• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

52 Kiss-ass


About Brass

  • Rank
    Super Anarchist

Recent Profile Visitors

8,514 profile views
  1. Brass

    2017 Rules Rule 69

    Salk's case got rolled about because of abysmal failures of due process by the chair of the protest committee. There was never any consideration, seemingly in the original 'hearing' or in the commercial arbitration about whether the alleged acts brought the sport into disrepute. And, technically, it was not a rule 69 matter: it was a hearing process mimicing rule 69, prescribed by the NOR/SI, for an offence specifically involving alcohol or drugs created by the NOR/SI.
  2. Brass

    2017 Rules Rule 69

    See this post Key things about bringing the sport into disrepute So, no guys, farting in church while wearing a regatta T shirt does NOT open you up to rule 69.
  3. Brass

    Rules Question - Shortening the Race

    Agreed, under the new rules, openly disclosed conflicts are permitted if nobody objects, but it's not great practice, and as soon as the RC not sailing gets up to speed, it should probably be discontinued. Not because the competitor with a conflict is doing anything wrong (he/she is very likely being as impartial as they can), but because it's a potential source of bad feeling. Rule 2 protests (or 69 hearings) should be a last resort, in my view. The RRS do NOT, except for rule 63.4, with respect to protest committee members only, address conflict of interest with respect to race officials. WS Regulations, such as those applicable to Conflict of Interest or Misconduct do NOT apply to race officials who are not World Sailing Race Officials accredited by WS. WS Regulations apply to World Sailing Race Officials, who consist of: (a) International Classifiers (b) International Expression Judges (c) International Judges (d) International Measurers (e) International Race Officers (f) International Technical Delegates (g) International Umpires (WS Regulation 31.1).. I would suggest that this may be because the drafters of the RRS recognised that at club or local level it was likely, and indeed arguably desirable that representatives of competitors should be on race committees. It also recognises the widespread practice of rostering competitors as race officers. Any tendency to bias or preferential treatment should be taken care of by the corporate committee process, and, with rostered race officers, hopefully by the individual's natural sense of fairness, and an understanding that one takes off one's competitor's hat and puts on one's race officer's hat, when in that role. If there is actual bias or preferential treatment, I am happy that this would amount to improper action or omission and can be dealt with by way of redress, and, if necessary by way of local or national misconduct by officials by-laws or regulations. As for the OP case of a competitor, while a race is in progress advising, instructing, coaching or otherwise urging the race officer on race management issues, this is absolutely not on. You've appointed the race officer to conduct racing. Once you have done that, leave them to get on with it, and ride with any poor decisions they may make. In the case of a competitor improperly influencing a RO, I'd be inclined to go for rule 69 rather than rule 2, but taking the OP example, I would't be going near rule 2/69: I'd take it as all done in good faith, if misguided.. I'd hazard a guess that in the OP case, the reason the RO didn't properly signal the shorten course was that he had the 'mentor' blowing down his ear on the VHF, gobbling up time that would have been better used setting up for the shorten course finish.
  4. Brass

    Race Committe Question

    WS Regulations apply to World Sailing Race Officials, who consist of: (a) International Classifiers (b) International Expression Judges (c) International Judges (d) International Measurers (e) International Race Officers (f) International Technical Delegates (g) International Umpires (WS Regulation 31.1). WS Regulations do NOT apply to race officials who are not World Sailing Race Officials accredited by WS.
  5. Brass

    Rules Question - Shortening the Race

    Immediately before the course was shortened, he was sitting in fifth place. A short time (sounds like it would have been less that a minute) after the course was shortened, he finished the race in fifth place. No evidence on how this result affected his placement in the series. What is “significant” is rather subjective, but most PCs would not consider the above to meet the standard. If I was hearing the request for redress, I wouldn't be relying on that. A mistake or a misjudgement by a race committee, even if it advantages some boat is not necessarily an improper action or omission. Judges Manual: K.29.9 Improper Action or Omission  "An improper action is doing something that is not permitted by the racing rules, notice of race or sailing instructions. An omission is not doing something that is the rules including notice of race or sailing instructions states shall not be done. If a race officer or protest committee or the technical committee does or does not do something over which it has discretion or is not mandatory, even though it may be totally inappropriate and an extremely bad or poor judgement, it is neither an improper action, nor an omission for which redress can be given." That's not to say, of course, that the failure to signal shorten course properly wasn't absolutely improper.
  6. Brass

    Someone has been naughty!

    Iker says in his statement to the EDIO that he hasn't modified the boat and he's stated that to the jury (of the initial measurement protest hearing) (18). Conclusion 21 doesn't say Iker lied to this jury before the hearing, it just says that he continued to lie during the hearing. Really that should be supported by a fact found quoting him during the hearing, is that what your getting at? Thanks for pointing out the paragraph 18 words to me. That is a fact about words the protestee said about something he said at a previous occasion. I understand about the previous protest hearing different from the rule 69 hearing. I would have thought that a more appropriate fact to be found would have been "Martinez said to the Jury hearing protest xxx words to the effect that YYY " YYY was not true".
  7. Brass

    Someone has been naughty!

    Those are facts about an interview with the Event Disciplinary Investigating Officer, and found the Conclusion in para 20. The EDIO is not the jury.
  8. Brass

    Someone has been naughty!

    Interesting. Can't see a fact found to support the conclusion about not telling the truth to the jury.
  9. Per this definition, I understand that "clearing" the finish line does not necessarily require a boat to sail its entire hull through the finish line. Immediately bearing-away after poking the bow across the finish line is OK, as long as the finishing boat does not hit a finishing mark or interfere with another boat racing. True? Correct. If this is some smart-arse reference to the 'string rule', the requirements of rule 28 are discharged when a boat finishes in accordance with the definition of finish. Once any part of a boat in its normal position crosses the finishing line, she has finished, and rule 28 no longer applies to her.
  10. Not unless the SIs say you can. You're "clear of the finish" (which is to say, no longer racing) as soon as the finish marks are no longer affecting your choice of course. But there's no reason to get the rest of the boat across the line. You're finished once any part of the hull, crew or equipment in normal position crosses the line. You could at that point let the current push you back, then fall off and sail away from the finish marks. Since you're still racing until you clear the line and finish marks, Rule 24.1 would not apply to you. I suppose 24.2 might. Rule 24.1 will not apply as long as part of the boat is across the finishing line, and then while a finishing mark is influencing her course (that is, if she has to take some action to avoid the mark). The instant she drifts far enough back onto the course side, so as to be clear of the line and marks, she is no longer racing and rule 24.1 will click in. In light drifing conditions, she might not break rule 24.1 because it was not reasonably possible for her to not interfere with another boat. Don't think rule 24.2 will apply. Rule 24.2, apart from a boat taking a penalty applies to a boat sailing on another leg of the course. A boat that has finished is not sailing on any leg at all.
  11. There is a (usually) brief interval after a boat finishes (part of her crosses the finishing line) and before she has cleared the finishing line and marks, during which she is still racing, and required to comply with rule 42 Propulsion. A boat that starts motoring during this period breaks rule 42. The effect of the rule is not to prevent a boat returning to the course side and attacking a competitor, which is dealt with by rule 24.1, but to avoid a sudden transition of obligation between boats which may be at close quarters when one first crosses the finishing line.
  12. Why guess? Case 127 Definition, Racing A boat clears the finishing line and marks when no part of her hull, crew or equipment is on the line, and no mark is influencing her choice of course.
  13. Thank you. My bad again.
  14. Quite right. My bad.