J70, cheating and pros

[Team_GBR]

Its the only sanction a CA has...If WS were to issue bans every time a boat fails measurement it would be pretty damn stupid. I suspect most of these owners were guilty more of not reading the rules than anything else. Wouldn't be the first time a class got in the habit of doing stuff the rules prohibit.

Hogwash! We aren't talking about weekend sailors who drink beer as they sail around. These guys compete at the very top of the sport and knew exactly what they were doing. They knew the rules. It's been a long term problem in the class. this isn't a case of a boat failing to measure, which happens all the time for any one of many reasons. This is a case of owners doing something they knew was illegal but which they believed they would get away with, because no action had been taken in the past. It was deliberate cheating. I have never sailed a J70 but knew of the problem. The funny thing is that it is not a world wide problem, just sailors from one particular country, some of them have a real reputation for playing fast and loose with one design rules. To think this was anything other than outright cheating is being very naive.

What action? What sanction? You are free to modify any boat any way you like and I wouldn't have it any other way. Modifying a boat is not a crime. The only thing that is wrong is to enter a boat in an event claiming it to be a class legal wotsit when it isn't, and that's down to the owner who signs the entry form. I bet there was some lively discussion in the Onorato family.

Now if the company doing the work claimed that the modifications were within the class rules and they are not, then the owners will presumably have a claim under trade law, but that's way out of a CAs purview.

The person who was reshaping the keels knew what he was doing was wrong and he encouraged owners to have the work done. He knew the boats would be raced. He cannot say he didn't know that the boats would be raced at the world championships. He knew the work was illegal. "Just following orders" doesn't stack up in this case. What do you think his sales pitch was? I can make your keel look pretty? Or was it "I have developed a shape for J70 keels that will make your boat faster than other J70's? He knew it was against class rules yet he still touted for business.  Modifying a boat is not a crime, but providing the means for somebody to deliberately cheat is against everything the sport is about. I believe the guy sails in the class. He should have been banned from all class racing, or if they felt that could not be done (I don't see why not), he should have been reported to WS under rule 69.

 

[Parma]

Hogwash! We aren't talking about weekend sailors who drink beer as they sail around. These guys compete at the very top of the sport and knew exactly what they were doing. They knew the rules. It's been a long term problem in the class. this isn't a case of a boat failing to measure, which happens all the time for any one of many reasons. This is a case of owners doing something they knew was illegal but which they believed they would get away with, because no action had been taken in the past. It was deliberate cheating. I have never sailed a J70 but knew of the problem. The funny thing is that it is not a world wide problem, just sailors from one particular country, some of them have a real reputation for playing fast and loose with one design rules. To think this was anything other than outright cheating is being very naive.

The person who was reshaping the keels knew what he was doing was wrong and he encouraged owners to have the work done. He knew the boats would be raced. He cannot say he didn't know that the boats would be raced at the world championships. He knew the work was illegal. "Just following orders" doesn't stack up in this case. What do you think his sales pitch was? I can make your keel look pretty? Or was it "I have developed a shape for J70 keels that will make your boat faster than other J70's? He knew it was against class rules yet he still touted for business.  Modifying a boat is not a crime, but providing the means for somebody to deliberately cheat is against everything the sport is about. I believe the guy sails in the class. He should have been banned from all class racing, or if they felt that could not be done (I don't see why not), he should have been reported to WS under rule 69.

EXACTLY

 

[JimC]

Hogwash! We aren't talking about weekend sailors who drink beer as they sail around. These guys compete at the very top of the sport and knew exactly what they were doing. They knew the rules.

Yeah, yeah, first class virtue signalling. I'm sure we all think you're a very moral person. Back in the real world, where every third thread on this site demonstrates that 7 sailors out of 10 haven't got a bloody clue about the racing rules, let alone their class rules, and a recent high profile incident demonstrated ignorance of fundamental rules can apply at a very high level...

Class rules are like the Highway code, everyone thinks they know it, we're all supposed to read it, but actually no ****** ever does. It seems clear enough the CA, with information we haven't seen, thought there was a very wide range of culpability for the sorry mess.

As for the thing about the yard. If you want him reported under RRS69 you have to start by explaining how RRS69 applies to him if he was not a competitor, boat owner or support person.  And if he's not a CA member the CA has no authority over him at all. But if he advertised or represented his work as being class legal then its the *real* law that comes into play.

 

[sunseeker]

Yeah, yeah, first class virtue signalling. I'm sure we all think you're a very moral person. Back in the real world, where every third thread on this site demonstrates that 7 sailors out of 10 haven't got a bloody clue about the racing rules, let alone their class rules, and a recent high profile incident demonstrated ignorance of fundamental rules can apply at a very high level...

Class rules are like the Highway code, everyone thinks they know it, we're all supposed to read it, but actually no ****** ever does. It seems clear enough the CA, with information we haven't seen, thought there was a very wide range of culpability for the sorry mess.

As for the thing about the yard. If you want him reported under RRS69 you have to start by explaining how RRS69 applies to him if he was not a competitor, boat owner or support person.  And if he's not a CA member the CA has no authority over him at all. But if he advertised or represented his work as being class legal then its the *real* law that comes into play.

Your apologizing for cheaters makes you a cheater.

i learned long ago that ignorance of the law was no excuse.

 

[Svanen]

As for the thing about the yard. If you want him reported under RRS69, you have to start by explaining how RRS69 applies to him if he was not a competitor, boat owner or support person.  And if he's not a CA member, the CA has no authority over him at all. But if he advertised or represented his work as being class legal, then its the *real* law that comes into play.

Correct.

 

[JimC]

Couple of observations.

Firstly that biggest penalty goes to the former owner of 922, and as far as I can see he wasn't at the worlds.

Secondly that a bit of googling suggests that boat was, when owned by that person, entered as "Corinthian" in at least in some events.

 

[Team_GBR]

Yeah, yeah, first class virtue signalling. I'm sure we all think you're a very moral person. Back in the real world, where every third thread on this site demonstrates that 7 sailors out of 10 haven't got a bloody clue about the racing rules, let alone their class rules, and a recent high profile incident demonstrated ignorance of fundamental rules can apply at a very high level...

Class rules are like the Highway code, everyone thinks they know it, we're all supposed to read it, but actually no ****** ever does. It seems clear enough the CA, with information we haven't seen, thought there was a very wide range of culpability for the sorry mess.

The information you haven't seen is very well known. The owners knew the modifications that were made were illegal. They had all been told it before and I know that for a fact. There had been confrontations about this in the past. It was well known in the class and regularly discussed that these people were breaking the rules but they had been allowed to get away with it for a long time. Any owner who claims they did not know these modifications were illegal is simply lying. What happened is that the class finally grew some balls.

As for the thing about the yard. If you want him reported under RRS69 you have to start by explaining how RRS69 applies to him if he was not a competitor, boat owner or support person.  And if he's not a CA member the CA has no authority over him at all. But if he advertised or represented his work as being class legal then its the *real* law that comes into play.

Again, I believe you are mistaken. The class has the power to ban him from competing in class run events. To start with, if he works on the boats, he is a support person, but I believe he crews. 

What i don't understand is why you are being such an apologist for these cheats. This was deliberate, done in full knowledge in the belief they could get away with it. We should be looking at every possible opportunity under the rules to sanction everybody who was knowingly involved.

 

[Brass]

  12 hours ago, JimC said:
Yeah, yeah, first class virtue signalling.

What i don't understand is why you are being such an apologist for these cheats. This was deliberate, done in full knowledge in the belief they could get away with it. We should be looking at every possible opportunity under the rules to sanction everybody who was knowingly involved.

I'm with JimC.  Displays of personal moral outrage, asserting that my sportsmanship is bigger than your sportsmanship, don't really help the sport.

JImC is not being an aoplogist.

He is just pointing out that what is 'well known' about what the owners knew and had been told is very likely to be embarrassingly insufficient for a protest committee to be comfortably satisfied in making a rule 69 decision or a WS disciplinary panel in making a WS Regulations disciplinary finding, particularly in the face of a very likely formal restraint of trade action by the boat yard corporation.

 

[Team_GBR]

He is just pointing out that what is 'well known' about what the owners knew and had been told is very likely to be embarrassingly insufficient for a protest committee to be comfortably satisfied in making a rule 69 decision or a WS disciplinary panel in making a WS Regulations disciplinary finding, particularly in the face of a very likely formal restraint of trade action by the boat yard corporation.

Another load of hogwash that is exactly why the class got into a mess in the first place. Why would the burden of proof be any more for WS than it is for the class association? If the class association has insufficient evidence, expect to see law suites following their bans. I suspect we haven't heard the end of this. As an international class, any decision like this will be seen by WS who are entitled to initiate or take action.

Banning a boatbuilder from sailing does not constitute restraint of trade. He would still be free to continue operation of his boatyard. He does not need to sail to do that.

To get back to the real issue, it is important to note that the class association found that the individuals concerned were found to have been involved with " intentional violation of the Class Rules” and/or “unsportsmanlike conduct” at the 2017 World Championship and/or some extended period prior to the World Championship." Please note the word "intentional". That means they knew what they were doing. These guys knowingly cheated. What do you think the penalty should be?

 

[JimC]

So from what you are saying it sounds as if the class got in a mess because "everyone knew" the first boat (or boats) was illegal, but no-one had the balls to protest. Unsurprising then if other owners decided it couldn't be as illegal as all that. So the moral of this sad tale is to follow the rules and protest, not bitch pathetically behind the scenes or after the event.

 

[Frogman56]

JC

+ me big time.

Bad stuff mostly happens when 'good people do nothing...'

 

[A Class Sailor]

So from what you are saying it sounds as if the class got in a mess because "everyone knew" the first boat (or boats) was illegal, but no-one had the balls to protest. . So the moral of this sad tale is to follow the rules and protest, not bitch pathetically behind the scenes or after the event.

If only it was that simple. You rightly point out, you cannot do things without the right evidence, something that will stand proper scrutiny and here lies the problem. Building inaccuracies and quality control in the J70's means there can be significant differences in the keels, so proving what everybody knew, that keels were being altered, needed some proper process and ways of measurement, which were only developed after it became clear that people were cheating. This was the first time everything fell into place and they had the processes and methodology to tackle the cheaters. Remember, the class is very new, it took time to understand the level of cheating and who was doing it and to put process in place.

Again, I don't really understand your attitude. You continually seem to be making excuses for people who knowingly cheated. Your comment "Unsurprising then if other owners decided it couldn't be as illegal as all that" is total rubbish. At best, you could say that people cheated because they saw somebody get away with it so thought they could get away with it themselves. It doesn't get away from the truth, that they made a conscious decision to cheat, knowing it was against class rules, and they did it to gain an advantage believing they would get away with it. Stop making excuses. It is very clear these guys were knowingly cheating and there is no excuse for that.

The class should be praised for taking decisive action, for outing cheats and for imposing sanctions against them. Your constant excusing of their actions and blaming the association and class for allowing the situation to occur is unhelpful and sends the wrong message.

 

[JimC]

Perhaps because I've seen *all* the inside information for a similar incident in another class and so know first hand that there can be wildly different levels of culpability.  The CA clearly believes there are vastly different levels of culpability in this case too, otherwise they wouldn't be handing out a two year ban to one person and a "be more careful in future" warning to others. 

 

[fastyacht]

Perhaps because I've seen *all* the inside information for a similar incident in another class and so know first hand that there can be wildly different levels of culpability.  The CA clearly believes there are vastly different levels of culpability in this case too, otherwise they wouldn't be handing out a two year ban to one person and a "be more careful in future" warning to others. 

 

[Team_GBR]

Perhaps because I've seen *all* the inside information for a similar incident in another class and so know first hand that there can be wildly different levels of culpability.  The CA clearly believes there are vastly different levels of culpability in this case too, otherwise they wouldn't be handing out a two year ban to one person and a "be more careful in future" warning to others. 

Still making excuses.

The sanctions were not based on levels of culpability. They were handed out based on whether the person had cheated and for how long they are known to have cheated. Cheating involves knowing you are cheating and doing it deliberately. Those who were warned could not be proven to know or deliberately set out to cheat. If you present a boat to be measured and it does not, that doesn't make you a cheat.

The reason for the differing length of bans is easy to understand. In the case of the longer ban, this wasn't the first boat they had altered they had been warned that alterations were illegal and they sold an altered boat without informing the owner (which brings up a completely different set of issues not relevant to this).

Sailing must have a "no tolerance" policy for those who knowingly cheat by altering their boats contrary to the rules. There are no acceptable excuses for doing it. I believe that in this situation, the class association has done a great job, as far as it has gone, and sent out a clear message that cheating will not be tolerated.