Jump to content


Rules question, boat bent after tee-boning.


  • Please log in to reply
151 replies to this topic

#1 The Ghost....

The Ghost....

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 252 posts
  • Location:Melbourne, OZ

Posted 21 May 2012 - 07:02 AM

On last Saturdays stern chaser a boat that was just to windward of our starboard bow decided to turn across our bow. We collided and my boat was damaged. He thought he was too early for the start and decided to run down the line. We were unable to take evasive action as my 9 ton cruiser is not very nimble in light winds, it was only about 8 knots.
What rules has he broken?
What rules if any did we break?

Any help appreciated.

Ghost

#2 I'moutahere

I'moutahere

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,810 posts

Posted 21 May 2012 - 07:10 AM

On last Saturdays stern chaser a boat that was just to windward of our starboard bow decided to turn across our bow. We collided and my boat was damaged. He thought he was too early for the start and decided to run down the line. We were unable to take evasive action as my 9 ton cruiser is not very nimble in light winds, it was only about 8 knots.
What rules has he broken?
What rules if any did we break?

Any help appreciated.

Ghost

Was that up in Port D?

#3 Presuming Ed

Presuming Ed

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,937 posts
  • Location:London, UK

Posted 21 May 2012 - 07:22 AM

Diagrams help. Boat Scenario is free: http://boats.sourceforge.net/

How to use it.



RRS are here.

If she went from clear ahead to windward as she turned, then 15 doesn't apply because you acquired RoW because of her actions, leaving her with having broken 11. If she was overlapped to windward the whole time, then she's simply broken 11. If there was nothing you could have done to avoid contact, then you haven't broken 14.

#4 saltyokie

saltyokie

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 303 posts
  • Location:santa barbara
  • Interests:racing CAtalina 38 in CHRF fleet - SBYC

Posted 21 May 2012 - 07:27 AM

On last Saturdays stern chaser a boat that was just to windward of our starboard bow decided to turn across our bow. We collided and my boat was damaged. He thought he was too early for the start and decided to run down the line. We were unable to take evasive action as my 9 ton cruiser is not very nimble in light winds, it was only about 8 knots.
What rules has he broken?
What rules if any did we break?

Any help appreciated.

Ghost


As always we could use a a little more information. What tack or jibe were you (boat A) on? Was boat B (the other guy) on the same tack or jibe? When she crossed your bow did she tack or jibe? We have some fundamental rules in the RRS which are not that different from the Coll Regs which apply to non racing situations. First Rule is Port/Starboard - starboard tack or jibe has rights, port boat must keep clear. Another thing that may come in, a boat that is tacking or jibing must keep clear of a boat on a particular heading. Finally, even if boat B had the right of way after changing course (doubtful but possible) Boat A must be given opportunity to keep clear which does not sound like it happened. Collisions are part of racing - calm down, have an extra drink and write down exactly what happened while it is clear in your mind and have your crew do the same. Take two beers and call me in the morning.

#5 JimC

JimC

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,742 posts
  • Location:South East England
  • Interests:Dinghies, especially box rule classes.

Posted 21 May 2012 - 07:40 AM

The number one priority in this situation is to protest. If you didn't protest you have made life very difficult for yourself.

#6 Dog Watch

Dog Watch

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,282 posts

Posted 21 May 2012 - 08:05 AM

11.
14 possibly.

#7 European Bloke

European Bloke

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,865 posts

Posted 21 May 2012 - 08:51 AM

If it happened as you described then he broke the key rule of not to be an utter twat.

Once you’ve done that the rest is just detail.

#8 saltyokie

saltyokie

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 303 posts
  • Location:santa barbara
  • Interests:racing CAtalina 38 in CHRF fleet - SBYC

Posted 21 May 2012 - 10:17 AM

The number one priority in this situation is to protest. If you didn't protest you have made life very difficult for yourself.


+1

#9 Aloha 27

Aloha 27

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 933 posts
  • Location:Canada's Ocean Playground

Posted 21 May 2012 - 10:21 AM


The number one priority in this situation is to protest. If you didn't protest you have made life very difficult for yourself.


+1


+2 what Jim said.

As per DW above, I'm thinking rule 11 for sure and without benefit of a diagram, likely rule 14 as well.

#10 rgscpat

rgscpat

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 707 posts
  • Location:New Mexico/southwest USA
  • Interests:sailing, racing, race management, Desert Sea / southwest USA sailing, future of sailing, travel, photography, hiking

Posted 21 May 2012 - 03:17 PM

Running out the red flag immediately and yelling protest can get a pass if the damage was bad and obvious enough, provided a protest was eventually made within time limits or with good reason beyond them:

61.1 ...

(3) if the incident results in damage or injury that is obvious
to the boats involved and one of them intends to protest,
the requirements of this rule do not apply to her, but she
shall attempt to inform the other boat within the time
limit of rule 61.3.



61.3 Protest Time Limit
A protest by a boat, ..., shall be
delivered to the race office no later than within the time limit stated
in the sailing instructions. If none is stated, the time limit is two
hours after the last boat in the race finishes. .... The protest
committee shall extend the time if there is good reason to do so.

#11 walterbshaffer

walterbshaffer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,014 posts
  • Location:San Diego, California USA
  • Interests:Formerly Member No. 9720

Posted 21 May 2012 - 03:29 PM

If it happened as you described then he broke the key rule of not to be an utter twat.


Thats what I was thinking.

Why do people do crap like that???? There's always some idiot jamming himself in at a mark, rc boat or line. Enough already.

#12 Steam Flyer

Steam Flyer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,942 posts
  • Location:Eastern NC

Posted 21 May 2012 - 05:01 PM


If it happened as you described then he broke the key rule of not to be an utter twat.


Thats what I was thinking.

Why do people do crap like that???? There's always some idiot jamming himself in at a mark, rc boat or line. Enough already.


'Cuz there's always one more idiot than there's room for.

And the more the gummint tries to idiot-proof the world, the more idiotic the idiots get... then they try to go sailing...

FB- Doug

#13 Beau.Vrolyk

Beau.Vrolyk

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,269 posts
  • Location:San Francisco & Santa Cruz
  • Interests:Sailing on any and everything that floats. Skiing when the rainfall turns semi-solid and white.

Posted 21 May 2012 - 05:09 PM



If it happened as you described then he broke the key rule of not to be an utter twat.


Thats what I was thinking.

Why do people do crap like that???? There's always some idiot jamming himself in at a mark, rc boat or line. Enough already.


'Cuz there's always one more idiot than there's room for.

And the more the gummint tries to idiot-proof the world, the more idiotic the idiots get... then they try to go sailing...

FB- Doug


So.... the stupidity of the "gummint" is the reason that someone tries to jam themselves into a place they can't fit? Seriously?? WOW, that "gummint" is a lot more powerful than I thought. (s)

You don't think that folks used to barge at marks way back when the "gummint" was a lot smaller and didn't "idiot-proof the world"? Seriously, you can't take the easy cop-out of blaming lousing sailing and bad judgement on whichever "gummint" you're talking about.

Stupidity wasn't just invented - it's been around a while. It predates Sailing and Governments.

BV

#14 Ship o' Fools

Ship o' Fools

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 505 posts

Posted 21 May 2012 - 05:22 PM

Actually, that might be a great new rule to be adopted: If you are early to the start line, you are the ROW boat and can bear off, forcing all the leeward boats to bear off as well. Starts would be a lot more interesting and no more parking on the start line.

#15 D.M.D.

D.M.D.

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 555 posts

Posted 21 May 2012 - 08:54 PM

Any word on who's paying for the damage?????????

#16 blackjenner

blackjenner

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,565 posts
  • Location:Seattle
  • Interests:MrsBlack, Brigadoon, freedom

Posted 21 May 2012 - 10:29 PM



If it happened as you described then he broke the key rule of not to be an utter twat.


Thats what I was thinking.

Why do people do crap like that???? There's always some idiot jamming himself in at a mark, rc boat or line. Enough already.


'Cuz there's always one more idiot than there's room for.

And the more the gummint tries to idiot-proof the world, the more idiotic the idiots get... then they try to go sailing...

FB- Doug


Nothing is foolproof enough to stop a sufficiently talented fool.

#17 The Ghost....

The Ghost....

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 252 posts
  • Location:Melbourne, OZ

Posted 21 May 2012 - 10:30 PM

Yeah, thanks for the help. It was on Port Philip. We did find our little red flag and put it up and I called "Protest", paperwork was lodged within time limit. He was the windward boat and we were both on starboard.
Rule 11 would apply, The only thing I think I could also be guilty of is rule 12 as we had no overlap unless you call overlap when he has turned onto a converging course.
In that breeze we where unable to avoid a collision because #1 we did not know his intentions, and #2 9 ton boat cannot manouvre like a dinghy!

He proved he was a prat by sailing in front of me after the race started and then asking me what I was doing sailing into him in a "Social" race.

G
Attached File  CCF22052012_00000.pdf   251.29K   232 downloads

#18 saltyokie

saltyokie

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 303 posts
  • Location:santa barbara
  • Interests:racing CAtalina 38 in CHRF fleet - SBYC

Posted 21 May 2012 - 10:30 PM

Any word on who's paying for the damage?????????


It might be nice to have a diagram, wind direction - all those technical things. Based on what we think we know, the SA jury seems to think the barging boat violated the windward/leeward and possibly port starboard rules. A nice protest, properly filed could make things orderly. Otherwise we get messy.

These days whenever there are a half dozen boats approaching the line, hard on the wind on starboard - some idiot has to come barging - running right down the line. It often gets somewhat noisy.

#19 The Ghost....

The Ghost....

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 252 posts
  • Location:Melbourne, OZ

Posted 04 June 2012 - 10:26 AM

Well I just got home from the protest and the jury through it out because I didn't raise the flag in a reasonable period! Bloody hell! I told them I had the flag up within a minute and they latched onto that.

The other rules still apply about boat being damaged and protest being lodged so I will appeal.
I think I will also send a letter of demand to the other boat owner.

G (VERY ANGRY)

#20 Presuming Ed

Presuming Ed

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,937 posts
  • Location:London, UK

Posted 04 June 2012 - 11:11 AM

Was there obvious damage?

61.1 Informing the Protestee
(a) A boat intending to protest shall inform the other boat at the first reasonable opportunity. When her protest concerns an incident in the racing area that she is involved in or sees, she shall hail 'Protest' and conspicuously display a red flag at the first reasonable opportunity for each. She shall display the flag until she is no longer racing. However,
(1) if the other boat is beyond hailing distance, the protesting boat need not hail but she shall inform the other boat at the first reasonable opportunity;

(2) if the hull length of the protesting boat is less than 6 metres, she need not display a red flag;

(3) if the incident results in damage or injury that is obvious to the boats involved and one of them intends to protest, the requirements of this rule do not apply to her, but she shall attempt to inform the other boat within the time
limit of rule 61.3.

#21 BalticBandit

BalticBandit

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,728 posts

Posted 04 June 2012 - 03:09 PM

Well I just got home from the protest and the jury through it out because I didn't raise the flag in a reasonable period! Bloody hell! I told them I had the flag up within a minute and they latched onto that.


Way too long. you really need to have a red Flag in the cockpit if you are going to race. We go over and over and over this pretty much every 6 mos.


To the point were I think that ISAF "Sailing Instructions" template should include a note underscoring that. Why? Because there's always someone new to racing or to protests that does not understand this is how the rules are today.

#22 walterbshaffer

walterbshaffer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,014 posts
  • Location:San Diego, California USA
  • Interests:Formerly Member No. 9720

Posted 04 June 2012 - 03:38 PM


Well I just got home from the protest and the jury through it out because I didn't raise the flag in a reasonable period! Bloody hell! I told them I had the flag up within a minute and they latched onto that.


Way too long. you really need to have a red Flag in the cockpit if you are going to race. We go over and over and over this pretty much every 6 mos.


To the point were I think that ISAF "Sailing Instructions" template should include a note underscoring that. Why? Because there's always someone new to racing or to protests that does not understand this is how the rules are today.


I'd like to see a flag req'd only when the other boat is not within hailing distance or refuses verbally to acknowledge/respond to a protest.

Because when there's a smash up or foul aren't both boats usually right next to each other either yelling or proclaiming loudly "What the...??!!" "Foul!" & "Protest!": they both know it's going to need to be settled with a penalty or a hearing and the flag seems to have become a technical way to escape culpability.

#23 coyotepup

coyotepup

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 285 posts
  • Location:Michigan

Posted 04 June 2012 - 04:16 PM

Well I just got home from the protest and the jury through it out because I didn't raise the flag in a reasonable period! Bloody hell! I told them I had the flag up within a minute and they latched onto that.

The other rules still apply about boat being damaged and protest being lodged so I will appeal.
I think I will also send a letter of demand to the other boat owner.

G (VERY ANGRY)

You ask me, the application of that rule/clause is getting totally out of hand. Half the time it's just an excuse the jury uses to not hear the protest and it encourages skippers to fly the red flag and THEN worry about piddling little trifles, like, oh, getting out of the way of traffic, not creating another protestable issue somewhere else, minimizing damage to the boat, that kind of thing. Stupid stuff, really, as compared to how vitally important it is to fly a flag.

#24 jackdaw

jackdaw

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,183 posts
  • Location:Minneapolis, MN USA
  • Interests:The usual stuff.

Posted 04 June 2012 - 04:24 PM


Well I just got home from the protest and the jury through it out because I didn't raise the flag in a reasonable period! Bloody hell! I told them I had the flag up within a minute and they latched onto that.


Way too long. you really need to have a red Flag in the cockpit if you are going to race. We go over and over and over this pretty much every 6 mos.


To the point were I think that ISAF "Sailing Instructions" template should include a note underscoring that. Why? Because there's always someone new to racing or to protests that does not understand this is how the rules are today.


Indeed. That's why these things are so popular in our OD fleets.

http://www.protestflag.com/

#25 Steam Flyer

Steam Flyer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,942 posts
  • Location:Eastern NC

Posted 04 June 2012 - 06:03 PM

... ... ...
just an excuse the jury uses to not hear the protest and it encourages skippers to fly the red flag and THEN worry about piddling little trifles, like, oh, getting out of the way of traffic, not creating another protestable issue somewhere else, minimizing damage to the boat, that kind of thing. Stupid stuff, really, as compared to how vitally important it is to fly a flag.


Ya gotta have priorities.

Causing damage to another boat by ignoring a basic right-of-way rule is MUCH less important than having a red flag ready to deploy at a moment's notice.

:o

FB- Doug

#26 willsailforfood

willsailforfood

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 700 posts
  • Location:The Raincoast
  • Interests:Friends Don't Let Friends Sail PHRF

Posted 05 June 2012 - 01:00 AM

(3) if the incident results in damage or injury that is obvious to the boats involved and one of them intends to protest, the requirements of this rule do not apply to her, but she shall attempt to inform the other boat within the time
limit of rule 61.3.


Ed is correct here.

If there was damage, and, in the ensuing mayhem the priority was to evaluate the situation to determine if additional action was required to safeguard the vessel and it's crew than you are in good standing when it comes time to appeal.

I would make a strong point of this with your RC and the members of the original protest committee. As has been pointed out previously, there are some lazy and poor intentioned committees out there that think that disallowing protests is going to somehow discourage them. This is not their job.

In this instance where two boats came together (a T-bone no less) I see this as an irresponsible decision (based on the information provided).

I would appeal in an instant confident that a more experienced protest committee would see things a bit more clearly.

--
http://bonne-amie.blogspot.com

#27 Tunnel Rat

Tunnel Rat

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,301 posts

Posted 05 June 2012 - 01:24 AM


(3) if the incident results in damage or injury that is obvious to the boats involved and one of them intends to protest, the requirements of this rule do not apply to her, but she shall attempt to inform the other boat within the time
limit of rule 61.3.


Ed is correct here.

If there was damage, and, in the ensuing mayhem the priority was to evaluate the situation to determine if additional action was required to safeguard the vessel and it's crew than you are in good standing when it comes time to appeal.

I would make a strong point of this with your RC and the members of the original protest committee. As has been pointed out previously, there are some lazy and poor intentioned committees out there that think that disallowing protests is going to somehow discourage them. This is not their job.

In this instance where two boats came together (a T-bone no less) I see this as an irresponsible decision (based on the information provided).

I would appeal in an instant confident that a more experienced protest committee would see things a bit more clearly.

--
http://bonne-amie.blogspot.com

I totally agree with this. I suggest you emphasise that the one minute was used to check the safety of the crew and evaluate the damage done to your boat and the other boat, once it was apparent that all crew were safe and there was no immediate danger of either boat sinking then the flag was deployed. It would be an irresponsible protest committee that disallowed such a time delay.

I also agree with comments above about the stupidity that displaying the flag has to take precedence over all other activities on a boat that is usually involved in a great deal of activity - usually starting or rounding marks. However I guess that it does take away any doubt that a protest has been made, too often people yell and scream (without knowing the rules) and then do nothing after an incident.

#28 I'moutahere

I'moutahere

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,810 posts

Posted 05 June 2012 - 03:19 AM



(3) if the incident results in damage or injury that is obvious to the boats involved and one of them intends to protest, the requirements of this rule do not apply to her, but she shall attempt to inform the other boat within the time
limit of rule 61.3.


Ed is correct here.

If there was damage, and, in the ensuing mayhem the priority was to evaluate the situation to determine if additional action was required to safeguard the vessel and it's crew than you are in good standing when it comes time to appeal.

I would make a strong point of this with your RC and the members of the original protest committee. As has been pointed out previously, there are some lazy and poor intentioned committees out there that think that disallowing protests is going to somehow discourage them. This is not their job.

In this instance where two boats came together (a T-bone no less) I see this as an irresponsible decision (based on the information provided).

I would appeal in an instant confident that a more experienced protest committee would see things a bit more clearly.

--
http://bonne-amie.blogspot.com

I totally agree with this. I suggest you emphasise that the one minute was used to check the safety of the crew and evaluate the damage done to your boat and the other boat, once it was apparent that all crew were safe and there was no immediate danger of either boat sinking then the flag was deployed. It would be an irresponsible protest committee that disallowed such a time delay.

I also agree with comments above about the stupidity that displaying the flag has to take precedence over all other activities on a boat that is usually involved in a great deal of activity - usually starting or rounding marks. However I guess that it does take away any doubt that a protest has been made, too often people yell and scream (without knowing the rules) and then do nothing after an incident.

So is that all one has to do to justify ferreting oround in the chart table for a minute or two looking for the flag? Just checking to see if there is damage before displaying the flag. IT DOES NOT WORK THAT WAY!

(A bent pulpit - from a T bone between 2 yachts going the same way? - the protesting yacht is in real danger of being disqualified as well for not taking avoiding action, RRS14.b....)

#29 Steam Flyer

Steam Flyer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,942 posts
  • Location:Eastern NC

Posted 05 June 2012 - 03:27 AM

... ...
So is that all one has to do to justify ferreting oround in the chart table for a minute or two looking for the flag? Just checking to see if there is damage before displaying the flag. (A bent pulpit - from a T bone between 2 yachts going the same way - the protesting yacht is in real danger of being disqualified as well for not taking avoiding action, RRS14.B)

IT DOES NOT WORK THAT WAY!


I've got a great idea... early in the morning of a regatta, steal all your competitors protest flags. Then just ram the fuck out of 'em. Bring down their rig, hell sink 'em. It is against the rules, but it won't matter if they can't fly their protest flag in less than 2.55 seconds

FB- Doug

#30 BalticBandit

BalticBandit

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,728 posts

Posted 05 June 2012 - 03:44 AM



Well I just got home from the protest and the jury through it out because I didn't raise the flag in a reasonable period! Bloody hell! I told them I had the flag up within a minute and they latched onto that.


Way too long. you really need to have a red Flag in the cockpit if you are going to race. We go over and over and over this pretty much every 6 mos.


To the point were I think that ISAF "Sailing Instructions" template should include a note underscoring that. Why? Because there's always someone new to racing or to protests that does not understand this is how the rules are today.


I'd like to see a flag req'd only when the other boat is not within hailing distance or refuses verbally to acknowledge/respond to a protest.

Because when there's a smash up or foul aren't both boats usually right next to each other either yelling or proclaiming loudly "What the...??!!" "Foul!"

Not necessarily. If you've ever been bounced into another boat because you were on the inside of a 5 deep pinwheel and the outside boat didn't give room, you know that protesting the right boat isn't often clear until someone pops a flag.

Look its not hard to mount a Code B on your backstay, roll it up with a piece of outward facing electrical tape and leave a toggle on it. That way it deploys in 3 seconds AT THE MOST...

#31 I'moutahere

I'moutahere

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,810 posts

Posted 05 June 2012 - 03:53 AM


... ...
So is that all one has to do to justify ferreting oround in the chart table for a minute or two looking for the flag? Just checking to see if there is damage before displaying the flag. (A bent pulpit - from a T bone between 2 yachts going the same way - the protesting yacht is in real danger of being disqualified as well for not taking avoiding action, RRS14.B)

IT DOES NOT WORK THAT WAY!


I've got a great idea... early in the morning of a regatta, steal all your competitors protest flags. Then just ram the fuck out of 'em. Bring down their rig, hell sink 'em. It is against the rules, but it won't matter if they can't fly their protest flag in less than 2.55 seconds

FB- Doug

How do you feel about having to give way to starboard tack boats when you are on port tack? Yell loud enough & they will get out of your way?

#32 Steam Flyer

Steam Flyer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,942 posts
  • Location:Eastern NC

Posted 05 June 2012 - 04:01 AM



... ...
So is that all one has to do to justify ferreting oround in the chart table for a minute or two looking for the flag? Just checking to see if there is damage before displaying the flag. (A bent pulpit - from a T bone between 2 yachts going the same way - the protesting yacht is in real danger of being disqualified as well for not taking avoiding action, RRS14.B)

IT DOES NOT WORK THAT WAY!


I've got a great idea... early in the morning of a regatta, steal all your competitors protest flags. Then just ram the fuck out of 'em. Bring down their rig, hell sink 'em. It is against the rules, but it won't matter if they can't fly their protest flag in less than 2.55 seconds

FB- Doug

How do you feel about having to give way to starboard tack boats when you are on port tack? Yell loud enough & they will get out of your way?


If they can't protest you, it doesn't matter does it?

You've made it clear that you genuinely believe that the rule about protest flags trumps the basic right-of-way rules.

you can't have it both ways.

FB- Doug

#33 I'moutahere

I'moutahere

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,810 posts

Posted 05 June 2012 - 04:04 AM




... ...
So is that all one has to do to justify ferreting oround in the chart table for a minute or two looking for the flag? Just checking to see if there is damage before displaying the flag. (A bent pulpit - from a T bone between 2 yachts going the same way - the protesting yacht is in real danger of being disqualified as well for not taking avoiding action, RRS14.B)

IT DOES NOT WORK THAT WAY!


I've got a great idea... early in the morning of a regatta, steal all your competitors protest flags. Then just ram the fuck out of 'em. Bring down their rig, hell sink 'em. It is against the rules, but it won't matter if they can't fly their protest flag in less than 2.55 seconds

FB- Doug

How do you feel about having to give way to starboard tack boats when you are on port tack? Yell loud enough & they will get out of your way?


If they can't protest you, it doesn't matter does it?

You've made it clear that you genuinely believe that the rule about protest flags trumps the basic right-of-way rules.

you can't have it both ways.

FB- Doug


Bullshit! That is YOUR fabrication.

On the other hand, you have made it abundantly clear that you are prepared to cheat, & steal.

#34 Toolbox

Toolbox

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 490 posts
  • Location:Townsville, Australia
  • Interests:Sailing
    Family

Posted 05 June 2012 - 06:33 AM

If the protest committee believed that the flag was not flown fast enough (Not a valid protest) but through the facts discovered a breach of the rules took place there is nothing stopping the committee from opening a hearing into the matter themselves which can still result in one or both parties being disq.

In saying that talking to friends down that way indicates that there is quite a prevalence for barging on the port phillip scene at the moment.

-TB

#35 I'moutahere

I'moutahere

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,810 posts

Posted 05 June 2012 - 06:39 AM

If the protest committee believed that the flag was not flown fast enough (Not a valid protest) but through the facts discovered a breach of the rules took place there is nothing stopping the committee from opening a hearing into the matter themselves which can still result in one or both parties being disq.

In saying that talking to friends down that way indicates that there is quite a prevalence for barging on the port phillip scene at the moment.

-TB


No valid protest - no facts found (or discovered)

#36 Toolbox

Toolbox

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 490 posts
  • Location:Townsville, Australia
  • Interests:Sailing
    Family

Posted 05 June 2012 - 06:57 AM

seen protest committee's go on a fact hunt on similar, situations.

#37 I'moutahere

I'moutahere

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,810 posts

Posted 05 June 2012 - 07:36 AM

seen protest committee's go on a fact hunt on similar, situations.


Please explain.

#38 green03

green03

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 105 posts

Posted 05 June 2012 - 07:55 AM

Well I just got home from the protest and the jury through it out because I didn't raise the flag in a reasonable period! Bloody hell! I told them I had the flag up within a minute and they latched onto that.

The other rules still apply about boat being damaged and protest being lodged so I will appeal.
I think I will also send a letter of demand to the other boat owner.

G (VERY ANGRY)


Did you?

#39 Presuming Ed

Presuming Ed

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,937 posts
  • Location:London, UK

Posted 05 June 2012 - 08:31 AM

If the protest committee believed that the flag was not flown fast enough (Not a valid protest) but through the facts discovered a breach of the rules took place there is nothing stopping the committee from opening a hearing into the matter themselves which can still result in one or both parties being disq.

Yes there is.

60.2 A race committee may
a) protest a boat, but not as a result of information arising from a request for redress or an invalid protest, or from a report from an interested party other than the representative of the boat herself;
b) request redress for a boat; or
c ) report to the protest committee requesting action under rule 69.1(a).
However, when the race committee receives a report required by rule 43.1c or 78.3, it shall protest the boat.

60.3 A protest committee may
a) protest a boat, but not as a result of information arising from a request for redress or an invalid protest, or from a report from an interested party other than the representative of the boat herself. However, it may protest a boat
1) if it learns of an incident involving her that may have resulted in injury or serious damage, or
2) if during the hearing of a valid protest it learns that the boat, although not a party to the hearing, was involved in the incident and may have broken a rule;
b) call a hearing to consider redress; or
c ) act under rule 69.1(a).

Once a PC finds that a protest is invalid, and there isn't obvious damage, (61.1.a.3), there isn't much that can be done, unless another boat saw the incident, and has legally protested.

60.1 A boat may
a) protest another boat, but not for an alleged breach of a rule of Part 2 unless she was involved in or saw the incident; or
b) request redress.

{Bold = my emphasis}

(And the first thing that happens in a protest meeting is the discovery of validity. If the protest is found to be invalid, nothing further happens and there are no facts found)

#40 coyotepup

coyotepup

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 285 posts
  • Location:Michigan

Posted 05 June 2012 - 10:42 AM





... ...
So is that all one has to do to justify ferreting oround in the chart table for a minute or two looking for the flag? Just checking to see if there is damage before displaying the flag. (A bent pulpit - from a T bone between 2 yachts going the same way - the protesting yacht is in real danger of being disqualified as well for not taking avoiding action, RRS14.B)

IT DOES NOT WORK THAT WAY!


I've got a great idea... early in the morning of a regatta, steal all your competitors protest flags. Then just ram the fuck out of 'em. Bring down their rig, hell sink 'em. It is against the rules, but it won't matter if they can't fly their protest flag in less than 2.55 seconds

FB- Doug

How do you feel about having to give way to starboard tack boats when you are on port tack? Yell loud enough & they will get out of your way?


If they can't protest you, it doesn't matter does it?

You've made it clear that you genuinely believe that the rule about protest flags trumps the basic right-of-way rules.

you can't have it both ways.

FB- Doug


Bullshit! That is YOUR fabrication.

On the other hand, you have made it abundantly clear that you are prepared to cheat, & steal.


Let me ask you this.

Boat A and Boat B approach the leeward mark. A thinks she has rights because she is on starboard and B is on port, but B has established overlap. A does not give room. B yells for room, does not get it, is forced to scramble inside of the mark doing a 360 turn all the while hauling down her kite (so as to be able to do the turn) and avoid hitting two other boats also approaching the mark (not to mention avoid hitting the mark itself). A has committed a very protestable offense, but it is at least 90 seconds before B can fly her protest flag due to avoiding traffic. In what fucking world should that protest be invalidated for not flying the protest flag immediately?

#41 Beau.Vrolyk

Beau.Vrolyk

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,269 posts
  • Location:San Francisco & Santa Cruz
  • Interests:Sailing on any and everything that floats. Skiing when the rainfall turns semi-solid and white.

Posted 05 June 2012 - 11:11 AM

Coyote,

Have a look at the Rule on this:

61.1 (a) A boat intending to protest shall inform the other boat at the first reasonable opportunity. When her protest concerns an incident in the racing area that she is involved in or sees, she shall hail ‘Protest’ and conspicuously display a red flag at the first reasonable opportunity for each.


Every PC I've ever seen considers exactly the sorts of factors you're describing when trying to determine the "first reasonable opportunity". The rule does seem to require that folks set about "informing" and "displaying" right away and not be wandering around hunting for the flag or trying to remember what to hail.

BV

#42 coyotepup

coyotepup

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 285 posts
  • Location:Michigan

Posted 05 June 2012 - 12:19 PM

Coyote,

Have a look at the Rule on this:

61.1 (a) A boat intending to protest shall inform the other boat at the first reasonable opportunity. When her protest concerns an incident in the racing area that she is involved in or sees, she shall hail 'Protest' and conspicuously display a red flag at the first reasonable opportunity for each.


Every PC I've ever seen considers exactly the sorts of factors you're describing when trying to determine the "first reasonable opportunity". The rule does seem to require that folks set about "informing" and "displaying" right away and not be wandering around hunting for the flag or trying to remember what to hail.

BV

I guess then either you've been lucky or the PCs I've seen have been fools.....to me, the OP's narrative describes a reasonable opportunity. Throwing out a protest because you consider "within a minute" to be outside the realm of a reasonable opportunity is a huge misapplication of the rule IMO. The guy was starting a race for crying out loud. I've heard of PCs throwing out a protest because the skipper of the T-boned boat looked down to make a 10-second assessment of the damage before flying the flag. That's the sort of thing that is making me go WTF about this stuff.

I would agree that going down below to hunt down a lost flag and then not flying it until the protested boat has sailed away is a good reason for the rule. But I would MUCH rather err on the side of hearing a protest that was a little too slow to be flown, than the side of making a technicality out of not flying it soon enough and throwing out protests based on that alone.

#43 walterbshaffer

walterbshaffer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,014 posts
  • Location:San Diego, California USA
  • Interests:Formerly Member No. 9720

Posted 05 June 2012 - 02:27 PM




Well I just got home from the protest and the jury through it out because I didn't raise the flag in a reasonable period! Bloody hell! I told them I had the flag up within a minute and they latched onto that.


Way too long. you really need to have a red Flag in the cockpit if you are going to race. We go over and over and over this pretty much every 6 mos.


To the point were I think that ISAF "Sailing Instructions" template should include a note underscoring that. Why? Because there's always someone new to racing or to protests that does not understand this is how the rules are today.


I'd like to see a flag req'd only when the other boat is not within hailing distance or refuses verbally to acknowledge/respond to a protest.

Because when there's a smash up or foul aren't both boats usually right next to each other either yelling or proclaiming loudly "What the...??!!" "Foul!"

Not necessarily. If you've ever been bounced into another boat because you were on the inside of a 5 deep pinwheel and the outside boat didn't give room, you know that protesting the right boat isn't often clear until someone pops a flag.

Look its not hard to mount a Code B on your backstay, roll it up with a piece of outward facing electrical tape and leave a toggle on it. That way it deploys in 3 seconds AT THE MOST...

On the other hand not flying a flag within 3 seconds because you are occupied avoiding those 5 other boats should not mean the RRS don't apply; not saying the flag has no place - just that not having it out quickly enough should not invalidate a protest or be an excuse of the rules.

#44 Dog Watch

Dog Watch

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,282 posts

Posted 05 June 2012 - 02:41 PM

In post #17 of this thread, OP gave it away.

Yeah, thanks for the help. It was on Port Philip. We did find our little red flag and put it up and I called "Protest", paperwork was lodged within time limit.


I noticed this when it was posted, but was travelling and so could not respond.

Worded like that, I would be VERY suspicious as a protest chairman. "You mean you couldn't find it? You mean you hailed once you found it?" "Well done for getting the paperwork in, but equally important is the flag. Where was it?"

Let's not jump at the throats of the committee here. Remember, in these threads, you only get one side of the story.

DW

P.S. And no, the protest committee cannot 'take matters into their hands and protest the boat' based on information they learned in an invalid hearing.

Move along...nothing more to see here!




#45 Beau.Vrolyk

Beau.Vrolyk

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,269 posts
  • Location:San Francisco & Santa Cruz
  • Interests:Sailing on any and everything that floats. Skiing when the rainfall turns semi-solid and white.

Posted 05 June 2012 - 04:02 PM


Coyote,

Have a look at the Rule on this:

61.1 (a) A boat intending to protest shall inform the other boat at the first reasonable opportunity. When her protest concerns an incident in the racing area that she is involved in or sees, she shall hail 'Protest' and conspicuously display a red flag at the first reasonable opportunity for each.


Every PC I've ever seen considers exactly the sorts of factors you're describing when trying to determine the "first reasonable opportunity". The rule does seem to require that folks set about "informing" and "displaying" right away and not be wandering around hunting for the flag or trying to remember what to hail.

BV

I guess then either you've been lucky or the PCs I've seen have been fools.....to me, the OP's narrative describes a reasonable opportunity. Throwing out a protest because you consider "within a minute" to be outside the realm of a reasonable opportunity is a huge misapplication of the rule IMO. The guy was starting a race for crying out loud. I've heard of PCs throwing out a protest because the skipper of the T-boned boat looked down to make a 10-second assessment of the damage before flying the flag. That's the sort of thing that is making me go WTF about this stuff.

I would agree that going down below to hunt down a lost flag and then not flying it until the protested boat has sailed away is a good reason for the rule. But I would MUCH rather err on the side of hearing a protest that was a little too slow to be flown, than the side of making a technicality out of not flying it soon enough and throwing out protests based on that alone.


As always, it is up to the Protestor to present what they were doing in a way that the PC can understand that it really was the first "reasonable opportunity." It is not the PC's job to coach or help the Protestor to phrase what happened in a way that is to his advantage. Again, as always, the Protestor has every right to appeal if they feel that the PC has acted improperly. It's easy to get a very one-sided view of what actually happened in the "room". My comments are solely based on hearings where I have been in the room and listened to exactly what was said.

Failing to present how the hail was made and the flag was flown in a way that allows the PC to understand that there was something going on that delayed things, is a very very common error in my experience. To put this into perspective, start counting "one-thousand and one", "one-thousand and two", etc... while you pull a dollar bill out of your pocket. How long did it take? It's that time frame that the PC is probably thinking of when they think about how long is the first "reasonable opportunity". Just as it would take you a lot longer to pull out that dollar bill if you'd just been in a car crash, it can reasonably take a while to get the red flag out after a collision. But keep in mind that everyone in the crew would have to be involved in assessing the damage and dealing with the collision. The rule doesn't say that the Skipper has to fly the flag, nor that the Skipper has to assess the damage, it says the "boat" which includes all her crew each making their best effort to both deal with the damage and execute the hail and flag. Thus, one probably has to convince the PC that the entire crew was required to either sail the boat safely, deal with injuries or assess the damage. That's a tall order if there are six or eight people in the crew. Someone should be able to hail and hoist the flag. But, to repeat, the typical failing in my experience is that the Protestor simply doesn't make a cases for why what they did was actually the first "reasonable opportunity".

BV

#46 coyotepup

coyotepup

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 285 posts
  • Location:Michigan

Posted 05 June 2012 - 05:15 PM



Coyote,

Have a look at the Rule on this:

61.1 (a) A boat intending to protest shall inform the other boat at the first reasonable opportunity. When her protest concerns an incident in the racing area that she is involved in or sees, she shall hail 'Protest' and conspicuously display a red flag at the first reasonable opportunity for each.


Every PC I've ever seen considers exactly the sorts of factors you're describing when trying to determine the "first reasonable opportunity". The rule does seem to require that folks set about "informing" and "displaying" right away and not be wandering around hunting for the flag or trying to remember what to hail.

BV

I guess then either you've been lucky or the PCs I've seen have been fools.....to me, the OP's narrative describes a reasonable opportunity. Throwing out a protest because you consider "within a minute" to be outside the realm of a reasonable opportunity is a huge misapplication of the rule IMO. The guy was starting a race for crying out loud. I've heard of PCs throwing out a protest because the skipper of the T-boned boat looked down to make a 10-second assessment of the damage before flying the flag. That's the sort of thing that is making me go WTF about this stuff.

I would agree that going down below to hunt down a lost flag and then not flying it until the protested boat has sailed away is a good reason for the rule. But I would MUCH rather err on the side of hearing a protest that was a little too slow to be flown, than the side of making a technicality out of not flying it soon enough and throwing out protests based on that alone.


As always, it is up to the Protestor to present what they were doing in a way that the PC can understand that it really was the first "reasonable opportunity." It is not the PC's job to coach or help the Protestor to phrase what happened in a way that is to his advantage. Again, as always, the Protestor has every right to appeal if they feel that the PC has acted improperly. It's easy to get a very one-sided view of what actually happened in the "room". My comments are solely based on hearings where I have been in the room and listened to exactly what was said.

Failing to present how the hail was made and the flag was flown in a way that allows the PC to understand that there was something going on that delayed things, is a very very common error in my experience. To put this into perspective, start counting "one-thousand and one", "one-thousand and two", etc... while you pull a dollar bill out of your pocket. How long did it take? It's that time frame that the PC is probably thinking of when they think about how long is the first "reasonable opportunity". Just as it would take you a lot longer to pull out that dollar bill if you'd just been in a car crash, it can reasonably take a while to get the red flag out after a collision. But keep in mind that everyone in the crew would have to be involved in assessing the damage and dealing with the collision. The rule doesn't say that the Skipper has to fly the flag, nor that the Skipper has to assess the damage, it says the "boat" which includes all her crew each making their best effort to both deal with the damage and execute the hail and flag. Thus, one probably has to convince the PC that the entire crew was required to either sail the boat safely, deal with injuries or assess the damage. That's a tall order if there are six or eight people in the crew. Someone should be able to hail and hoist the flag. But, to repeat, the typical failing in my experience is that the Protestor simply doesn't make a cases for why what they did was actually the first "reasonable opportunity".

BV

I get what you're saying about the burden of proof and what the protester needs to do to meet the requirment. But I think the root problem is deeper. The problem I have, or one of them, is the idea of throwing out a perfectly good protest because the PC came to the conclusion that the flag wasn't flown in a reasonable time. Which is a subjective measure to begin with. And of course, I don't disagree that the burden of proof is on the protester. But if it's established that the protestee's action was grounds for a valid protest and then it's thrown out because the PC got nitpicky and said "well, it didn't take the entire crew to sail the boat safely, one of them could have flown the flag," what kind of message does that send? Or - even worse - if the PC doesn't even get to the grounds for the protest and throws it out as invalid based on the flag before they even get there.

That just encourages people to protest first and ask questions later. Do I think that guy might've fouled me? Wave the flag first. I don't think an itchy trigger finger on the protest flag is a good idea. Like I said, I would far, far rather allow a worthwhile protest even with a questionable idea of a reasonable time, than throw one out on that one technicality. If I'm really and truly fouled, especially to the point of damage on my boat, my protest shouldn't hinge on whether I could've spared one of the crew to fly the flag instead of sail the boat.

#47 Somebody Else

Somebody Else

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,946 posts
  • Location:Southern California
  • Interests:Shootings, just like HotRod!

Posted 05 June 2012 - 05:22 PM

Yep. Using "conspicuously display a red flag at the first reasonable opportunity" as a reason to disallow a protest is just plain wrong and should be changed in the RRS. "Reasonable" is too subjective and protest committees are over-eager to decide much too stringently on this.

Look, set an exact time limit if you want, but "reasonable" simply doesn't cut it. Over and over and over again, reasonable protests are disallowed because of this horrible loophole.

Personally, I vote for "one minute" -- time enough to pull someone off the weather rail. Two minutes would be fine, also.

All too frequently the sequence of events goes something like this:
Stbd: "Starboard."
Stbd: "STARBOARD!"
Stbd: <reasonably ducks to avoid contact>
Stbd: "Hey! Do your turns!"
<ten seconds pass>
Stbd: "Come on! I had to avoid you; do your turns!"
<ten more seconds pass>
Port: "I'm not going to."
<it's now been 30 seconds since the incident>
Stbd: "Protest" <flag up>

Protest Committee: "30 seconds? Too long. Disallowed."

I know racers who play the part of Port in the above scenario -- egregious foul, then ignore friendly hails -- because they know the committee will disallow. If I were making the rules, Port would get tossed from the regatta on rules 2 and 69. It turns a friendly club race into an arena of animosity. Look, if it's the Worlds, go ahead and play hardball, but if it's beercans, don't pull that crap, OK?

#48 Ajax

Ajax

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,682 posts
  • Location:Edgewater, MD
  • Interests:It's Obvious!

Posted 05 June 2012 - 05:57 PM

Wow. As a newb skipper, this thread is a real eye-opener.

My protest flag is mounted on the backstay, but rolled up in a manner that would take too long to deploy by the standards illustrated in this thread.

#49 ojfd

ojfd

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 598 posts

Posted 05 June 2012 - 06:23 PM

All too frequently the sequence of events goes something like this:
Stbd: "Starboard."
Stbd: "STARBOARD!"
Stbd: <reasonably ducks to avoid contact>
Stbd: "Hey! Do your turns!"
<ten seconds pass>
Stbd: "Come on! I had to avoid you; do your turns!"
<ten more seconds pass>
Port: "I'm not going to."
<it's now been 30 seconds since the incident>
Stbd: "Protest" <flag up>

Protest Committee: "30 seconds? Too long. Disallowed."


What about this one?

Stbd: "Starboard."
Stbd: "STARBOARD!"
Stbd: <reasonably ducks to avoid contact>
Stbd: "Protest!" <flag up>

You won't have any problems with it in the protest room.

#50 bottlerocket

bottlerocket

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 239 posts
  • Location:Texas

Posted 05 June 2012 - 06:42 PM

What Somebody Else said is exactly how many people approach the problem. Remember in friendly racing you can always take your flag down. Why not do what you are supposed to on every violation - yell protest, pull the flag? Then sort out whether the other guy will do his turns or you will file the protest. Simple.

That being said, if a guy breaks a rule that results in damage to another boat and does nothing about it, he deserves whatever shit can be launched in his direction.

#51 The Main Man

The Main Man

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 531 posts
  • Location:Blighty

Posted 05 June 2012 - 06:50 PM


All too frequently the sequence of events goes something like this:
Stbd: "Starboard."
Stbd: "STARBOARD!"
Stbd: <reasonably ducks to avoid contact>
Stbd: "Hey! Do your turns!"
<ten seconds pass>
Stbd: "Come on! I had to avoid you; do your turns!"
<ten more seconds pass>
Port: "I'm not going to."
<it's now been 30 seconds since the incident>
Stbd: "Protest" <flag up>

Protest Committee: "30 seconds? Too long. Disallowed."


What about this one?

Stbd: "Starboard."
Stbd: "STARBOARD!"
Stbd: <reasonably ducks to avoid contact>
Stbd: "Protest!" <flag up>

You won't have any problems with it in the protest room.


Agreed. That's the way to do it. You can then make a request for turns but shout protest first!

#52 Somebody Else

Somebody Else

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,946 posts
  • Location:Southern California
  • Interests:Shootings, just like HotRod!

Posted 05 June 2012 - 07:35 PM

Agreed.

It's just that there is a stigma attached to the formality of yelling "Protest!" and pulling the flag.

No one wants to be known in their fleet as that guy who always yells, "Protest!" like some butt-hurt little girl. So there is a tendency to solve the issue in a friendly, informal manner before escalation.

This, obviously, is the wrong attitude to take.

#53 coyotepup

coyotepup

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 285 posts
  • Location:Michigan

Posted 05 June 2012 - 07:59 PM

Agreed.

It's just that there is a stigma attached to the formality of yelling "Protest!" and pulling the flag.

No one wants to be known in their fleet as that guy who always yells, "Protest!" like some butt-hurt little girl. So there is a tendency to solve the issue in a friendly, informal manner before escalation.

This, obviously, is the wrong attitude to take.

Yep. Pull the protest flag too often and you start to get a reputation. But protesting at the slightest provocation is what the rule encourages.

#54 Innocent Bystander

Innocent Bystander

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,399 posts
  • Location:Lower Southern MD

Posted 05 June 2012 - 08:15 PM


Agreed.

It's just that there is a stigma attached to the formality of yelling "Protest!" and pulling the flag.

No one wants to be known in their fleet as that guy who always yells, "Protest!" like some butt-hurt little girl. So there is a tendency to solve the issue in a friendly, informal manner before escalation.

This, obviously, is the wrong attitude to take.

Yep. Pull the protest flag too often and you start to get a reputation. But protesting at the slightest provocation is what the rule encourages.


That stigma combined with the "I know I fouled you but you must force me to do my turns or otherwise take my medicine" is a perfect example of how Corinthian spirit has left the racing scene. You do the right thing because it's the right thing, not because some whiner caught you. Next we'll see folks suing to get their name on a trophy for the Mac race- Oh that's right. We've already seen that shit.

#55 willsailforfood

willsailforfood

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 700 posts
  • Location:The Raincoast
  • Interests:Friends Don't Let Friends Sail PHRF

Posted 05 June 2012 - 08:30 PM

If the protest committee believed that the flag was not flown fast enough (Not a valid protest) but through the facts discovered a breach of the rules took place there is nothing stopping the committee from opening a hearing into the matter themselves which can still result in one or both parties being disq.

In saying that talking to friends down that way indicates that there is quite a prevalence for barging on the port phillip scene at the moment.

-TB


If this is the case then it seems the RC would be looking for a case like this to make an example out of someone. Not saying it's their job, but from all the information we have here it seems the leeward boat was deeply in the wrong here and failed to keep clear. If I was on the committee my objective, beyond enforcing the rules as they were intended, would be to make sure that yachts that violate those rules are aware that their actions have consequences. Giving idiots like this a pass on a technicality is not what the rules authors intended.

Furthermore, if the offending yacht believed they were over early (read: not started) then they had NO RIGHTS until they had properly returned to the line and started. Placing themselves in a position where ANY yachts who have properly started, regardless of tack, have to take evasive action to avoid them (or can't avoid them as seems to be the case) places them even deeper in the hole.

As the owner of an 19,000# yacht I can tell you that if I ever T bone someone (regardless of fault) I'm going to be on the bow looking at the fittings very carefully to insure my $60k spruce rig isn't going to go over the side after insuring everyone is alright, long before I worry about a flag. I expect the RC and PC to understand that this should be a skipper's priority.

--
http://bonne-amie.blogspot.com

#56 willsailforfood

willsailforfood

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 700 posts
  • Location:The Raincoast
  • Interests:Friends Don't Let Friends Sail PHRF

Posted 05 June 2012 - 08:33 PM

That stigma combined with the "I know I fouled you but you must force me to do my turns or otherwise take my medicine" is a perfect example of how Corinthian spirit has left the racing scene. You do the right thing because it's the right thing, not because some whiner caught you. Next we'll see folks suing to get their name on a trophy for the Mac race- Oh that's right. We've already seen that shit.


+1

#57 I'moutahere

I'moutahere

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,810 posts

Posted 05 June 2012 - 08:38 PM


If the protest committee believed that the flag was not flown fast enough (Not a valid protest) but through the facts discovered a breach of the rules took place there is nothing stopping the committee from opening a hearing into the matter themselves which can still result in one or both parties being disq.

In saying that talking to friends down that way indicates that there is quite a prevalence for barging on the port phillip scene at the moment.

-TB


If this is the case then it seems the RC would be looking for a case like this to make an example out of someone. Not saying it's their job, but from all the information we have here it seems the leeward boat was deeply in the wrong here and failed to keep clear. If I was on the committee my objective, beyond enforcing the rules as they were intended, would be to make sure that yachts that violate those rules are aware that their actions have consequences. Giving idiots like this a pass on a technicality is not what the rules authors intended.

Furthermore, if the offending yacht believed they were over early (read: not started) then they had NO RIGHTS until they had properly returned to the line and started. Placing themselves in a position where ANY yachts who have properly started, regardless of tack, have to take evasive action to avoid them (or can't avoid them as seems to be the case) places them even deeper in the hole.

As the owner of an 19,000# yacht I can tell you that if I ever T bone someone (regardless of fault) I'm going to be on the bow looking at the fittings very carefully to insure my $60k spruce rig isn't going to go over the side after insuring everyone is alright, long before I worry about a flag. I expect the RC and PC to understand that this should be a skipper's priority.

--
http://bonne-amie.blogspot.com


Just about everything you wrote is wrong. Best you do not go racing - ever.

#58 Brass

Brass

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,534 posts

Posted 05 June 2012 - 11:42 PM


(3) if the incident results in damage or injury that is obvious to the boats involved and one of them intends to protest, the requirements of this rule do not apply to her, but she shall attempt to inform the other boat within the time
limit of rule 61.3.

Ed is correct here.

If there was damage, and, in the ensuing mayhem the priority was to evaluate the situation to determine if additional action was required to safeguard the vessel and it's crew than you are in good standing when it comes time to appeal.

I would make a strong point of this with your RC and the members of the original protest committee. As has been pointed out previously, there are some lazy and poor intentioned committees out there that think that disallowing protests is going to somehow discourage them. This is not their job.

In this instance where two boats came together (a T-bone no less) I see this as an irresponsible decision (based on the information provided).

I would appeal in an instant confident that a more experienced protest committee would see things a bit more clearly.

--
http://bonne-amie.blogspot.com

I totally agree with this. I suggest you emphasise that the one minute was used to check the safety of the crew and evaluate the damage done to your boat and the other boat, once it was apparent that all crew were safe and there was no immediate danger of either boat sinking then the flag was deployed. It would be an irresponsible protest committee that disallowed such a time delay.

I also agree with comments above about the stupidity that displaying the flag has to take precedence over all other activities on a boat that is usually involved in a great deal of activity - usually starting or rounding marks. However I guess that it does take away any doubt that a protest has been made, too often people yell and scream (without knowing the rules) and then do nothing after an incident.

So is that all one has to do to justify ferreting oround in the chart table for a minute or two looking for the flag? Just checking to see if there is damage before displaying the flag. IT DOES NOT WORK THAT WAY!


Johnny is right, at least for US sailors.

There are three US Sailing Appeals that lay out the ground very completely.

Appeal 61

"First reasonable opportunity" means as soon as practicable, not as soon as convenient.

Appeal 82

A boat is not obligated to give priority to displaying a protest flag at the cost of the crew failing to act to keep the boat under control or delaying a spinnaker set.

BUT

Appeal 67 (this one specifically covers time spent in assessing damage)

Failure to display a protest flag during a period of time when some member of the crew is not otherwise occupied is a failure to display it "at the first reasonable opportunity." If a protest flag is not displayed at the first reasonable opportunity, the protest is invalid and the hearing must be closed.


#59 Brass

Brass

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,534 posts

Posted 05 June 2012 - 11:46 PM

Let me ask you this.

Boat A and Boat B approach the leeward mark. A thinks she has rights because she is on starboard and B is on port, but B has established overlap. A does not give room. B yells for room, does not get it, is forced to scramble inside of the mark doing a 360 turn all the while hauling down her kite (so as to be able to do the turn) and avoid hitting two other boats also approaching the mark (not to mention avoid hitting the mark itself). A has committed a very protestable offense, but it is at least 90 seconds before B can fly her protest flag due to avoiding traffic. In what fucking world should that protest be invalidated for not flying the protest flag immediately?

Certainly not in the USA.

See the folloowing US Sailing Appeals

Appeal 82

A boat is not obligated to give priority to displaying a protest flag at the cost of the crew failing to act to keep the boat under control or delaying a spinnaker set.

BUT

Appeal 67 (this one specifically covers time spent in assessing damage)

Failure to display a protest flag during a period of time when some member of the crew is not otherwise occupied is a failure to display it "at the first reasonable opportunity." If a protest flag is not displayed at the first reasonable opportunity, the protest is invalid and the hearing must be closed.


#60 The Ghost....

The Ghost....

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 252 posts
  • Location:Melbourne, OZ

Posted 06 June 2012 - 12:34 AM

In post #17 of this thread, OP gave it away.


Yeah, thanks for the help. It was on Port Philip. We did find our little red flag and put it up and I called "Protest", paperwork was lodged within time limit.


I noticed this when it was posted, but was travelling and so could not respond.

Worded like that, I would be VERY suspicious as a protest chairman. "You mean you couldn't find it? You mean you hailed once you found it?" "Well done for getting the paperwork in, but equally important is the flag. Where was it?"

Let's not jump at the throats of the committee here. Remember, in these threads, you only get one side of the story.

DW

P.S. And no, the protest committee cannot 'take matters into their hands and protest the boat' based on information they learned in an invalid hearing.

Move along...nothing more to see here!


OK, court things is not really my scene, I am not the worlds greatest debater and struggle getting words out when under pressure. After talking with the other crew on board the memory of the indecent comes back and would be worded differently.
This is more like the event:
After the other boat became untangled from us, we had dragged them backwards in water for some distance, I called PROTEST, I was standing at the companion way and dived inside nearly bowling over one of the crew in the process, my boat is a pilot house so it is easy and quick to get inside, just two simple steps. I went into the saloon found the flag immediately, it sits on a shelf about 1.5m past the campanionway, I came out waving the flag and tied it to the backstay. This is not a story made up in hindsight, this is what had been confirmed by other crew members as to what actually happened. I was not on the helm at the time of the crash so was able to move freely and rapidly. I am going to do replay to work out the exact timing.

More to the point of this anomaly in the interpretations is, The rule states "reasonable time" I have searched many of the ISAF case studies and can find no reference to an actual, must be displayed in XXXX seconds.
Where is this precedence coming from and how is this precedence being communicated to the sailing community? I have been racing for nearly 15 years and this is my first protest. How would others know any thing other than "reasonable time"?

I have contacted a lawyer about sending the letter of demand but before I do that I will call him and ask him to pay up.

G

#61 Brass

Brass

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,534 posts

Posted 06 June 2012 - 12:46 AM




Coyote,

Have a look at the Rule on this:

61.1 (a) A boat intending to protest shall inform the other boat at the first reasonable opportunity. When her protest concerns an incident in the racing area that she is involved in or sees, she shall hail 'Protest' and conspicuously display a red flag at the first reasonable opportunity for each.


It might have been better if you had quoted the rest of the rule here

... However,

(1) if the other boat is beyond hailing distance, the protesting boat need not hail but she shall inform the other boat at the first reasonable opportunity;

(2) if the hull length of the protesting boat is less than 6 metres, she need not display a red flag;

(3) if the incident results in damage or injury that is obvious to the boats involved and one of them intends to protest, the requirements of this rule do not apply to her, but she shall attempt to inform the other boat within the time limit of rule 61.3.

Every PC I've ever seen considers exactly the sorts of factors you're describing when trying to determine the "first reasonable opportunity". The rule does seem to require that folks set about "informing" and "displaying" right away and not be wandering around hunting for the flag or trying to remember what to hail.

I guess then either you've been lucky or the PCs I've seen have been fools.....to me, the OP's narrative describes a reasonable opportunity. Throwing out a protest because you consider "within a minute" to be outside the realm of a reasonable opportunity is a huge misapplication of the rule IMO. The guy was starting a race for crying out loud. I've heard of PCs throwing out a protest because the skipper of the T-boned boat looked down to make a 10-second assessment of the damage before flying the flag. That's the sort of thing that is making me go WTF about this stuff.

I would agree that going down below to hunt down a lost flag and then not flying it until the protested boat has sailed away is a good reason for the rule. But I would MUCH rather err on the side of hearing a protest that was a little too slow to be flown, than the side of making a technicality out of not flying it soon enough and throwing out protests based on that alone.


As always, it is up to the Protestor to present what they were doing in a way that the PC can understand that it really was the first "reasonable opportunity." It is not the PC's job to coach or help the Protestor to phrase what happened in a way that is to his advantage.

But I would suggest that it is the protest committee's job to apply all the relevant rules, whetehr the parties call up those rules or not. In particular rules 61.1(a) (1), (2), and (3) 'switch off' flag and/or hail requirements in certain circumstances. They are, arguably, somewhat arcane exceptions that parties may not realise apply, or need to be applied. But the protestee had better have her ducks in a row about the residual 'informing the protestee' requirements.

Again, as always, the Protestor has every right to appeal if they feel that the PC has acted improperly. It's easy to get a very one-sided view of what actually happened in the "room". My comments are solely based on hearings where I have been in the room and listened to exactly what was said.

I get what you're saying about the burden of proof

There is no 'onus' or burden of proof. The parties and the protestee both have to make their best efforts to arrive at the truth. But the parties have to bring along all the evidence, and the protest committee should apply all the relevant rules.

and what the protester needs to do to meet the requirment.

But I think the root problem is deeper. The problem I have, or one of them, is the idea of throwing out a perfectly good protest because the PC came to the conclusion that the flag wasn't flown in a reasonable time.

That's the way the game is designed to be played, until you come to a certain threshold, when flag and hail switch off: that is when there is injury or damage that is obvious to the boats involved. In that case, under rule 61.1(a)(3), the informing the protestee is greatly watered down and becomes only that the boat intending to protest shall attempt to inform the other boat within the time limit of rule 61.3.

Which is a subjective measure to begin with.

'Reasonable' when it occurs in the rules is NOT a subjective measure. it is an objective measure. It means 'reasonable in the judgement of a hypothetical 'average reasonable sailor'.

And of course, I don't disagree that the burden of proof is on the protester. But if it's established that the protestee's action was grounds for a valid protest

You are jumbling up the 'merit' of a protest with the 'validity' of a protest. They are different. The rules require that if a protest is not valid, the protest committee closes the hearing and does not consider its merit.

and then it's thrown out because the PC got nitpicky and said "well, it didn't take the entire crew to sail the boat safely, one of them could have flown the flag," what kind of message does that send?

It says, as made clear by US Sailing Appeal 67, that if you think that another boat has broken a rule on the water, and you think that boat should be penalised, you must hail 'Protest' and fly a red flag at the first reasonable opportunity, unless some exception in the rules applies.

Or - even worse - if the PC doesn't even get to the grounds for the protest and throws it out as invalid based on the flag before they even get there.

That just encourages people to protest first and ask questions later.

Yes, that's exactly what the rules encourage.

Do I think that guy might've fouled me? Wave the flag first. I don't think an itchy trigger finger on the protest flag is a good idea. Like I said, I would far, far rather allow a worthwhile protest even with a questionable idea of a reasonable time, than throw one out on that one technicality.

The rules foresee that most incidents on the water should be resolved by a boat taking an on-water penalty, and never reach a protest hearing.

With the adoption of the standard on-water penalties under rule 44, which must be taken 'as soon after the incident as possible' it is critically important that a protesting boat informs the protestee 'as soon as reasonably possible' that she thinks there has been an incident, otherwise it will be impossible for the protestee to take her penalty according to rule 44.


If I'm really and truly fouled, especially to the point of damage on my boat, my protest shouldn't hinge on whether I could've spared one of the crew to fly the flag instead of sail the boat.

If there's damage to your boat, that's real, and not just in your mind, that is 'obvious to the boats involved' then flag and hail are off.

t.



#62 I'moutahere

I'moutahere

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,810 posts

Posted 06 June 2012 - 12:49 AM


In post #17 of this thread, OP gave it away.


Yeah, thanks for the help. It was on Port Philip. We did find our little red flag and put it up and I called "Protest", paperwork was lodged within time limit.


I noticed this when it was posted, but was travelling and so could not respond.

Worded like that, I would be VERY suspicious as a protest chairman. "You mean you couldn't find it? You mean you hailed once you found it?" "Well done for getting the paperwork in, but equally important is the flag. Where was it?"

Let's not jump at the throats of the committee here. Remember, in these threads, you only get one side of the story.

DW

P.S. And no, the protest committee cannot 'take matters into their hands and protest the boat' based on information they learned in an invalid hearing.

Move along...nothing more to see here!


OK, court things is not really my scene, I am not the worlds greatest debater and struggle getting words out when under pressure. After talking with the other crew on board the memory of the indecent comes back and would be worded differently.
This is more like the event:
After the other boat became untangled from us, we had dragged them backwards in water for some distance, I called PROTEST, I was standing at the companion way and dived inside nearly bowling over one of the crew in the process, my boat is a pilot house so it is easy and quick to get inside, just two simple steps. I went into the saloon found the flag immediately, it sits on a shelf about 1.5m past the campanionway, I came out waving the flag and tied it to the backstay. This is not a story made up in hindsight, this is what had been confirmed by other crew members as to what actually happened. I was not on the helm at the time of the crash so was able to move freely and rapidly. I am going to do replay to work out the exact timing.

More to the point of this anomaly in the interpretations is, The rule states "reasonable time" I have searched many of the ISAF case studies and can find no reference to an actual, must be displayed in XXXX seconds.
Where is this precedence coming from and how is this precedence being communicated to the sailing community? I have been racing for nearly 15 years and this is my first protest. How would others know any thing other than "reasonable time"?

I have contacted a lawyer about sending the letter of demand but before I do that I will call him and ask him to pay up.

G

You have to convince the jury that you displayed the flag at the first reasonable opportunity. You obviously did not. Having to go below to find the flag is indicative that it was not displayed at the first reasonable opportunity.

Additionally, if the protest had been valid, the other boat would most likely (from what you described) be disqualified, but as you have stated, there is damage, so you would most likely be disqualified under RRS 14.b.... Having a "heavy" cruising type of boat does not excuse you from 14.b.....


EDIT..... Interesting that there must have been considerable damage that you would spend a lot of money talking to a lawyer, yet you still managed to finish a "beer can" race.

#63 The Ghost....

The Ghost....

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 252 posts
  • Location:Melbourne, OZ

Posted 06 June 2012 - 01:08 AM

There was no chance of avoiding the collision on my behalf and truth be known on his as well, except for either of us to take action much prior to colliding, as stated the wind was quite light. I timed my start pretty good, was probably about 5m off the line when the started happened, it was a stern chaser so there was only three boats on the line and no start signal was given other than dropping a number. I used a timer to time my start.Prior to colliding I called him a couple of times to stay up which he failed to do, he was trying to slow up so he didn't go OCS and then at the last moment, after the race started, he turned in front of me, I believe because he thought we hadn't started, no other explanation for his actions. When he turned I had to asses what the outcome would be if I held my course he may cross, if we turned we may be more likely to collide, so we held our course, he failed to cross our bow, and of course we collided.

I had done hundreds of starts and there is always such argy bargy, but never have I seen some one turn in such a manner.
Don't forget the other boat is a 22 footer and I am a 40. Being a qualified coxswain, I am well of aware of the collregs.

G.

#64 I'moutahere

I'moutahere

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,810 posts

Posted 06 June 2012 - 01:17 AM

There was no chance of avoiding the collision on my behalf and truth be known on his as well, except for either of us to take action much prior to colliding, as stated the wind was quite light. I timed my start pretty good, was probably about 5m off the line when the started happened, it was a stern chaser so there was only three boats on the line and no start signal was given other than dropping a number. I used a timer to time my start.Prior to colliding I called him a couple of times to stay up which he failed to do, he was trying to slow up so he didn't go OCS and then at the last moment, after the race started, he turned in front of me, I believe because he thought we hadn't started, no other explanation for his actions. When he turned I had to asses what the outcome would be if I held my course he may cross, if we turned we may be more likely to collide, so we held our course, he failed to cross our bow, and of course we collided.

I had done hundreds of starts and there is always such argy bargy, but never have I seen some one turn in such a manner.
Don't forget the other boat is a 22 footer and I am a 40. Being a qualified coxswain, I am well of aware of the collregs.

G.

So I gather that he was clear ahead and you established an overlap to leeward and it sounds like you made no attempt to give him room to keep clear or to avoid a collision.

Now it seems that RRS 12 & 15 are relevent.

#65 green03

green03

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 105 posts

Posted 06 June 2012 - 01:26 AM

Why is the flag an issue ?

Either the exception for damage obvious to both applies, or it doesn't.

Damage seems to have been considerable enough that lawyers are considered. Assume that means it's obvious to both boats. (Can't imagine the 22ft didn't have any damage as described). Check.

Then, by the rule quoted, attempt to communicate to other party. Called Protest, and flew flag with some delay. Check.

Anything else missing here?

The intent of the exception seems to be to disallow technicalities from being used to evaluate the merits in cases where real damage occurred. That's different from "business as usual" rule violation, where exoneration might be the most serious concern to the boat protested. As written, the purpose of this exemption seems to be to make sure the PCs are able to establish facts in these more serious cases.

#66 BalticBandit

BalticBandit

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,728 posts

Posted 06 June 2012 - 01:29 AM


There was no chance of avoiding the collision on my behalf and truth be known on his as well, except for either of us to take action much prior to colliding, as stated the wind was quite light. I timed my start pretty good, was probably about 5m off the line when the started happened, it was a stern chaser so there was only three boats on the line and no start signal was given other than dropping a number. I used a timer to time my start.Prior to colliding I called him a couple of times to stay up which he failed to do, he was trying to slow up so he didn't go OCS and then at the last moment, after the race started, he turned in front of me, I believe because he thought we hadn't started, no other explanation for his actions. When he turned I had to asses what the outcome would be if I held my course he may cross, if we turned we may be more likely to collide, so we held our course, he failed to cross our bow, and of course we collided.

I had done hundreds of starts and there is always such argy bargy, but never have I seen some one turn in such a manner.
Don't forget the other boat is a 22 footer and I am a 40. Being a qualified coxswain, I am well of aware of the collregs.

G.

So I gather that he was clear ahead and you established an overlap to leeward and it sounds like you made no attempt to give him room to keep clear or to avoid a collision.

Now it seems that RRS 12 & 15 are relevent.


No the overlap gets established by Windward turning. That means that L has no requirement to "Give Room" to keep clear. Since overlap was established for a good time by testimony, W must stay clear.

#67 I'moutahere

I'moutahere

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,810 posts

Posted 06 June 2012 - 01:30 AM

Why is the flag an issue ?

Either the exception for damage obvious to both applies, or it doesn't.

Damage seems to have been considerable enough that lawyers are considered. Assume that means it's obvious to both boats. (Can't imagine the 22ft didn't have any damage as described). Check.

Then, by the rule quoted, attempt to communicate to other party. Called Protest, and flew flag with some delay. Check.

Anything else missing here?

The intent of the exception seems to be to disallow technicalities from being used to evaluate the merits in cases where real damage occurred. That's different from "business as usual" rule violation, where exoneration might be the most serious concern to the boat protested. As written, the purpose of this exemption seems to be to make sure the PCs are able to establish facts in these more serious cases.


But not enough to prevent either boat from finishing a beer can race...... odd?

#68 Brass

Brass

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,534 posts

Posted 06 June 2012 - 01:40 AM

Yep. Using "conspicuously display a red flag at the first reasonable opportunity" as a reason to disallow a protest is just plain wrong and should be changed in the RRS. "Reasonable" is too subjective and protest committees are over-eager to decide much too stringently on this.

Look, set an exact time limit if you want, but "reasonable" simply doesn't cut it. Over and over and over again, reasonable protests are disallowed because of this horrible loophole.

Personally, I vote for "one minute" -- time enough to pull someone off the weather rail. Two minutes would be fine, also.


1 minute at 5kts and you're 150m away from where the incident occurred.

Even if the protestee can see your flag being displayed at that distance, how is she to know that it relates to some incident 40 seconds ago, and not to some other incident that may have occurred in that time.

ASAP means ASAP, and in the absence of some good reason why, that should be immediately.

#69 Innocent Bystander

Innocent Bystander

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,399 posts
  • Location:Lower Southern MD

Posted 06 June 2012 - 01:47 AM

Yep. Using "conspicuously display a red flag at the first reasonable opportunity" as a reason to disallow a protest is just plain wrong and should be changed in the RRS. "Reasonable" is too subjective and protest committees are over-eager to decide much too stringently on this.

Look, set an exact time limit if you want, but "reasonable" simply doesn't cut it. Over and over and over again, reasonable protests are disallowed because of this horrible loophole.

Personally, I vote for "one minute" -- time enough to pull someone off the weather rail. Two minutes would be fine, also.


1 minute at 5kts and you're 150m away from where the incident occurred.

Even if the protestee can see your flag being displayed at that distance, how is she to know that it relates to some incident 40 seconds ago, and not to some other incident that may have occurred in that time.

ASAP means ASAP, and in the absence of some good reason why, that should be immediately.



Because without a little red flag a windward boat that turns down on a leeward and causes any contact at all cannot be expected to know they violated basic RoW rules.

Kill all the lawyers. Bring back the honest competitors,

#70 I'moutahere

I'moutahere

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,810 posts

Posted 06 June 2012 - 02:00 AM


Yep. Using "conspicuously display a red flag at the first reasonable opportunity" as a reason to disallow a protest is just plain wrong and should be changed in the RRS. "Reasonable" is too subjective and protest committees are over-eager to decide much too stringently on this.

Look, set an exact time limit if you want, but "reasonable" simply doesn't cut it. Over and over and over again, reasonable protests are disallowed because of this horrible loophole.

Personally, I vote for "one minute" -- time enough to pull someone off the weather rail. Two minutes would be fine, also.


1 minute at 5kts and you're 150m away from where the incident occurred.

Even if the protestee can see your flag being displayed at that distance, how is she to know that it relates to some incident 40 seconds ago, and not to some other incident that may have occurred in that time.

ASAP means ASAP, and in the absence of some good reason why, that should be immediately.



Because without a little red flag a windward boat that turns down on a leeward and causes any contact at all cannot be expected to know they violated basic RoW rules.

Kill all the lawyers. Bring back the honest competitors,


Quite right. And anyone in a 22' yacht should know to get out of the way of a 40' yacht that comes in at speed from clear astern.

Might IS right after all.

#71 green03

green03

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 105 posts

Posted 06 June 2012 - 02:04 AM



ASAP means ASAP, and in the absence of some good reason why, that should be immediately.



Because without a little red flag a windward boat that turns down on a leeward and causes any contact at all cannot be expected to know they violated basic RoW rules.

Kill all the lawyers. Bring back the honest competitors,


Why are we discussing the timing of the flag in this context? Is it relevant - to this case?

What level of damage, or injury, should be required to trigger the exemption?

Death? Loss or limb? Broken mast? Hole below the waterline?

#72 Brass

Brass

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,534 posts

Posted 06 June 2012 - 02:40 AM


ASAP means ASAP, and in the absence of some good reason why, that should be immediately.


Because without a little red flag a windward boat that turns down on a leeward and causes any contact at all cannot be expected to know they violated basic RoW rules.

Kill all the lawyers. Bring back the honest competitors,


Why are we discussing the timing of the flag in this context? Is it relevant - to this case?

What level of damage, or injury, should be required to trigger the exemption?

Death? Loss or limb? Broken mast? Hole below the waterline?


I wasn't discussiong the timing of the flag 'in this context'. I was discussing the issue generally, in the context of a suggestion that the rules should expressly allow one minute or more.

The Ghost hasn't said whether, in his or her opinion there was injury or damage obvious to the boats involved: you and others have, quite reasonably, assumed that that is the case, so flag and hail are off, but attempt to inform the other boat within the time
limit of rule 61.3' is ON.

The requirement is that the injury or damage should be 'obvious'. Obvious is not serious. Damage can be serious but not obvious or obvious but not serious, or both serious and obvious.

#73 Brass

Brass

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,534 posts

Posted 06 June 2012 - 03:01 AM

After the other boat became untangled from us, we had dragged them backwards in water for some distance, I called PROTEST, I was standing at the companion way and dived inside nearly bowling over one of the crew in the process, my boat is a pilot house so it is easy and quick to get inside, just two simple steps. I went into the saloon found the flag immediately, it sits on a shelf about 1.5m past the campanionway, I came out waving the flag and tied it to the backstay. This is not a story made up in hindsight, this is what had been confirmed by other crew members as to what actually happened. I was not on the helm at the time of the crash so was able to move freely and rapidly. I am going to do replay to work out the exact timing.

More to the point of this anomaly in the interpretations is, The rule states "reasonable time" I have searched many of the ISAF case studies and can find no reference to an actual, must be displayed in XXXX seconds.
Where is this precedence coming from and how is this precedence being communicated to the sailing community? I have been racing for nearly 15 years and this is my first protest. How would others know any thing other than "reasonable time"?


If you were in pommieland you would be definitely out of luck.

RYA Appeal 1999/1

Rule 61.1(a), Protest Requirements: Informing the Protestee



A protest flag must be kept close at hand. A boat that waits to see whether another boat will take a penalty before displaying a protest flag has not acted at the first reasonable opportunity. A protest committee need not investigate the promptness of the display of a protest flag when no question of delay arises in the written protest, and when the protestee, when asked, makes no objection. When a boat that is already displaying a protest flag wishes to protest again, only a hail is required.



QUESTION 1



When the rules require a boat to display a protest flag in order for a protest to be valid, should the protest committee expect a competitor to have the protest flag ready to use, or is it reasonable in a larger boat to keep it below or in a locker, and fetch it when needed? If not, how many seconds does a boat have before the first reasonable opportunity may be said to have passed?



ANSWER 1



A protest committee should expect a competitor to have a protest flag close at hand. Where it is kept is not important, but if its location delays its display significantly, as it is likely to do if kept below, and there was some other more quickly accessible place where it could have been kept, then it will not have been displayed at the first reasonable opportunity. No particular time for displaying the protest flag can be specified. The longer the time between the incident and the display of the protest flag, the more closely the protest committee should examine the circumstances to see if the first reasonable opportunity had clearly passed.



QUESTION 2



Has a protestor acted at the first reasonable opportunity when: the protestor has hailed immediately, and has then waited to see whether the other boat takes a twoturns penalty before displaying a protest flag?



ANSWER 2



No.



QUESTION 3



Should a protest committee investigate the promptness of the hail and (when applicable) the flag in all cases, or only when the protestee makes an objection? ANSWER 3 The purpose of the flag and hail is to do as much as is practical afloat to make the protestee aware of a potential protest. If the protest form claims that the flag and hail were prompt, and when the protestee does not, when asked, dispute this, the objective of the rule has been achieved, and there is no need to investigate further. When the protest form is ambiguous or silent, or when the protestee objects on this point, the protest committee must investigate.



QUESTION 4



What should a protestor do when he wishes to protest, but is already displaying his own protest flag in respect of a previous incident?



ANSWER 4

It will be sufficient to hail, a second flag is not required.



#74 The Ghost....

The Ghost....

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 252 posts
  • Location:Melbourne, OZ

Posted 06 June 2012 - 04:02 AM


There was no chance of avoiding the collision on my behalf and truth be known on his as well, except for either of us to take action much prior to colliding, as stated the wind was quite light. I timed my start pretty good, was probably about 5m off the line when the started happened, it was a stern chaser so there was only three boats on the line and no start signal was given other than dropping a number. I used a timer to time my start.Prior to colliding I called him a couple of times to stay up which he failed to do, he was trying to slow up so he didn't go OCS and then at the last moment, after the race started, he turned in front of me, I believe because he thought we hadn't started, no other explanation for his actions. When he turned I had to asses what the outcome would be if I held my course he may cross, if we turned we may be more likely to collide, so we held our course, he failed to cross our bow, and of course we collided.

I had done hundreds of starts and there is always such argy bargy, but never have I seen some one turn in such a manner.
Don't forget the other boat is a 22 footer and I am a 40. Being a qualified coxswain, I am well of aware of the collregs.

G.

So I gather that he was clear ahead and you established an overlap to leeward and it sounds like you made no attempt to give him room to keep clear or to avoid a collision.

Now it seems that RRS 12 & 15 are relevent.



JS,
I will put it another way, we are travelling at 2-3 knots(Very light breeze) at the time which the race starts he is just clear of my bow and about 1m to windward, I call him for a second time to stay up. I turn back to do something else, but a seconds later I look back and he is heading across our bow. At this time there is an overlap. My helmsman asks for directions and I say hold our course, thinking if he is lucky he might just sneak through, if we turned to port it would have been a collision. I called him again and he responded that his helm was over (attempting to turn to starboard) he was going so slow that his helm had little effect. By then the only thing that would have avoided a collision is divine intervention, and I don't believe in that shit either. This all happened in a few seconds, like 3-5, after the race even the race starter said to me, "Why the hell did he turn straight in front of you after the race started".

I appreciate the banter here because it seals my conviction and allows me to get my facts straight because it is clear in my head but from an outsiders point it may not be as clear.

G.

#75 I'moutahere

I'moutahere

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,810 posts

Posted 06 June 2012 - 04:13 AM



There was no chance of avoiding the collision on my behalf and truth be known on his as well, except for either of us to take action much prior to colliding, as stated the wind was quite light. I timed my start pretty good, was probably about 5m off the line when the started happened, it was a stern chaser so there was only three boats on the line and no start signal was given other than dropping a number. I used a timer to time my start.Prior to colliding I called him a couple of times to stay up which he failed to do, he was trying to slow up so he didn't go OCS and then at the last moment, after the race started, he turned in front of me, I believe because he thought we hadn't started, no other explanation for his actions. When he turned I had to asses what the outcome would be if I held my course he may cross, if we turned we may be more likely to collide, so we held our course, he failed to cross our bow, and of course we collided.

I had done hundreds of starts and there is always such argy bargy, but never have I seen some one turn in such a manner.
Don't forget the other boat is a 22 footer and I am a 40. Being a qualified coxswain, I am well of aware of the collregs.

G.

So I gather that he was clear ahead and you established an overlap to leeward and it sounds like you made no attempt to give him room to keep clear or to avoid a collision.

Now it seems that RRS 12 & 15 are relevent.



JS,
I will put it another way, we are travelling at 2-3 knots(Very light breeze) at the time which the race starts he is just clear of my bow and about 1m to windward, I call him for a second time to stay up. I turn back to do something else, but a seconds later I look back and he is heading across our bow. At this time there is an overlap. My helmsman asks for directions and I say hold our course, thinking if he is lucky he might just sneak through, if we turned to port it would have been a collision. I called him again and he responded that his helm was over (attempting to turn to starboard) he was going so slow that his helm had little effect. By then the only thing that would have avoided a collision is divine intervention, and I don't believe in that shit either. This all happened in a few seconds, like 3-5, after the race even the race starter said to me, "Why the hell did he turn straight in front of you after the race started".

I appreciate the banter here because it seals my conviction and allows me to get my facts straight because it is clear in my head but from an outsiders point it may not be as clear.

G.

Problem with "trial by SA" is we usually only get one side of the story.

#76 Ballast Technician

Ballast Technician

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,157 posts

Posted 06 June 2012 - 04:45 AM

I think this issue has been pretty much resolved from a rules perspective:
  • Assuming the scenario as described by the OP (although there are some inconsistencies and contradictions in his account) and If the damage was not obvious, then the flag was too late and there is no valid protest.
  • On the other hand, if the damage was obvious and the OP did attempt to inform the other boat within the time limit of rule 61.3, then he might have grounds for an appeal.
End of story, at least for the protest/race result.

However, it appears that the OP is in fact less interested in the race result and more concerned about who pays for the repairs:

I think I will also send a letter of demand to the other boat owner.


I have contacted a lawyer about sending the letter of demand but before I do that I will call him and ask him to pay up.


Important to note that this is a separate matter and not necessarily affected by the result of the protest.

#77 The Ghost....

The Ghost....

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 252 posts
  • Location:Melbourne, OZ

Posted 06 June 2012 - 05:01 AM

[/quote]
Problem with "trial by SA" is we usually only get one side of the story.
[/quote]

In this case its all you need because his story will be all crap. All he will say is that he cannot believe I did not turn to avoid the tee bone.

#78 willsailforfood

willsailforfood

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 700 posts
  • Location:The Raincoast
  • Interests:Friends Don't Let Friends Sail PHRF

Posted 06 June 2012 - 05:15 AM

Just about everything you wrote is wrong. Best you do not go racing - ever.


Funny, I sailed almost 100 days on the race course last season, did two distance events, the Melges PCC's, two graded Match Racing events, and countless others (placing respectably among the top boats on each).

I think there's a real possibility you're not terribly well informed on the matter.

#79 I'moutahere

I'moutahere

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,810 posts

Posted 06 June 2012 - 05:19 AM


Just about everything you wrote is wrong. Best you do not go racing - ever.


Funny, I sailed almost 100 days on the race course last season, did two distance events, the Melges PCC's, two graded Match Racing events, and countless others (placing respectably among the top boats on each).

I think there's a real possibility you're not terribly well informed on the matter.


I don't care how many days you sailed. You are still wrong in just about everything you wrote. No spelling mistakes though.

I don't count the days I've sailed, but over 55 years I suppose it adds up.

#80 willsailforfood

willsailforfood

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 700 posts
  • Location:The Raincoast
  • Interests:Friends Don't Let Friends Sail PHRF

Posted 06 June 2012 - 05:21 AM


There was no chance of avoiding the collision on my behalf and truth be known on his as well, except for either of us to take action much prior to colliding, as stated the wind was quite light. I timed my start pretty good, was probably about 5m off the line when the started happened, it was a stern chaser so there was only three boats on the line and no start signal was given other than dropping a number. I used a timer to time my start.Prior to colliding I called him a couple of times to stay up which he failed to do, he was trying to slow up so he didn't go OCS and then at the last moment, after the race started, he turned in front of me, I believe because he thought we hadn't started, no other explanation for his actions. When he turned I had to asses what the outcome would be if I held my course he may cross, if we turned we may be more likely to collide, so we held our course, he failed to cross our bow, and of course we collided.

I had done hundreds of starts and there is always such argy bargy, but never have I seen some one turn in such a manner.
Don't forget the other boat is a 22 footer and I am a 40. Being a qualified coxswain, I am well of aware of the collregs.

G.

So I gather that he was clear ahead and you established an overlap to leeward and it sounds like you made no attempt to give him room to keep clear or to avoid a collision.

Now it seems that RRS 12 & 15 are relevent.


You assume he wasn't over early as has been mentioned earlier.

#81 willsailforfood

willsailforfood

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 700 posts
  • Location:The Raincoast
  • Interests:Friends Don't Let Friends Sail PHRF

Posted 06 June 2012 - 05:26 AM



Just about everything you wrote is wrong. Best you do not go racing - ever.


Funny, I sailed almost 100 days on the race course last season, did two distance events, the Melges PCC's, two graded Match Racing events, and countless others (placing respectably among the top boats on each).

I think there's a real possibility you're not terribly well informed on the matter.


I don't care how many days you sailed. You are still wrong in just about everything you wrote. No spelling mistakes though.

I don't count the days I've sailed, but over 55 years I suppose it adds up.


I know a lot of people who've sailed for decades and can't find their way around a race course to save their life.

Show me where in the rules a boat who has not started has any rights over a boat who has properly started on any leg of the course.

#82 I'moutahere

I'moutahere

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,810 posts

Posted 06 June 2012 - 05:28 AM



There was no chance of avoiding the collision on my behalf and truth be known on his as well, except for either of us to take action much prior to colliding, as stated the wind was quite light. I timed my start pretty good, was probably about 5m off the line when the started happened, it was a stern chaser so there was only three boats on the line and no start signal was given other than dropping a number. I used a timer to time my start.Prior to colliding I called him a couple of times to stay up which he failed to do, he was trying to slow up so he didn't go OCS and then at the last moment, after the race started, he turned in front of me, I believe because he thought we hadn't started, no other explanation for his actions. When he turned I had to asses what the outcome would be if I held my course he may cross, if we turned we may be more likely to collide, so we held our course, he failed to cross our bow, and of course we collided.

I had done hundreds of starts and there is always such argy bargy, but never have I seen some one turn in such a manner.
Don't forget the other boat is a 22 footer and I am a 40. Being a qualified coxswain, I am well of aware of the collregs.

G.

So I gather that he was clear ahead and you established an overlap to leeward and it sounds like you made no attempt to give him room to keep clear or to avoid a collision.

Now it seems that RRS 12 & 15 are relevent.


You assume he wasn't over early as has been mentioned earlier.


You were the only one who mentioned anybody being over early..

Maybe you should read this carefully.....


If this is the case then it seems the RC would be looking for a case like this to make an example out of someone. Not saying it's their job, but from all the information we have here it seems the leeward boat was deeply in the wrong here and failed to keep clear. If I was on the committee my objective, beyond enforcing the rules as they were intended, would be to make sure that yachts that violate those rules are aware that their actions have consequences. Giving idiots like this a pass on a technicality is not what the rules authors intended.

Furthermore, if the offending yacht believed they were over early (read: not started) then they had NO RIGHTS until they had properly returned to the line and started. Placing themselves in a position where ANY yachts who have properly started, regardless of tack, have to take evasive action to avoid them (or can't avoid them as seems to be the case) places them even deeper in the hole.

As the owner of an 19,000# yacht I can tell you that if I ever T bone someone (regardless of fault) I'm going to be on the bow looking at the fittings very carefully to insure my $60k spruce rig isn't going to go over the side after insuring everyone is alright, long before I worry about a flag. I expect the RC and PC to understand that this should be a skipper's priority.



#83 Bill E Goat

Bill E Goat

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,562 posts
  • Location:Sydney

Posted 06 June 2012 - 05:28 AM

Why not state the flag must be displayed within 30 seconds or before reaching 3 boatlengths separation whichever is sooner
Ie quickly and visibly

#84 I'moutahere

I'moutahere

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,810 posts

Posted 06 June 2012 - 05:35 AM




Just about everything you wrote is wrong. Best you do not go racing - ever.


Funny, I sailed almost 100 days on the race course last season, did two distance events, the Melges PCC's, two graded Match Racing events, and countless others (placing respectably among the top boats on each).

I think there's a real possibility you're not terribly well informed on the matter.


I don't care how many days you sailed. You are still wrong in just about everything you wrote. No spelling mistakes though.

I don't count the days I've sailed, but over 55 years I suppose it adds up.


I know a lot of people who've sailed for decades and can't find their way around a race course to save their life.

Show me where in the rules a boat who has not started has any rights over a boat who has properly started on any leg of the course.


"Show me where in the rules a boat who has not started has any rights over a boat who has properly started on any leg of the course." Where the fuck did that come from?

Wherever you got that from, you have just demonstrated your lack of knowledge of the rules. A boat is racing from the PREP SIGNAL.

Attached File  racing.PNG   23.65K   7 downloads

#85 willsailforfood

willsailforfood

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 700 posts
  • Location:The Raincoast
  • Interests:Friends Don't Let Friends Sail PHRF

Posted 06 June 2012 - 05:46 AM

Wherever you got that from, you have just demonstrated your lack of knowledge of the rules. A boat is racing from the PREP SIGNAL.


Look saint, let's not get into a measuring contest over the wording here. The intent of my comment was to say "properly started" so I'll give it to you, your unit is bigger. But you should acknowledge that if the other boat had indeed been over early they were obligated to keep clear of the other competitors who had properly started and were not "over early."

To address your earlier comment, Ghost mentioned that his assumption was he was returning to the line in post 63. I've had my say on the matter and if I'm wrong so be it. I've got better things to do than get bent out of shape arguing and flinging vulgarities at you all night. You have the floor, let the profanity flow.

#86 I'moutahere

I'moutahere

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,810 posts

Posted 06 June 2012 - 05:59 AM


Wherever you got that from, you have just demonstrated your lack of knowledge of the rules. A boat is racing from the PREP SIGNAL.


Look saint, let's not get into a measuring contest over the wording here. The intent of my comment was to say "properly started" so I'll give it to you, your dick is bigger. But you should acknowledge that if the other boat had indeed been over early they were obligated to keep clear of the other competitors who had properly started and were not "over early."

To address your earlier comment, Ghost mentioned that his assumption was he was returning to the line in post 63.


WTF is your nonsense all about?

"To address your earlier comment, Ghost mentioned that his assumption was he was returning to the line in post 63."

Nowhere in this thread does the OP suggest that the other boat was on the course side of the line at their start time, or returning.

You wrote that.

Both boats are racing from the Prep signal - from 4 minutes before their start. The Rules apply from the prep signal. There was no mention of a recall, so there is no indication that the other boat knew if they over or not.

You might have sailed 100 days last year but you would be advised (in everyon else's best interests) to read the rule book.

#87 willsailforfood

willsailforfood

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 700 posts
  • Location:The Raincoast
  • Interests:Friends Don't Let Friends Sail PHRF

Posted 06 June 2012 - 06:09 AM

Nowhere in this thread does the OP suggest that the other boat was on the course side of the line at their start time, or returning.

You wrote that.


Actually Ghost wrote,

"Prior to colliding I called him a couple of times to stay up which he failed to do, he was trying to slow up so he didn't go OCS and then at the last moment, after the race started, he turned in front of me, I believe because he thought we hadn't started, no other explanation for his actions. When he turned I had to asses what the outcome would be if I held my course he may cross, if we turned we may be more likely to collide, so we held our course, he failed to cross our bow, and of course we collided."

I've read the rulebook. You latched on to one unclear statement I made and used it to emasculate yourself and frankly I have better things to do than argue if a boat that's OCS has to keep clear or not. The next time I'm OCS you can count on me continuing to keep clear of yachts who have properly started, but you win, see it your way.

Good night.

#88 I'moutahere

I'moutahere

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,810 posts

Posted 06 June 2012 - 06:18 AM


Nowhere in this thread does the OP suggest that the other boat was on the course side of the line at their start time, or returning.

You wrote that.


Actually Ghost wrote,

"Prior to colliding I called him a couple of times to stay up which he failed to do, he was trying to slow up so he didn't go OCS and then at the last moment, after the race started, he turned in front of me, I believe because he thought we hadn't started, no other explanation for his actions. When he turned I had to asses what the outcome would be if I held my course he may cross, if we turned we may be more likely to collide, so we held our course, he failed to cross our bow, and of course we collided."

I've read the rulebook. You latched on to one unclear statement I made and used it to emasculate yourself and frankly I have better things to do than argue if a boat that's OCS has to keep clear or not. The next time I'm OCS you can count on me continuing to keep clear of yachts who have properly started, but you win, see it your way.

Good night.


WTF are you on about? Nobody was OCS!

#89 Dog Watch

Dog Watch

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,282 posts

Posted 06 June 2012 - 06:19 AM

Ghost,

It isn't a matter of stating a time. In fact, doing so will lead to more problems.

The key word is 'reasonable'. The precedent which has been set is that the flag is 'readily at hand', in consideration of the fact that the burden to use the flag if you want to protest is set by the rules before you leave the dock

That means you have no excuse for a delay caused by the flag not being readily at hand.

Any other delay is left to the PC to judge. This may seem unsatisfactorily subjective. However, consider why it might be deliberately like that.... In one situation 5 seconds may be all that is needed to deploy a flag. In another, a full minute might be what is reasonably needed.

PCs should be reasonable...in allowing a reasonable delay.

Being seamanlike and fair and prepared, showing appreciation for the other boat's right to know exactly which incident you are protesting and exonerate is all part of being reasonable.

So timing isn't the clincher. It's whether the flag was readily at hand, AND it's deployment was without unreasonable delay.

Ghost, I'm afraid, if you had to fetch your flag from below, it suggests that you had not prepared your boat for the race, and all the rules which could / did crop up. The delay then is likely, by most PCs to be considered unreasonable.

Hope that helps.

Dw

#90 willsailforfood

willsailforfood

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 700 posts
  • Location:The Raincoast
  • Interests:Friends Don't Let Friends Sail PHRF

Posted 06 June 2012 - 06:23 AM

WTF are you on about? Nobody was OCS!


I was commenting purely on his earlier assumption.

Are you off your meds or something? Did I kick your dog or what? What's up with your incessant use of profanity when addressing me? Can't you discuss this like a gentleman or are you really that angry of a person?

Have a close look at Dog Watch's post above... that's how civilized people communicate. I appreciate his commentary on the subject and because he actually wrote it in a civilized tone I actually care to read it and give it some credence. Angrier posts.. well, you decide.

#91 I'moutahere

I'moutahere

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,810 posts

Posted 06 June 2012 - 06:31 AM


WTF are you on about? Nobody was OCS!


I was commenting purely on his earlier assumption.


Are you off your meds or something? Did I kick your dog or what? What's up with your incessant use of profanity when addressing me? Can't you discuss this like a gentleman or are you really that angry of a person?


You mean YOUR assumption. As much as you try to portray it - the OP DID NOT WRITE ANYBODY WAS OCS, or returning back behind the line, or any other way you try and twist the words.

Go back to my post 82 (I think) and read ALL your inaccuracies.

This "bluster" and feigned offense you are carrying on with is just an attempt to coverup your lack of knowledge of the rules - and you have demonstrated that clearly.

#92 willsailforfood

willsailforfood

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 700 posts
  • Location:The Raincoast
  • Interests:Friends Don't Let Friends Sail PHRF

Posted 06 June 2012 - 06:46 AM

This "bluster" and feigned offense you are carrying on with is just an attempt to coverup your lack of knowledge of the rules - and you have demonstrated that clearly.

Rather than use the bully pulpit approach you may want to consider taking a more instructional tone in your future rantings. You have a privilaged position and a great deal of knowledge to contribute to the conversation but your tone is self defeating.

When you take this holier than thou tone and use your knowledge to push people around all you manage is to prove yourself a bully and make people want to stop racing. We do this for enjoyment, not belittlement from people like you who, considering their position, might want to take a more amiable tone with competitors.

I have no argument with your logic or your rules knowledge and I am perfectly willing to accept that I made a bad assumption. What you did accomplish is I now am now fairly certain that you are not someone I care to hang out with. Maybe that's a good thing in your eyes, but I spend about $50k a year on sailing and I'm no longer doing that racing because of attitudes like yours.In my eyes that's a net loss for the sport.

#93 I'moutahere

I'moutahere

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,810 posts

Posted 06 June 2012 - 06:54 AM

but I spend about $50k a year on sailing and I'm no longer doing that racing because of attitudes like yours.


That I can understand. You are potentally a hazard on the course until you learn the rules.

I think it goes "if you don't do it my way, I'll take my bat & ball home & won't play".

#94 willsailforfood

willsailforfood

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 700 posts
  • Location:The Raincoast
  • Interests:Friends Don't Let Friends Sail PHRF

Posted 06 June 2012 - 07:03 AM


but I spend about $50k a year on sailing and I'm no longer doing that racing because of attitudes like yours.


That I can understand. You are potentally a hazard on the course until you learn the rules.

I think it goes "if you don't do it my way, I'll take my bat & ball home & won't play".


Boy, that's a really unfortunate attitude for the sport. Especially considering your position. I'm sure there are plenty of folks in unnamed cash strapped clubs contemplating their survival who wince at this kind of nonsense. Are you confident in your superiority yet?

#95 I'moutahere

I'moutahere

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,810 posts

Posted 06 June 2012 - 07:19 AM



but I spend about $50k a year on sailing and I'm no longer doing that racing because of attitudes like yours.


That I can understand. You are potentally a hazard on the course until you learn the rules.

I think it goes "if you don't do it my way, I'll take my bat & ball home & won't play".


Boy, that's a really unfortunate attitude for the sport. Especially considering your position. I'm sure there are plenty of folks in unnamed cash strapped clubs contemplating their survival who wince at this kind of nonsense. Are you confident in your superiority yet?


Your attitude & behaviour reminded me of a protest hearing I reluctantly sat on some years ago at a very small club.

A couple of 100 metres after the start in a windy day, a windward boat fell down on a leeward boat (going the same speed). The leeward boat lodged a protest. The leeward boat did not display the flag because they could not find it. Protest invalid. But in an attempt to explain the rules we talked about the situation and how it WOULD have gone if the flag had been used.

The guy in the windward boat got upset because in his view "the rules were wrong and should be changed, and he wasn't going to accept the rule was right and would not race again under that rule" We never saw him again. The other guy got pissed off because his protest wasn't heard and said "I'll not race here again" He didn't.

Just like you, they didn't get their own way so "took their bat and ball and went home" Childish stuff. The sport doesn't need that.

#96 willsailforfood

willsailforfood

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 700 posts
  • Location:The Raincoast
  • Interests:Friends Don't Let Friends Sail PHRF

Posted 06 June 2012 - 07:29 AM

It's actually a very different situation and I really feel sorry for you that you can't see that.

I am not leaving because I don't like the rules and want them changed to my liking. In fact I have already said that I am perfectly willing to accept that I am wrong in this case.

What you fail to comprehend here is that many of us sail because we enjoy it and many people make significant sacrifice to race sailboats as it is a tremendously expensive sport. When confronted with caustic attitudes like yours, especially when the attitude is one of a person who plays a significant role in the officiating of the sport, it seriously diminishes the fun factor and the willingness to shell out countless thousands to be belittled by people like you who use their knowledge as a bludgeon.

Racing sailboats is a choice. We do it or fun and you need to keep this in mind when interacting with competitors. You can use your position to inform and increase peoples enjoyment of the sport through increased understanding of a complex ruleset or you can belittle everyone you encounter for lacking your knowledge of the rules.

The choice is yours.

#97 I'moutahere

I'moutahere

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,810 posts

Posted 06 June 2012 - 07:42 AM

What you fail to comprehend here is that many of us sail because we enjoy it and many people make significant sacrifice to race sailboats as it is a tremendously expensive sport. When confronted with caustic attitudes like yours, especially when the attitude is one of a person who plays a significant role in the officiating of the sport, it seriously diminishes the fun factor and the willingness to shell out countless thousands to be belittled by people like you who use their knowledge as a bludgeon.



I think you have me confused with somebody else.

You made erroneous statements that you have NOW realised were erroneous, but until this post you were not accepting that fact and made disparaging remarks to me - thus.

I think there's a real possibility you're not terribly well informed on the matter.


There are people who make "significant sacrifices" so people like YOU can go racing. Those people making those sacrifices shouldn't be talked down to as you have been doing, and in fact are doing in your last post, but twisting the words to disguise it.

#98 Dog Watch

Dog Watch

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,282 posts

Posted 06 June 2012 - 10:19 AM

Guys, use PM please . You are now off topic!

#99 walterbshaffer

walterbshaffer

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,014 posts
  • Location:San Diego, California USA
  • Interests:Formerly Member No. 9720

Posted 06 June 2012 - 03:14 PM

So far in all this parsing of words and word-smithing one upmanship nobody has explained why a flag should be required to validate a foul after 2 boats collide and people are yelling "PROTEST!!" and "FOUL!!" in each others ears. It's not like flying a flag impacts in any way the facts, the rights of way, burdens or purpose of the RRS.

Instead of flying a flag why not jingle a bell, blow a horn or have the skipper pull his pants down? All are equally impactful.

And please don't say "because the boats involved need to know they are involved in a protest". They know; the flag has just become a cheap escape hatch to avoid culpability.

#100 Dog Watch

Dog Watch

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,282 posts

Posted 06 June 2012 - 03:34 PM

So far in all this parsing of words and word-smithing one upmanship nobody has explained why a flag should be required to validate a foul after 2 boats collide and people are yelling "PROTEST!!" and "FOUL!!" in each others ears. It's not like flying a flag impacts in any way the facts, the rights of way, burdens or purpose of the RRS.

Instead of flying a flag why not jingle a bell, blow a horn or have the skipper pull his pants down? All are equally impactful.

And please don't say "because the boats involved need to know they are involved in a protest". They know; the flag has just become a cheap escape hatch to avoid culpability.


A flag is an alternative to an aural communication.

Sensible I think, since the noise of the kind and waves, sails send rigging can drown out even the most mighty of voices.

The ISAF probably considered jingle bells, horns and monies, but decided on a flag.

That's all.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users