Jump to content

Recommended Posts

 

Is-this-OK-by-RRS-49.jpg

The discussion started when I called the first picture as illegal. It was in a forum thread in Sailing Anarchy called “Best Pic of the year” (Post Number 43). I was advised that it was “fucking obvious to a 9th grader that it wasn’t illegal”.  Welcome to my Room. 

Well I am no Bryan Willis or Dave Perry although I do have ambitions (some would call it pretentions) to eventually reach the dizzy heights of IU & IJ but am currently a mere beginner with only 700 or so umpired races under my belt but I do know a man, well several actually, who have rules knowledge and experience way beyond mine.

I started the research on the rule initially to satisfy myself that, should I ever have a case like this, whether on the water or in the room, that I would not make an incorrect decision. It then became clear that sailors could fall foul of this rule (RRS 49) through not knowing the finer points and it may be beneficial to share the finer details and judges/umpires views.

It has been clear to me for a long time that it is dangerous to assume that, just because someone has been a racer for a long time, their rules knowledge is up to scratch. This was highlighted during a rules forum I was running in my home town – (yeah, you’ve guessed it, Shanghai) when during the ‘Definitions’ session a racer who I have tons of respect for blurted out “Is that what the definition really means?” I just responded with “Read the words” but it did surprise me.

Rule 49 is a rule in the book for safety otherwise it would be permissible to be hanging off all kinds of appendages, even offshore. (some IOR boats even used to have trapezes under the old rules).

So I wrote to the powers that be, US Sailing Appeals committee and World Sailing Rules committee with disappointingly, not even an acknowledgement of receipt.

The sailor in the picture claimed they had dropped the pole in readiness for the gybe and he was acting as a ‘’human pole” (his words). Rule 49 has two words in it that gave me cause for concern in their looseness and ability to be interpreted in different ways, namely “necessary” and “briefly”. I can understand ‘necessary’ being used to apply to situations involving danger and/or the safety of vessel and/or crew and situations which may result in damage.

The second word “briefly” is also open to interpretation and the rule provides no guidance to just what time scale ‘briefly’ actually is. For my own part I thought “acting as a human pole” fell well outside that definition.

I was first pointed in the direction of the US Appeals book :

USA Appeal US72
Rule 49.2, Crew Position; Lifelines
Family Hour vs. Zephyros

A crew member briefly leaning out over a boat’s lifelines to hold a spinnaker guy after the pole has been removed in preparation for rounding a mark does not break rule 49.2.

Facts and Decision of the Protest Committee

When approximately 30 seconds from the leeward mark, Zephyros released the spinnaker guy from the spinnaker pole and a crew member held the guy by hand, leaning out over the lifelines so as to maximize the distance between the hull and the guy until the spinnaker had to be lowered. Lifelines were required by the class rules. The protest committee disqualified Zephyros under rule 49.2 and she appealed.

Decision of the Appeals Committee 

Rule 49.2 allows the torso of a crew member to be outside the lifelines briefly if the crew is performing “a necessary task.” Without a spinnaker pole, a spinnaker is less efficient and more unstable. As a boat prepares to round a leeward mark, removing the pole is one of the first necessary steps. From that time until the spinnaker is lowered, holding the guy by hand is a less effective but nonetheless useful means of controlling the spinnaker, which remains a “necessary task” even without the pole. This interval of time is normally a brief one, since generally there is no advantage in flying a spinnaker without a pole.

In this case, where there were approximately 30 seconds remaining before rounding the mark, the time between releasing the guy and lowering the spinnaker was necessarily shorter than that, and met the requirement of “briefly.”

Zephyros’ appeal is upheld. The protest committee’s decision is reversed, and Zephyros is reinstated in her finishing place.

However when you go to the World Sailing latest Case Book there is a ruling in Case 83 which appears to contradict the US Appeal. Less of the torso outside and only for short periods of time. (a fraction of the 30 seconds in the US Sailing appeal)

The Case Book is available on the technical site of www.sailing.org and with the current lock down, it is certainly something that is worth reading for serious sailors. It states that a crew member placing part of their torso outside the lifelines in conditions where there was 3 second gusts breaks RRS 49

Mmm – contradiction indeed.

So I wrote to a group of Umpires and Judges I have worked with in the past with the photo with my quandary. With such differences, and bearing in mind the fact I could be sitting on a jury, or judging on the water where, if a deliberate breaking of the rules, a judge initiated penalty would be appropriate.

My first point was ‘would the WS ruling over-rule the US Appeal? Or would an appeal be upheld in the USA but in the rest of the world it would be a DSQ if protested? ’

World sailing rules the rules and of course a US Sailing Appeal case has no bearing outside the United States – point one cleared up. The officials I wrote to have between them officiated at multiple America’s Cups, National, Regional & World championships and other major regattas, even the Olympics so a fairly knowledgeable group of guys and a mix of judges and umpires (some are both)

The general consensus was that if the spinnaker take down required the tack of the spinnaker be “briefly” held by placing the torso outside the lifelines to prevent the spinnaker either wrapping the forestay or going under the boat as part of a take-down, then that would be legal.  If however the pole was taken away and the take down didn’t proceed immediately or “a brief time interval later” then that would be worthy of a penalty.

A couple initially thought it may be mid gybe but on a closer look, if it were end for end, where is the pole hanging from the uphaul and it couldn’t be a dip pole as, not only is the pole not attached to the mast, it wouldn’t be able to swing through due to the partially hoisted jib.

In the photograph in question the jib is still on the foredeck and it would normally be hoisted before a spinnaker take down so it is likely that the photograph was not in ‘mid-drop’. There is a crew member at the mast who appears to be pulling on a halyard (presumably hoisting the jib), the crew member clearly with his torso outside the lifelines in what appears to be a settled position and a third crew member aft of the mast who doesn’t appear to be taking any part in the proceedings. So the pole has been taken off early and no immediate attempt to continue with the spinnaker drop.

Would that satisfy the definition of “briefly” or indeed “necessary”? Necessary perhaps but does the pole really need to come off before the jib is raised?

However the time from when the pole came off through the time to hoist the jib and then drop the spinnaker would be hard pushed to be classed as “briefly”. The general consensus of the officials polled was that if the pole came off, was stowed and the drop then continued with the tack of the sail held for that brief or short time there would be no penalty but if the pole came off and was held in the manner of the photograph while other tasks were being performed it would break RSS 49.2

An on the water judge could not penalise the action unless it was seen to be deliberate. A judge would most likely issue a warning post race and then (naturally) be keenly watching that competitor next time round.

Of course, if another competitor saw the action they could raise the flag and protest. The on the water judge could then be called as a witness in any subsequent hearing.

Social-Distancing1-.jpg

I would finish by stating it gives me no pleasure in calling out someone, however the next time it might be a real protest and could put quite a dent in the chance of winning a regatta. 

In the second picture there is no doubt, not for the boat closest to the camera but the one in the background is certainly worth a flag unless they are going for a really early drop. 

Open to discussion as always. See ya on the water.

SS

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Editor said:
I would finish by stating it gives me no pleasure in calling out someone, however the next time it might be a real protest and could put quite a dent in the chance of winning a regatta. 

In the second picture there is no doubt, not for the boat closest to the camera but the one in the background is certainly worth a flag unless they are going for a really early drop. 

Open to discussion as always. See ya on the water.

SS

Cheers SS, good discussion.  My comments:

1) For analysis sake, the jib was going up  when that photo was shot and typically takes less than 5 seconds to full hoist, the mark was probably 4 BL from the bow.  The kite would be tripped within about 8 seconds and tucked away in 15.

2) When citing to a case book for an analysis, you should include the full text of the cite.

3) The photo was taken during practice.

4) If it was a race, I would have welcomed a protest for my actions in the picture.  I quite like going to the room and that one would be a very easy protest to win given the language of the rule in my opinion. 

5) No worries brother, that's how people learn (and I wouldn't be leaning nearly so far if (1) this was a race or (2) there was no photog there.  Anyone know who took the photo <_<

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, MR.CLEAN said:

The kite would be tripped within about 8 seconds and tucked away in 15.

Seems a pretty brief scenario to me.

After all, how long is a race? It takes 5 mins to get one started...

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Liquid said:

Seems a pretty brief scenario to me.

After all, how long is a race? It takes 5 mins to get one started...

Mumm 30s targeted around 40 mins per race if i remember correctly.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, MR.CLEAN said:

every boat had them tested by measurer

I think you missed the reference. We all had a good when Scot posted a picture bragging about a win, but the lifelines were so absurdly loose there wasn’t a chance in hell they were legal. It was awhile ago. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Editor said:
 

Is-this-OK-by-RRS-49.jpg

The discussion started when I called the first picture as illegal. It was in a forum thread in Sailing Anarchy called “Best Pic of the year” (Post Number 43). I was advised that it was “fucking obvious to a 9th grader that it wasn’t illegal”.  Welcome to my Room. 

Well I am no Bryan Willis or Dave Perry although I do have ambitions (some would call it pretentions) to eventually reach the dizzy heights of IU & IJ but am currently a mere beginner with only 700 or so umpired races under my belt but I do know a man, well several actually, who have rules knowledge and experience way beyond mine.

I started the research on the rule initially to satisfy myself that, should I ever have a case like this, whether on the water or in the room, that I would not make an incorrect decision. It then became clear that sailors could fall foul of this rule (RRS 49) through not knowing the finer points and it may be beneficial to share the finer details and judges/umpires views.

It has been clear to me for a long time that it is dangerous to assume that, just because someone has been a racer for a long time, their rules knowledge is up to scratch. This was highlighted during a rules forum I was running in my home town – (yeah, you’ve guessed it, Shanghai) when during the ‘Definitions’ session a racer who I have tons of respect for blurted out “Is that what the definition really means?” I just responded with “Read the words” but it did surprise me.

Rule 49 is a rule in the book for safety otherwise it would be permissible to be hanging off all kinds of appendages, even offshore. (some IOR boats even used to have trapezes under the old rules).

So I wrote to the powers that be, US Sailing Appeals committee and World Sailing Rules committee with disappointingly, not even an acknowledgement of receipt.

The sailor in the picture claimed they had dropped the pole in readiness for the gybe and he was acting as a ‘’human pole” (his words). Rule 49 has two words in it that gave me cause for concern in their looseness and ability to be interpreted in different ways, namely “necessary” and “briefly”. I can understand ‘necessary’ being used to apply to situations involving danger and/or the safety of vessel and/or crew and situations which may result in damage.

The second word “briefly” is also open to interpretation and the rule provides no guidance to just what time scale ‘briefly’ actually is. For my own part I thought “acting as a human pole” fell well outside that definition.

I was first pointed in the direction of the US Appeals book :

USA Appeal US72
Rule 49.2, Crew Position; Lifelines
Family Hour vs. Zephyros

A crew member briefly leaning out over a boat’s lifelines to hold a spinnaker guy after the pole has been removed in preparation for rounding a mark does not break rule 49.2.

Facts and Decision of the Protest Committee

When approximately 30 seconds from the leeward mark, Zephyros released the spinnaker guy from the spinnaker pole and a crew member held the guy by hand, leaning out over the lifelines so as to maximize the distance between the hull and the guy until the spinnaker had to be lowered. Lifelines were required by the class rules. The protest committee disqualified Zephyros under rule 49.2 and she appealed.

Decision of the Appeals Committee 

Rule 49.2 allows the torso of a crew member to be outside the lifelines briefly if the crew is performing “a necessary task.” Without a spinnaker pole, a spinnaker is less efficient and more unstable. As a boat prepares to round a leeward mark, removing the pole is one of the first necessary steps. From that time until the spinnaker is lowered, holding the guy by hand is a less effective but nonetheless useful means of controlling the spinnaker, which remains a “necessary task” even without the pole. This interval of time is normally a brief one, since generally there is no advantage in flying a spinnaker without a pole.

In this case, where there were approximately 30 seconds remaining before rounding the mark, the time between releasing the guy and lowering the spinnaker was necessarily shorter than that, and met the requirement of “briefly.”

Zephyros’ appeal is upheld. The protest committee’s decision is reversed, and Zephyros is reinstated in her finishing place.

However when you go to the World Sailing latest Case Book there is a ruling in Case 83 which appears to contradict the US Appeal. Less of the torso outside and only for short periods of time. (a fraction of the 30 seconds in the US Sailing appeal)

The Case Book is available on the technical site of www.sailing.org and with the current lock down, it is certainly something that is worth reading for serious sailors. It states that a crew member placing part of their torso outside the lifelines in conditions where there was 3 second gusts breaks RRS 49

Mmm – contradiction indeed.

So I wrote to a group of Umpires and Judges I have worked with in the past with the photo with my quandary. With such differences, and bearing in mind the fact I could be sitting on a jury, or judging on the water where, if a deliberate breaking of the rules, a judge initiated penalty would be appropriate.

My first point was ‘would the WS ruling over-rule the US Appeal? Or would an appeal be upheld in the USA but in the rest of the world it would be a DSQ if protested? ’

World sailing rules the rules and of course a US Sailing Appeal case has no bearing outside the United States – point one cleared up. The officials I wrote to have between them officiated at multiple America’s Cups, National, Regional & World championships and other major regattas, even the Olympics so a fairly knowledgeable group of guys and a mix of judges and umpires (some are both)

The general consensus was that if the spinnaker take down required the tack of the spinnaker be “briefly” held by placing the torso outside the lifelines to prevent the spinnaker either wrapping the forestay or going under the boat as part of a take-down, then that would be legal.  If however the pole was taken away and the take down didn’t proceed immediately or “a brief time interval later” then that would be worthy of a penalty.

A couple initially thought it may be mid gybe but on a closer look, if it were end for end, where is the pole hanging from the uphaul and it couldn’t be a dip pole as, not only is the pole not attached to the mast, it wouldn’t be able to swing through due to the partially hoisted jib.

In the photograph in question the jib is still on the foredeck and it would normally be hoisted before a spinnaker take down so it is likely that the photograph was not in ‘mid-drop’. There is a crew member at the mast who appears to be pulling on a halyard (presumably hoisting the jib), the crew member clearly with his torso outside the lifelines in what appears to be a settled position and a third crew member aft of the mast who doesn’t appear to be taking any part in the proceedings. So the pole has been taken off early and no immediate attempt to continue with the spinnaker drop.

Would that satisfy the definition of “briefly” or indeed “necessary”? Necessary perhaps but does the pole really need to come off before the jib is raised?

However the time from when the pole came off through the time to hoist the jib and then drop the spinnaker would be hard pushed to be classed as “briefly”. The general consensus of the officials polled was that if the pole came off, was stowed and the drop then continued with the tack of the sail held for that brief or short time there would be no penalty but if the pole came off and was held in the manner of the photograph while other tasks were being performed it would break RSS 49.2

An on the water judge could not penalise the action unless it was seen to be deliberate. A judge would most likely issue a warning post race and then (naturally) be keenly watching that competitor next time round.

Of course, if another competitor saw the action they could raise the flag and protest. The on the water judge could then be called as a witness in any subsequent hearing.

Social-Distancing1-.jpg

I would finish by stating it gives me no pleasure in calling out someone, however the next time it might be a real protest and could put quite a dent in the chance of winning a regatta. 

In the second picture there is no doubt, not for the boat closest to the camera but the one in the background is certainly worth a flag unless they are going for a really early drop. 

Open to discussion as always. See ya on the water.

SS

And that friends is the short version of why sailing is on life support

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

SS, when comparing Case 83 with US appeal 72, you should consider the circumstances of the reason for the crew to be outside the lifelines. In the case, the crew is doing a normal trimming action and therefor, was probably happening all the way down the run. In the appeal and the photo, the crew is clearly acting during a douse, therefore doing a brief and necessary job. 

Please don't confuse different situations by not understanding or paying attention to the the intricacies of that situation. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, toad said:

And that friends is the short version of why sailing is on life support

The rules have evolved for reasons related to very competitive contests and the resulting tactics and strategy that develop from playing from within the rules and with every advantage to be gained by pushing the rules to their limit, just like any other sport (holding, pass interference,  travelling,  hooking, barging, etc)

For the newby basic rules and straight forward contests are essential and rewarding, but as a competitor's skills and experience advance working at the limits of the rules and the nuances of working at the limits of those rules become part of the enjoyment of the contest. Can you not find the level of competition that suits your desires and competitive drive, or lack thereof?

Link to post
Share on other sites

It actually takes a bit of a legal mindset to work through various situations as rules turn on and off but that said complexity is appreciated as you become more experienced, but to the degree the rules become complex and open to multiple interpretation is the degree that people begin to lose interest. I've read the RRS and the casebook multiple times, it ain't easy at times- mostly common sense but people are people and if it gets too hard they switch off because they want to win on the water not in the room.

Link to post
Share on other sites

>> And that friends is the short version of why sailing is on life support.

I was going to say almost the same thing. While such rule are appropriately enforced in competitive classes, Protesting the guy in a Catalina 30 (or some other FKSB) who just decided to try sailboat racing on a Wednesday night  for the first time is hurting the sport.  I've seen this first hand. The number of boats in my one design fleet cratered when a rules nazi was fleet captain. Boats that came in to the fleet didn't stay for more than a season or two.

I don't have a good answer on how to find balance but overzealous rules enforcement isn't the way to grow a fleet. 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/11/2020 at 2:40 PM, toad said:

And that friends is the short version of why sailing is on life support

Racing is on life support because people love to push the rules.

We've all had the A-hole push their bow in at a mark and get away with it because someone just said....fuck it, I'm done. There is always the big fish in the little pond that ruins the fun.

A-Holes ruin everything.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ultimately this is about enjoyment, having fun, sharing pleasures with friends but when it becomes an extension of a law court or a corporate boardroom whats the point? May as well stay in the office and rip up $100 bills while some cunt throws water in your face and someone else recites the RRS chapter and verse....The general observation is that the simpler a sport is the more popular it is. Gear sports like yachting are prone to excessive rules and regs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Gloves are for wire halyards.

Haven't worn a pair in probably nearly 30 years.  Still carry a (mismatched) pair incase I hurt my hand,  & I sail Main, Trimmer and Helm.  worst damage in recent years was caused by a poorly leathered wheel.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/11/2020 at 12:13 PM, MR.CLEAN said:

Cheers SS, good discussion.  My comments:

4) If it was a race, I would have welcomed a protest for my actions in the picture.  I quite like going to the room and that one would be a very easy protest to win given the language of the rule in my opinion. 

 

W'ow, just wow. Those three statements are the dumbest I've read from someone who pretends to know how to race. 

1) "I would have welcomed a protest." No one with any sense or who has ever won anything worth winning would say that.  

2)" I quite like going to the room." Doubling down on #1, basically saying "I'm an idiot and proud of it."

3)" that one would be a very easy protest to win. " Proof again that clean doesn't know what he is talking about. anyone who has been in the room knows that it's 50/50 at best. You cannot predict what a protest committee ( or jury ) will decide. Any racer,  lawyer  or anyone who has been around people  knows that.  

Basic racing rule, stay out of the room because you do not control the outcome and are a fool if you think you do. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, surf nazi said:

 Those three statements are the dumbest I've read

Why is it dumb to enjoy protest hearings?  They're very interesting.  I'd suggest it's really fucking dumb to avoid them, because you never learn how to win them.

I like courtrooms too.  "It's only 50/50 at best" is what lawyers tell their clients, not what they tell each other.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, MR.CLEAN said:

Why is it dumb to enjoy protest hearings?  They're very interesting.  I'd suggest it's really fucking dumb to avoid them, because you never learn how to win them.

I like courtrooms too.  "It's only 50/50 at best" is what lawyers tell their clients, not what they tell each other.

Again, all I can say is wow. Your suggestion that it's dumb to avoid protest hearings is contrary to what every smart sailor knows ( and what the best put in their books). When you involved in the sport as helm or tactician you will be in the room enough to learn how to win them but you also learn to avoid them because you see the crazy outcomes Hey, if you enjoy them, fine. But here's a good take on how the best and wisest feel about them. In the finn world masters last year there were around 270 boats divided into 2 fleets, so 135 boats on the line. Guess how many protests ? 1 . I rest my case.   

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, MR.CLEAN said:

how many in the olympics?

Finn class in Rio, 3 protests (not including redress requests). One DSQ, one invalid, one initially DSQ but reversed on reopening (video evidence changed the facts found).

 

https://www.sailing.org/olympics/rio2016/results/notices/protest-summary.php?view=pro&rgtaid=12379&evntid=31369&order=ASC

Link to post
Share on other sites

As a judge, avoiding the room hurts us as much as the sailors.  We need the work.

One comment / question - if sailors are avoiding the room, like the Finns you cited, are they taking all of their turns on the water, or are they taking the appropriate penalty for their actions?  If the answer is yes, I agree with you and all is good, the sailors are playing by the rules.  If the answer is no, there is still most certainly an issue.  The extent of that can be further debated.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, TJSoCal said:

Finn class in Rio, 3 protests (not including redress requests). One DSQ, one invalid, one initially DSQ but reversed on reopening (video evidence changed the facts found).

 

https://www.sailing.org/olympics/rio2016/results/notices/protest-summary.php?view=pro&rgtaid=12379&evntid=31369&order=ASC

Weird way to differentiate; redress requests use the rules and the protest committee too.  

Go ahead and count the total protests in Rio (or any major Melges/Jboat/TP52/Swan/Invitational/etc regatta) and then tell me how no one should try to gain experience with protests.  

I'll wait.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, surf nazi said:

When you involved in the sport as helm or tactician you will be in the room enough to learn how to win them but you also learn to avoid them because you see the crazy outcomes 

I have rarely seen you contradict yourself in the same sentence.  Is mastery now something that you get from 'being there enough to learn"?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, MR.CLEAN said:

Weird way to differentiate; redress requests use the rules and the protest committee too.  

Go ahead and count the total protests in Rio (or any major Melges/Jboat/TP52/Swan/Invitational/etc regatta) and then tell me how no one should try to gain experience with protests.  

I'll wait.

Well, all the redress requests appeared to be around the fact that the Finn marks were dark orange, the nearby Laser marks were red and some Finn sailors overstood their weather mark thinking they were sailing to the Laser mark. PCs weren't sympathetic, all of the redress requests were denied.

I'd expect that at a high level like that the sailors have a pretty good idea whether they broke a rule or not and can do the risk/reward math on doing turns.

For the record I agree with you both that if you think another boat has broken a rule a protest is not inappropriate and that most racing sailors would benefit from more experience in the protest room. I think you look at an incident on the water differently if you have a better idea how judges would look at it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, TJSoCal said:

Well, all the redress requests appeared to be around the fact that the Finn marks were dark orange, the nearby Laser marks were red and some Finn sailors overstood their weather mark thinking they were sailing to the Laser mark. PCs weren't sympathetic, all of the redress requests were denied.

I'd expect that at a high level like that the sailors have a pretty good idea whether they broke a rule or not and can do the risk/reward math on doing turns.

For the record I agree with you both that if you think another boat has broken a rule a protest is not inappropriate and that most racing sailors would benefit from more experience in the protest room. I think you look at an incident on the water differently if you have a better idea how judges would look at it.

Whatever you'd expect, there are tons of protests at almost all high level events. It's a bit silly to use a Masters regatta like Nazi did above as an indicator of anything wider.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is racing dying because people protest because they expect and hope that the rules to be followed? Or is racing dying because there is a large amount of participants who want to show up, not be held accountable for having any working knowledge of the rules and how it may apply to them, and then they get pissy and say that "competitive sailors are ruining racing!" when they are called on their lack of knowledge?

This opinion isn't taking into account the sea lawyers who do exist and try to use the rules as a weapon to take advantage of newcomers, and are more often than not complete assholes about the whole thing.  Those particular people certainly aren't helping anyone get into, or stay involved, sailing. 

There's a learning curve with not only getting a boat around the course competitively, but also getting informed about the racing rules. In itself it is not a process meant to weed out participants, but many people draw a correlation between the rules being complicated and the lack of participation these days. Well, the rules are in many ways clearer than they used to be, and participation has gone to hell. There were a lot of boats and crews back in the days of "Mast Abeam!".

I don't think Shanghai Sailor needs to be criticized for being curious about a potential rules violation, and trying to figure it out. No racer should be called out for trying to get clarification on a rules situation, regardless of whether they are right or wrong, and especially if they are asking the question. 

Likewise, Clean saying he welcomes going to the room isn't going an admission of being a bully on the water or being a habitual rules violator at all. Those who know the rules better are often very comfortable going to the room because they are less likely to take stupid risks on the water and be forced into going into the room in a bad position. The more knowledgeable sailors are also likely to know when to take the penalty on the water rather than going to the room. It's a gamble. Those who know the rules better are also often (not always) more open to learning something new in the room, even when they thought they had a good read on the situation. 

If more people learned the rules while having the opportunity to race in a OD dinghy or small keelboat fleet, and realized that going to the room is a great opportunity to learn, rather than being so protective about an existing incomplete body of knowledge regarding the rules, there would be much better racing. People generally accept a referee blowing a whistle in every other sport, why should sailors who try to play the game within the framework that is there for everyone to benefit from be criticized for wanting other sailors to play by the rules?

 

  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, if you wait for protest room experience until a big race for regatta are on the line whether you are the protestor or protestee good luck.  Don't like them but it's part of the game and you need to able to present and defend articulately.  Just like in life words matter!

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Captain Jack Sparrow said:

 

  1. Clean saying he welcomes going to the room isn't going an admission of being a bully on the water or being a habitual rules violator at all. 
     
  2. Those who know the rules better are often very comfortable going to the room because they are less likely to take stupid risks on the water and be forced into going into the room in a bad position.
  1. Clean is an attorney and if he went to a law school, he was trained in ACTING. We all know that theatrics are part of the court room antics. (I've been on a few juries and can say, if I was the judge, I would have chastised the attorneys.) Acting is part of being an attorney now days. If the Court Rooms weren't closed, Clean would be working instead of posing like an egomaniac.Being able to present a case in a fashionable manner is #1. It makes you look like you know something that maybe you do not.
     
    • Imagine if we had protest committees made up of 3 judges As overseers to control the attorneys presenting their case,  and 6 or 7 peers, to make the judgement.
       
  2. I know many sailors that know the rules and use them to bully their competition. It is destroying sailboat racing. World and US Sailing are losing control. 

 

 

I think Clean a a bigger stooge than he appears to be.

stooges.jpg.db890e1a2156ba75be1e85981f99f23b.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Meat Wad said:
  1. Clean is an attorney and if he went to a law school, he was trained in ACTING. We all know that theatrics are part of the court room antics. (I've been on a few juries and can say, if I was the judge, I would have chastised the attorneys.) Acting is part of being an attorney now days. If the Court Rooms weren't closed, Clean would be working instead of posing like an egomaniac.Being able to present a case in a fashionable manner is #1. It makes you look like you know something that maybe you do not.
     
    • Imagine if we had protest committees made up of 3 judges As overseers to control the attorneys presenting their case,  and 6 or 7 peers, to make the judgement.
       
  2. I know many sailors that know the rules and use them to bully their competition. It is destroying sailboat racing. World and US Sailing are losing control. 

 

 

I think Clean a a bigger stooge than he appears to be.

stooges.jpg.db890e1a2156ba75be1e85981f99f23b.jpg

On 1) I know that, and don't disagree about the acting bit. And there are certainly plenty of people who if given a chance to get into the protest room will certainly present a scene. I don't know Clean and have never sailed against him so don't have an opinion on what he would or wouldn't do in a protest scenario.

Would it have validated or invalidated his argument about welcoming going to the protest room if somebody other he had said it? I get why hearing that an attorney enjoys going to the protest room may raise some eyebrows or tempers, but he's likely not the only person who has the opinion that he doesn't mind going to the protest room if need be.

2) I agree. My point is that the racing rules aren't killing racing, assholes are.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have at the US Pan Am Trials level, Lightning and Sunfish. Well organized and above board. And we had to DSQ the winner's last race, deneying him a trip. Appealed and DSQ upheld.

On the other hand I once was once on a 3 person PC where a boat was DSQ where we found from others after posting that what we heard was not at all what happened. The other boat didn't show up to 'the room.' He wouldn't let us reopen.

Can happen.      Dave Ellis

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, MR.CLEAN said:

I have rarely seen you contradict yourself in the same sentence.  Is mastery now something that you get from 'being there enough to learn"?

 

Not a contradiction at all.  If you're helm or tactician for a number of years, you will be forced into the room by others. You learn to avoid the room if possible. Sometimes it's not possible. Get it ? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, surf nazi said:

Not a contradiction at all.  If you're helm or tactician for a number of years, you will be forced into the room by others. You learn to avoid the room if possible. Sometimes it's not possible. Get it ? 

In other words, you advise learning, if at all, by osmosis. Got it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, MR.CLEAN said:

Whatever you'd expect, there are tons of protests at almost all high level events. It's a bit silly to use a Masters regatta like Nazi did above as an indicator of anything wider.

 

 

I used the finn world masters as an example because  Finn Masters have learned more things about racing over the years than any other fleet( not all but the vast majority ).  Yes, there are a ton of protests in other classes for a variety of reasons. I was tactician on a mumm 30 for worlds and a bunch of national/ north american champs back when the top of the paid sailing world was farr 40s and mumm 30s. In the worlds in annapolis, there were multiple protests every day. the reason wasn't that everyone was good, it was the many tacticians put their owner drivers in situations they couldn't handle. Phillipe Khan was in protests nearly every day and his boat was being repaired almost daily from all the contact. 

Also, there are a ton of protests in youth events. Here again , it's due to a lack of skill , lack of knowledge of the rules, too many coaches and too many rich parents with spoiled kids. Basically, the same reasons for all the protests in what you call "big events ". 

If you know the rules and have experience enough to know what the situation is and what it will be ahead ( how was the overlap established, is that an obstruction ahead, have I communicated the situation as I see it to the other boat, etc. etc ) you can stay out of the room. 

And yes, I have been forced into the room at local, regional, world , national and international events.  I've only lost a couple and one of those , I should have done turns instead of risking the room. Lesson, stay out of the room. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, MR.CLEAN said:

In other words, you advise learning, if at all, by osmosis. Got it.

That is not osmosis. Don't use words you don't know. another lesson, you're welcome.

Link to post
Share on other sites

+1 on staying out of the room.  Plus, wouldn't you rather have a shower and a nice dinner than hang out in the hallway outside the protest room on a Saturday night?  The other boat didn't beat you because the guy leaned out to hold the afterguy for a minute.  Sheesh 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I've skipped much of the thread, especially the, 'this is why sailing is dying bit' so maybe this has been covered, but...

I understand the vagueness of "briefly" can be debated forever, but can't see how the human pole is "necessary". Any reasonably proficient helmsman/trimmer combo can keep a kite flying while running deep during a spinnaker drop. The human pole is only necessary to increase the boat's performance. And applying the definition of "necessary" to maximizing performance opens up a huge can of worms.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, MR.CLEAN said:

bad judges and lying witnesses plague all dispute resolution systems.

I think that ideally a protest is a good thing for learning.  My experience however is that it's rare that a protest is a situation like the one described here.  They aren't normally people with different understandings of the rules going to the room for clarification.  It's more often something like fighting over buoy room with no evidence and dodgy witnesses.  I'd be super interested to listen in on this one.  The one's i've been through however.... I'd rather have a tooth filling drilled.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/13/2020 at 5:13 PM, MR.CLEAN said:

Why is it dumb to enjoy protest hearings?  They're very interesting.  I'd suggest it's really fucking dumb to avoid them, because you never learn how to win them.

I like courtrooms too.  "It's only 50/50 at best" is what lawyers tell their clients, not what they tell each other.

have to admit that it's not bad to enter the room from time to time. in a class where sometimes people are lazy and do not protest, other people sometimes take advantage of it and break the rules intentionally to gain places without a protest... if someone is not taking a penalty you should protest him/her/them and go to the room!

and it's always interesting to learn about how the jury members investigate a situation. (it will make you stronger next time)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, TJSoCal said:

I'm honestly curious, how many people here have actually seen and/or participated in a protest hearing? 

several for me... (and do not have problem with protests or going to the room)

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
On 4/11/2020 at 1:13 PM, MR.CLEAN said:

When citing to a case book for an analysis, you should include the full text of the cite.

In seeking to emphasize your self-importance (“listen to me, I am a LAWYER”), you’re inadvertently exposing your ignorance.

Shanghai Sailor correctly referred to Case 83 and US Appeal 72. Those references are readily understood, and the decisions can be quickly found in the Casebook and the US Sailing Appeals Book, respectively.

Rules decisions are not cited like law reports ([1983] 2 A.C. 694 (H.L.), or 343 F.Supp. 1075 (E.D.  Mich.), etc. etc.).

On 4/12/2020 at 9:24 PM, toad said:

The general observation is that the simpler a sport is the more popular it is.

Hmmmm. Cricket has well over a billion fans worldwide ... rather more than, say, horseshoes or bowling.

On 4/13/2020 at 11:13 AM, MR.CLEAN said:

I like courtrooms too.

 

oh-please-tell-me-more.jpg

 

On 4/12/2020 at 2:35 PM, oc_man said:

I don't have a good answer on how to find balance but overzealous rules enforcement isn't the way to grow a fleet. 

Agreed. On the other hand, non-enforcement isn’t the way to grow a fleet either. A climate of permissiveness tends to lead to jerks bullying novices out on the water, which of course drives people away. As you said, balance is important.

FWIW, I would rather err on the side of too much enforcement rather than too little. While there are a few unfortunate exceptions, the great majority of protest committee chairs emphasize the educational aspect of protests and try to keep hearings as friendly as possible. It is an adversarial process, but no one is playing for sheep stations.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/12/2020 at 2:58 AM, Editor said:
...
The sailor in the picture claimed they had dropped the pole in readiness for the gybe and he was acting as a ‘’human pole” (his words). Rule 49 has two words in it that gave me cause for concern in their looseness and ability to be interpreted in different ways, namely “necessary” and “briefly”. I can understand ‘necessary’ being used to apply to situations involving danger and/or the safety of vessel and/or crew and situations which may result in damage.

The second word “briefly” is also open to interpretation and the rule provides no guidance to just what time scale ‘briefly’ actually is. For my own part I thought “acting as a human pole” fell well outside that definition.

I was first pointed in the direction of the US Appeals book :

USA Appeal US72
Rule 49.2, Crew Position; Lifelines
A crew member briefly leaning out over a boat’s lifelines to hold a spinnaker guy after the pole has been removed in preparation for rounding a mark does not break rule 49.2.

Facts and Decision of the Protest Committee

When approximately 30 seconds from the leeward mark, Zephyros released the spinnaker guy from the spinnaker pole and a crew member held the guy by hand, leaning out over the lifelines so as to maximize the distance between the hull and the guy until the spinnaker had to be lowered. ...

Rule 49.2 allows the torso of a crew member to be outside the lifelines briefly if the crew is performing “a necessary task.” Without a spinnaker pole, a spinnaker is less efficient and more unstable. As a boat prepares to round a leeward mark, removing the pole is one of the first necessary steps. From that time until the spinnaker is lowered, holding the guy by hand is a less effective but nonetheless useful means of controlling the spinnaker, which remains a “necessary task” even without the pole. ...

In this case, where there were approximately 30 seconds remaining before rounding the mark, the time between releasing the guy and lowering the spinnaker was necessarily shorter than that, and met the requirement of “briefly.”

However when you go to the World Sailing latest Case Book there is a ruling in Case 83 which appears to contradict the US Appeal. Less of the torso outside and only for short periods of time. (a fraction of the 30 seconds in the US Sailing appeal)

... It states that a crew member placing part of their torso outside the lifelines in conditions where there was 3 second gusts breaks RRS 49.

It further says:

Permission [in rule 49 to perform a necessary task] does not extend to normal sail trimming even when this would be more effectively achieved by positioning the torso outside the lifelines'.

I would suggest that the cited passages of US Appeal 72 and Case 83 go to 'necessary', and are indeed in conflict.

US Sailing Appeal 72 very specifically deals with the 'human pole' situation we are here considering, and classes it as a 'necessary task'.

WS Case 83, more generally says that 'normal sail trimming ... by positioning the torso outside the lifelines' is not a necessary task and breaks rule 49.

I guess the nub of the argument, if there is one, is whether 'human poling' is 'normal' sail trimming or not.

I might suggest that human poling, within the time frame of a normal mark approach and spinnaker douse manouevre, at least once within the zone, and lasts for say less than a minute is a normal and necessary task, but when it is undertaken for a longer period to gain tactical flexibility (for example, before reaching the zone to facilitate the option of a quick gybe to gain starboard tack right of way) is not OK, and because it was not necessary to pole-off a that point, is not, under those circumstances a necessary task.

I'd find it hard to criticise a US protest committee for following US Sailing Appeal 72, at least when close to the mark.

So much for the 'necessary' criterion.

 

On 4/12/2020 at 2:58 AM, Editor said:

We can now consider the 'briefly' criterion

Case 36 is relevant.  IT says, in effect that positioning outside the lifelines for 'several minutes' is not 'briefly.

US Sailing Appeal 72 deals with a condition of only about 30 seconds duration, and indicates that that is to be considered 'briefly' for the purposes of rule 49. 

 

On 4/12/2020 at 3:13 AM, MR.CLEAN said:

For analysis sake, the jib was going up  when that photo was shot and typically takes less than 5 seconds to full hoist, the mark was probably 4 BL from the bow.  The kite would be tripped within about 8 seconds and tucked away in 15.

So, in this particular example, approaching the mark, less than 30 seconds:  I think that's 'briefly'.

Bottom line, for this example, in the USA, rule 49 is not broken.

 

On 4/12/2020 at 2:58 AM, Editor said:

...

My [next] point was ‘would the WS ruling over-rule the US Appeal? Or would an appeal be upheld in the USA but in the rest of the world it would be a DSQ if protested? ’

World Sailing Regulations and Rule Interpretations
The following World Sailing Regulations govern publication of the cases in The Case Book and the issuance of other interpretations of the racing rules.
28.3 Interpretations of the Racing Rules by World Sailing shall be made only through publication of cases in The Case Book or of calls in The Call Book for Match Racing or The Call Book for Team Racing. The cases are authoritative interpretations and explanations of the rules for all racing.

US Sailing Appeal Book
INTRODUCTION
The Appeals Book for 2017–2020 contains decisions of the US Sailing Appeals Committee.
Typically, protest committees conform their decisions to the appeals when the facts are similar,
which makes them invaluable for competitors and officials to know and use.

In a nutshell, WS Cases are authoritative and US Sailing Appeals are not, but should be expected to be followed by US Judges.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/13/2020 at 7:41 PM, TJSoCal said:

I'm honestly curious, how many people here have actually seen and/or participated in a protest hearing? 

On 4/14/2020 at 9:44 AM, daan62 said:

several for me... (and do not have problem with protests or going to the room)

 

 

I've been on both sides of the table.
The most important thing is to stick to the facts and not ramble on .
As a Protest Committee member, the head judge should keep it on track when people start to ramble on and on  and on. Protest hearings should not too much time.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Decided to do my Judges ticket a couple of years ago. More to assure myself that I did actually know what I was talking about when calling rules while sailing with others or watching the kids.Totally agree with Sneaky Duck that sometimes two very well intentioned sailors have a different view of what took place. Had a couple recently. One dismissed, one had an excellent witness who had said do your turns in support of the protestor at the time.

Arbitration Appendix T is helping get more sailors at a hearing and in and out faster.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Meat Wad said:

I've been on both sides of the table.
The most important thing is to stick to the facts and not ramble on .
As a Protest Committee member, the head judge should keep it on track when people start to ramble on and on  and on. Protest hearings should not too much time.

tell them what happened... answer extra questions... wait... drink beer! (and no extra discussion afterwards! (jury has spoken, eat it!))

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Grabbing a sail or someone that has fallen overboard may be regarded as "brief" and "necessary" reasons to put yourself at risk outside the lifelines, but getting the best set on a sail is never "necessary" no matter how brief.

Protest the cheats.

P.S. Would you ever trust anyone that calls themselves "MR.TRUSTWORTHY"?

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, gaw said:

Grabbing a sail or someone that has fallen overboard may be regarded as "brief" and "necessary" reasons to put yourself at risk outside the lifelines, but getting the best set on a sail is never "necessary" no matter how brief.

Protest the cheats.

Well, mate, you go ahead and persuade the US Sailing Racing Rules Committee.

See US Appeals 67 and 72.

Their view is clearly that tasks needful to sail a boat to best advantage are 'necessary'. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Brass said:

Well, mate, you go ahead and persuade the US Sailing Racing Rules Committee.

See US Appeals 67 and 72.

Their view is clearly that tasks needful to sail a boat to best advantage are 'necessary'. 

The US Ailing  racing rules committee does not hear, interpret or approve appeals. They submit recommendation on rule changes to World Sailing. They are involved drafting the US prescriptions to the RRS

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a HUGE difference between briefly and words  like immediately. The rule doesn’t even say right away, as soon as is practical, or without hesitation.

Briefly has been used to describe weeks, months, or even years.
**He served as a substitute teacher briefly after he finished college.

**Belichek briefly coached the Jets before taking the job with New England

***Trump was briefly married to each of two other women before marrying the nude model.

**A brief conversation requires each side to speak or it isn't a conversation. Each could speak two or three times and, especially if the subject were a complex legal brief,  it would be reasonable to call it a brief discussion. 

 

In a sailboat race, the spinnaker pole is up for most of a run. The boats sometimes briefly sail with their backstay  still tight, vangs  not yet eased, and someone may even briefly lean over the side to urinate. 
the skipper might briefly hand over the helm while she removes a layer of clothing, drinks some water , or simply takes a brief rest.

The idea that briefly was limited to three seconds by the authors of the rule is absurd. As briefly has so many possible meanings, and as every writer is well aware of those various meanings, had 3 seconds been their intended meaning, the rule would have included words to that effect.

Briefly in this rule is the same as “a little while.” It isn’t an endless permission to break the lifeline rules  but sailors can do so briefly. 
In fact, the rule isn’t even clear about lollygagging a bit, especially if it is a brief lollygag. 
I would have posted my thoughts a while ago but I procrastinated briefly. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, VWAP said:

The US Ailing  racing rules committee does not hear, interpret or approve appeals. They submit recommendation on rule changes to World Sailing. They are involved drafting the US prescriptions to the RRS

I'm happy to be educated about the minutae of US Sailing organisation.

Who in US Sailing is the body to approach to reverse Appeal 72?

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/11/2020 at 11:58 AM, Editor said:

The Case Book is available on the technical site of www.sailing.org and with the current lock down, it is certainly something that is worth reading for serious sailorsIt states that a crew member placing part of their torso outside the lifelines in conditions where there was 3 second gusts breaks RRS 49

@Brass it was in the op and, I thought, the primary reason for the editor’s confusion about briefly 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Brass said:

Gouv

Where in the world did you get three seconds from?

Racing Lasers Vs Paul Foerster at Würstfest about thirty years ago. He caught me before the leeward mark and held me off up the brief final leg. I beat him in two races where he failed to catch me on the last downwind leg. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Brass said:

I'm happy to be educated about the minutae of US Sailing organisation.

Who in US Sailing is the body to approach to reverse Appeal 72?

Contact Dave the Chairman of the appeals committee if you think the appeal is wrong

 

 

 

" The US Appeals Committee

The Appeals Committee: considers and decides appeals; answers questions from US Sailing member organizations regarding interpretations of the racing rules; when requested, reviews decisions of Association Appeals Committees; publishes selected decisions of the Appeals Committee; recommends changes in the racing rules to the Racing Rules Committee; and proposes, for approval by the Board, US Sailing appeals for adoption by World Sailing as Cases."

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, VWAP said:

Contact Dave the Chairman of the appeals committee if you think the appeal is wrong

 

" The US Appeals Committee

The Appeals Committee: considers and decides appeals; answers questions from US Sailing member organizations regarding interpretations of the racing rules; when requested, reviews decisions of Association Appeals Committees; publishes selected decisions of the Appeals Committee; recommends changes in the racing rules to the Racing Rules Committee; and proposes, for approval by the Board, US Sailing appeals for adoption by World Sailing as Cases."

Well that will be handy for @gaw the guy that thinks Appeal 72 is wrong in post 67

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...