.2, 30.3, 67, 69, A5 and P2. A decision

on redress shall not be made without a hearing. The protest committee

shall hear all protests and requests for redress that have been

delivered to the race office unless it allows a protest or request to be

withdrawn.

A5 SCORES DETERMINED BY THE RACE COMMITTEE

A boat that did not start, comply with rule 30.2 or 30.3, or finish, or

that takes a penalty under rule 44.3(a) or retires after finishing, shall

be scored accordingly by the race committee without a hearing. Only

the protest committee may take other scoring actions that worsen a

boat’s score.

RYA 1989/7

When a race committee believes that a boat has broken

a sailing instruction, it cannot disqualify her without a

hearing or deem her to have retired. The race or protest

committee must first lodge a protest against her, within

the time limit for doing so, and a hearing must then be

called.

RYA 1989/8

A race committee is not allowed to disqualify a boat

without a hearing, except under the Black Flag rule. A

race committee is not allowed to score a boat DNF for

failing to sail the course if she complies with the

definitions Start and Finish. A protest is needed.

RYA 2006/8

Unless otherwise specified in the sailing instructions, a

race committee has no power to disqualify a boat

without a hearing, or score her DNF if she finishes, if it

believes she has not sailed the course. Instead it must

protest her within the protest time limit.



-------------
Cherub 2649 "Dangerous Strawberry


Posted By: Strawberry
Date Posted: 13 Aug 12 at 1:55pm
Basically, if the race committee think you didn't sail the correct course it is their responsibility to protest the competitor.

-------------
Cherub 2649 "Dangerous Strawberry


Posted By: Brass
Date Posted: 13 Aug 12 at 3:49pm
No, it is not the responsibility of the race committee to protest a boat.
 

CASE 39

Sportsmanship and the Rules

Rule 60.2(a), Right to Protest; Right to Request Redress or Rule 69

Action

Except when it receives a report of a breach of a class rule or of rule 43 from an equipment inspector or a measurer for an event, a race committee is not required to protest a boat. The primary responsibility for enforcing the rules lies with the competitor.



Posted By: gordon
Date Posted: 13 Aug 12 at 4:55pm
That's what the rulebook says. A party has the right to a hearing.

-------------
Gordon


Posted By: gordon
Date Posted: 13 Aug 12 at 5:03pm
Brass - The RC is not required to protest, but they cannot take action without a protest except in very limited circumstances.

As you rightly point out the PRIMARY responsibilty for enforcing the rules iswith the competitor. This does not mean that race officials have NO responsibility. There are circumstances in which a race official may protest. Which is why publishing clear policy of the circumstances in which a RC or PC will consider protesting makes things clearer for everyone.


-------------
Gordon


Posted By: Andymac
Date Posted: 14 Aug 12 at 12:55pm
Originally posted by sargesail


BTW 20 minutes of coming ashore is not long.  If SIs said that I think I would have waterproof paper and a pencil in my BA, and write it before coming ashore!  Certainly the same in  plastic bag on the boat.  To me 20 minutes smacks of comedy event management.
 
As far as I'm aware (correct me if I'm wrong), you can lodge a protest in that time frame, and fill in the details later...
No need to hit the shore with a complete dossier prepared!


Posted By: sargesail
Date Posted: 14 Aug 12 at 1:52pm
Agreed Andy - but I would be able to write those essential details down when afloat.  Because it is all too easy to use up 20 minutes securing the boat on the trolley, dropping sails, pulling up the beach and then walking to the Club.

And some clubs still have a shocking attitude/understanding of their responsibilities to a competitor.

Having gone back to the OP here the bold call would have been to go ashore without sailing the extra lap, and then redress if scored DNF/DNC.  Easy to say with hindsight.

But there are far too many clubs which don't recognise that the RC can only DSQ for not failing to start or finish correctly (and that is the action of finsihing, not sailing the wrong course.


Posted By: Brass
Date Posted: 14 Aug 12 at 3:23pm
Originally posted by sargesail

But there are far too many clubs which don't recognise that the RC can only DSQ for not failing to start or finish correctly (and that is the action of finsihing, not sailing the wrong course.
My understanding is that in these variable lap-counting formats there is usually a SI that permits the race committee to determine the score/number of laps and changes rule rule A5.


Posted By: gordon
Date Posted: 15 Aug 12 at 1:38pm
Here is an example of a note to competitors regarding Jury policy. As used at some ISAF events:

Sailing is essentially a self-policing sport. The jury expect that boats will take a penalty promptly when appropriate. The primary responsibility for protesting breaches of the rules is with the competitors, not the jury. However, in addition to taking action in accordance with Appendix P, the jury may lodge protests in accordance with RRS 60.3.


The jury will not usually protest for a breach of a rule of Part 2 or rule 31 unless they observe an apparent breach of good sportsmanship (RRS 2). Examples of such breaches are:

deliberate breach of the rules without taking a penalty and gaining an advantage.

failing to take a penalty after knowingly touching a mark with no justification for exoneration.

intimidating other boats – often evidenced by unnecessary shouting or foul language.

team tactics – sailing to benefit another boat to the detriment of your own position.

reckless sailing – sailing that results in or is likely to result in damage or injury.



My advice to Sargesail - be totally without mercy. Everytime the RC disqualifies a boat, except as provided for in rule A5, redress should be requested, and if refused an appeal made.


Gordon




-------------
Gordon


Posted By: sargesail
Date Posted: 15 Aug 12 at 11:38pm
Gordon,

Happened at my last event too....sadly too late for the boat to ask for redress (they believed they had been OCS - since none of the correct scoring codes had been used)....and once they became aware they were beyond caring - by the time we were discussing it they were outside the redress time limit.....but I wished they had.

But I can't say I was surprised - all the rules/results work was poor.....I'll PM you later to ask your advice about what to do if I am in the same situation again...don;t want to air teh laundry on here!


Posted By: Brass
Date Posted: 16 Aug 12 at 12:41am
Originally posted by sargesail

Gordon,

Happened at my last event too....sadly too late for the boat to ask for redress (they believed they had been OCS - since none of the correct scoring codes had been used)....and once they became aware they were beyond caring - by the time we were discussing it they were outside the redress time limit.....but I wished they had.

But I can't say I was surprised - all the rules/results work was poor.....I'll PM you later to ask your advice about what to do if I am in the same situation again...don;t want to air teh laundry on here!
 
Maybe the discussion here will help
 
http://forums.sailinganarchy.com/index.php?showtopic=136758&view=findpost&p=3776708 - http://forums.sailinganarchy.com/index.php?showtopic=136758&view=findpost&p=3776708
 
That discussion focussed more on mid to long term issues within a club.  Problems with a specific regatta are more short term:  you usually only get a sniff of the problem when you first see the Draft or (worse still) Final SI.
 
I've said before that there are problems with bad or silly SI that the authors refuse to change.
 
One of the early signs of this problem is that the SI drafters omit or downright refuse to provide copies of the draft SI to the protest committee chair for review and/or ignore advice coming from such a review.
 
If it's your own club or race committee you may foresee problems in the organisation and planning phase.  Your challenge is then how to do the inter-personal politics and the actual work (redrafting SI, Briefing or re-training Asst RO, etc) in a short time-frame.  But that's nothing but an organisational change problem:  there's nothing the RRS that will give you much help (except just keep hammering people to use Appendix L/LE and not muck with it).
 
Edit:  And don't be afaid to amend SI in the course of the regatta if and when problems emerge or are confirmed.
 
You mentioned results and scoring.  That's something that is still only thinly covered in the new RM Manual.  If its not being done by someone who you KNOW will do a good job, then this needs to be carefully planned and reveiwed.
 
From a judges' point of view, if you haven't appointed an experienced and diligent jury secretary, then you need to make sure that all of the duties of the jury secretary shown in the Judges Manual Chap 8 are going to be effectively performed by someone.  That will do a huge amount to keep the results and protests issues on track. 


Posted By: Andymac
Date Posted: 16 Aug 12 at 9:59am
Originally posted by sargesail

....sadly too late for the boat to ask for redress (they believed they had been OCS - since none of the correct scoring codes had been used)....and once they became aware they were beyond caring - by the time we were discussing it they were outside the redress time limit.....but I wished they had.
 
They could have still applied for redress irrespective of any 'Protest time limits'.
Sometimes a problem is not apparent until after results are posted by the race committee, this can sometimes be hours or even days/weeks after the race in question! If you can give a legitimate reason why the protest/redress request was submitted outside the protest limit then it should still have been considered.


Posted By: ChrisJ
Date Posted: 16 Aug 12 at 3:46pm
The event SargeSail was talking about: In the second race of the week, we started next to the CB (large yacht). We believed we were behind the line, but were certainly close (i.e. alongside the yacht, not waiting at its stern).
Results came out, we were DSQed. Queried it, and were told "only DSQ would be OCS". DRAT said the crew - and for the rest of the week refused to let me get close to the line at the start, in case my eyesight had gone... So this result affected every race after that.

At the end of the week, we were told "You didn't go around the spacer mark".
Actually we DID, and while doing so we ran into the back of the boat ahead, and hit the buoy at the same time :-( By the time we had completed the various turns, we had drifted with the tide almost into the line of boats between windward mark and the spacer. So on completing the turns we bore away quick and hoisted the kite... That was when we were spotted by either rescue boat or another competitor.
But we didn't know this until after the prize giving at the end of the week. And by then we were preparing to head for home, and even if they had re-instated us it couldn't alter the "don't go near the line" calls from the crew with 15 seconds to go.

Still: The crew says "we wont be going back there again".


Posted By: Presuming Ed
Date Posted: 18 Aug 12 at 6:34am
A5 SCORES DETERMINED BY THE RACE COMMITTEE
A boat that did not start, comply with rule 30.2 or 30.3, or finish, or that takes a penalty under rule 44.3(a) or retires after finishing, shall be scored accordingly by the race committee without a hearing. Only the protest committee may take other scoring actions that worsen a  boat’s score.



Print Page | Close Window

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.665y - http://www.webwizforums.com
Copyright ©2001-2010 Web Wiz - http://www.webwizguide.com