19 posts before the protest meeting last Monday and 107 since, mainly about putting the flag up in zero seconds, the only comment before the PC meeting was to put it up immediately.
In post 10
rgscpat drew attention to the exception to the hail and flag requirement where damage was obvious to boats involved.
Immediately after you advised the protest hearing outcome and stated you intended to appeal, PEd, in post 20
asked you 'Was the damage obvious?', and again highlighted the rule 61.1(a)(3) exception.
In the remaining hundred or so posts, the rule 61.1(a)(3) exception for obvious damage has been mentioned by numerous posters, but in those posts you have never told us whether, in your opinion, there was damage obvious to the boats involved.
In your opinion was there damage that was obvious to the boats involved?
If so, did you state this to the protest committee or give the protest committee any other evidence of it?
In the protest committee's written decision, which I assume you have obtained, as you are entitled to do under rule 65.2, did the protest committee:
- Find a fact that there was damage obvious to the boats involved?
- Find a fact that there was NO damage obvious to the boats involved?
- Find no facts as to whether damage was obvious or not?
- State any conclusion referring to rule 61.1(a)(3)?
If there was damage obvious to the boats involved, but the protest committee concluded that your protest was invalid for lack of timely flag and hail, then your appeal on invalidity should be successful, and I hope you haven't frittered away your 15 days for lodging the appeal given to you under rule F2.1 in bothering about the flag and hail issue.
Obviously my wording of saying within in minute or so is not what the PC want to hear, when questioned more deeply about it at the time I said it was very quick but how quick I cannot remember, I was under extreme stress at the time and afterwards. I do remember clearly what I did at the time and that has been re-enforced by other crew that were on board at the time. So I was stupid in what I said to the committee but didn't realize the implications at the time. I now know that in sailing rules, reasonable means but a few seconds. So if another boat is in trouble and a reasonable effort to assist could be over in a few seconds. I offered to re-enact the flag raising with the PC but they declined and I have just done a few runs of my own as I am now down on my boat.
The sequence is as soon as they are untangled from us and right next to us sailing away in the opposite direction I call Protest twice and then dive below to get the flag,
The flag issue has been done to death, but your hail was way too late. There was absolutely nothing to prevent you from hailing 'protest' immediately you saw the other boat was not keeping clear, and before contact even occurred.
If it wasn't for the 'obvious damage' exception in rule 16.1(a)(3), you would be gone for all money, but if there was no obvious damage, then it would just be part of the game and it wouldn't matter
my estimation the time from the second protest call to starting to tie the flag to the backstay, was 8 seconds. He would have been 25 metres away by then, but had it been 4 seconds he would still have been two of his boat lengths away and possibly more worried about damage to his boat than a protest flag.
The time and distances are only relevant to explaining why it is necessary to hail and flag quickly.
Less than a minute is a term often used by people in Aus and I don't see anything wrong with it.
There is nothing wrong with it. It's just not evidence that you have hailed 'protest' and displayed a red flag at the first reasonable opportunity.